Aveuglement

I haven't posted anything in a while but I've got the urge again so here it goes.

I've read a lot online about how the mainstream feminist movement has been blind to the needs of "Women of Color" (WoC) and the oppression of other minorities. So it didn't completely surprise me to see that with this curious incident that some feminists completely missed the point along with not seeing the oppression that drove the incident in the first place.

So what is this oppression, and who are the oppressed I'm referring to? They're the socially inept, the geeks, the shy, the ones who lack the charisma and self confidence (arrogance?) needed to act out the normal rituals of socially acceptable sexual initiation. The ones unable to dance the dance that is considered the acceptable way of pursuing romantic or sexual interest. The oppression harms through the denial of human intimacy and companionship, where even though there are two willing participants they are denied interaction because either one is incapable of meeting the dictated standard of appropriate behavior. This is oppression is perpetuated by the fact that the charismatically privileged dominate popular media normalising, the use of their charisma as the acceptable way to express sexual desire, and oppressing those who lack those abilities. This is similar to the way their appearance drives the issue of body image.

The Open-Source Boob Project was an attempt to normalise or standardise the method of communicating sexual desire; to remove the mystical nature and ambiguity that confuses many, particularly those within the geek community, and denies them access to the intimacy they are born to need. In addition (and possibly more importantly) it would have normalised both the acceptance and rejection of the proposition, allowing for clear communication channels for matters of a sexual nature which would in turn reduce miscommunication and misunderstanding that leads to so many problems in the social-sexual realm.

It seems to me that those on feministing would seem to demonise any attempt to communicate sexual desire because such communication might make the woman feel uncomfortable dealing with the man. Firstly they're obviously critical of the active and direct approach; I mean asking a polite question and respecting the answer is just wrong. Secondly they deride the passive and direct approach by critising the badges; clearly not all women will have an interest in such approaches sex but why is it wrong to express your views that such approaches are acceptable to you? Finally using subtlety, such as the way someone dresses, to determine who might be interested is out too because such ambiguity might lead to misinterpretation: Did you catch that? "The ones who'd dressed to impress"? Almost as if they were "asking for it"? That because they were wearing a tight shirt, their breasts were practically public property, anyway?

I guess there's no acceptable way for a guy to initiate a sexually orientated discussion that's acceptable to feminists, even when both parties to the discussion have clearly indicated their desire to be involved. I'm wondering how feminists manage to initiate a sexual interaction when there appears no acceptable way to do so, unless they're suggesting that women shouldn't be free to control their bodies and must follow the puritanical way by tying sex to an emotional relationship.

The Open-Source label isn't about the boobs being free and open to anyone, it's about it being socially acceptable that a woman's views on her boobs are free and open, although I can certainly understand the software movement being uncomfortable with the association to politically incorrect progressive ideas. Like with the software movement, an open and free exchange of information will enable better collaboration between like minded individuals and the sharing of resources to meet a common goal; or the pairing of those with want-to-touch hands and those with want-to-be-touched boobs. Doing so would reduce the oppression of the "geek class" by enabling them to access physical human intimacy, something taken for granted by the charismatically-privileged.

I'm guessing there are several reasons that feminists of Feministing dislike this idea. I'm guessing it's partly because they rank the desire to be free from other's sexual expression to be more important than the ability of others to express their sexuality, but this runs contrary to the views of freedom of expression that exist throughout the west. Which is assuming that the reason isn't that they are blinded by their privilege from seeing the need for a more direct approach to sexual socialisation. It could also be that they're still influenced by the puritanism created by the patriarchy and believe that sex should be taboo and hidden away, particularly when it comes to female anatomy. Further the more cynical part of me would guess that by enabling the open discussion of sexuality would reduce the mysticism surrounding sex and hence reduce its power when used as a weapon against men.

Finally I'd suggest that i might be due to bigotry, like the way sexist bigots sought to exclude women from the workplace because they caused discomfort in some men, social adept women seek to exclude those less adept from the social-sexual environment because they cause discomfort in some women; or possibly like the way homophobic bigots detest the way homosexuals might engage in public displays of affection that makes the bigots uncomfortable, this more formal and clinical approach to sexuality causes these feminist to be uncomfortable; or perhaps worst, like the racist bigot believes black people don't deserve freedom they believe that the social inept don't deserve human intimacy.

One only has to look at the different ways violence and sex are treated in popular media, morality discussion and ratings systems to see the way sex is viewed within much of the English West has been twisted beyond rationalism or sanity. We, as a society, need new ways of looking at sex and given the importance of consent in the way we judge sexual interaction it is counter productive to critise those who query for consent in a clear manner. I think it's great that geeks would use their ingenuity to come up with novel approaches to such social-sexual interaction.