Scan barcode
A review by emleemay
Girls & Sex: Navigating the Complicated New Landscape by Peggy Orenstein
3.0
2 1/2 stars. Warning: long, often personal review.
This book does a lot of good. I mean, firstly, it is so readable and compelling that it is easy to speed through the chapters and finish the book in a day. Secondly, it gets its strength and arguments from a series of interviews and anecdotes that Orenstein has gathered from young women across the United States, which offers a personal, funny and often shocking look at the issues.
Thirdly, the stories from these girls and women kind of prove what I think is our ultimate failure on sex - regardless of issues relating to sexual and hook-up culture - and that is our need for better sex education.
I was pretty shocked when I came over to California (I know this differs a lot between states and schools) and discovered that a lot of kids didn't receive any kind of sex education until high school (at least age 14). I've always been dissatisfied with what we got in the UK, but I can at least say that we got the standard mechanics of sexual intercourse and safe sex methods by the time we left junior school (age 11). The truth no one wants to talk about is that a significant number of kids have had some kind of sexual experience before the age of 14.
That being said, throughout all school, our sex education was limited to the fundamentals of heterosexual sex. There was no discussion about homosexuality, masturbation, foreplay, anal or oral sex. I consider my high school a liberal one (the sex education teacher stood at the front of the class and literally said "Sex is great. I have sex. I love sex. But you have to know how to protect yourself from STDs and unwanted pregnancy. This is a condom." - best message ever??), and we still got no mention of these important things - some of which the majority will experience at some point.
The stories Orenstein shares show how we are doing teens a disservice by not educating them on sex and, by doing so, forcing them to find out for themselves on that completely reliable source of information - the Internet.
That's the good thing about this book. The problem, however, is that Orenstein's research claims are a little sketchy and she doesn't cite references or use footnotes in the body of the text to make it clear where she's pulled her "facts" from. Maybe this is just something that bothers me personally, as a former Politics student, but I like traditional Harvard or Chicago styles of reference (with it clearly noted as and when it appears in the text), not just notes and bibliography in the back.
Unfortunately, a lot of this book is the author’s own opinion, roughly backed up here and there by a quote from an educated, upper middle class young woman. And sometimes she seems to use a single girl’s testimony to draw a huge conclusion about the nature of sexuality and sexual relations. All experiences are, of course, valid and important, but just because I can find you a witness testimony of a Muslim committing a crime, or a self-proclaimed feminist hating men, it doesn't necessarily say something about the entire population of Muslims or feminists.
Generalization is one of the oldest mistakes in the book.
Some of her ideas about oversexualization are really interesting and I do think it's time to take a look at it again. Feminists today, myself included, have reclaimed sexuality and started the sex-positive movement. Why should we cover up?! If we want to wear short skirts and skimpy bikinis, then good for us! I think we're discouraged from considering why women feel the need to appear "hot" in a way that men don't; we're encouraged to not ask questions because "yes means yes" and I think there is room to question that ideology and wonder how much of it really is empowerment (not saying I agree, just that I think there's an opening for it).
But, like most influential people and convincing politicians, Orenstein makes a lot of shocking, interesting and emotive points, and never backs it up with any real evidence. Kind of like Donald Trump.
As I said, she makes many great leaps between one girl's story and her conclusions about society in general. And, for every horror story, I can come back with a very different tale from my own experiences. Because virtually all her points are based on anecdotal evidence, I’d like to reply with some of my own. There are many experiences out there, and you know what? I personally had very different ones.
- Orenstein claims that men have expectations of girls when it comes to sex because they watch porn - in other words, they expect a blow job, expect a woman to objectify herself, and don't care if she has an orgasm. The thing is, I know guys like this exist. Yes, they really do. Me and my friends fondly refer to them as "assholes". But I, for one, have not had this experience with men. Growing up, during my first sexual experiences, I swear the guys were at least as nervous as I was. Maye because they'd watched porn and seen penises twice the size of their own and women screaming like banshees. I've never actually known a guy expect a blow job. And, generally, I've found from my own experiences and those of my friends, a lot of guys are more embarrassed by the possibility that they wouldn’t satisfy, than annoyed if the girl doesn’t get them off.
- Orenstein claims that women feel the need to be sexual and embrace hook-up culture, though many don't really want to participate. Again, I'm sure this is true of some women, but I honestly don't think this is part of a bigger trend in society. To be honest, I think it strips a lot of women of their strength and agency, given that many young college women I know chose not to participate in hook-ups and no one gave a damn. Orenstein seems to underestimate girls' ability to say no, AND their ability to say yes and mean it. Because at the other end of the scale, you have one of my close friends from college who did participate in hook-ups and - she tells me and I truly believe - she did it not because she felt she should, or for some self-validation, but because she likes sex and wanted to.
- Orenstein claims that women are more concerned about being sexy and getting sex "right" for men than actually enjoying the sexual experience. I think there's some level of truth to this, especially with early sexual experiences, but the author leaves it unexplored. I think both boys and girls are concerned about doing the right thing and getting sex "right" when they first start out. I don't believe it's gender-specific and it seems kind of natural. Plus, sex for me really is about two people (if it wasn't, masturbation is a much quicker and easier option). It's natural to want the other person to enjoy it, to find you attractive, to have your desire fuelled by theirs. Wanting to know how to do it "right" for them is not a bad thing. It's not something I've felt the need to do because "I'm a woman and I need to please a man". There is something extremely exciting about turning your partner on, and to turn that into a gender politics issue is a gross oversimplification of sexual desire.
- Orenstein claims that these angry teenage boys and young men expect certain things from girls they hook up with. She cites one example of a guy storming out on a girl because she wouldn't give him a blow job. Again with those assholes - but can we really call this a societal trend based on a single (or few) bad experiences? I'll throw you back another anecdote of my own - this time, an extremely embarrassing one. It happened one drunken night in my second year of college (uh oh). I had been dancing with and kissing this guy all night, and afterwards he walked back with me (the assumption of sex was in the air). We got to my place... did I give him a blow job? Did I use my knowledge of porn to go through the motions of what is "right" to do? Ha! No, I threw up in my sink and passed out on my bed. And what did this angry young man with sex expectations do? He held my hair while I puked, pulled the bed sheet over me after, and left me sleeping. Then he texted me the next day to see if I was alright.
Unlike the author, I'm not trying to draw sweeping generalizations from this. I'm not claiming this says anything about society and sex, or that it somehow undermines the negative experiences of other women. But I am showing how easy it is to throw out single examples on both sides - the good and the bad - and how there are many different experiences. Using one to make a statement about the whole of society is ridiculous.
I also wish, for example, that she'd considered how porn is a way for some women to get sexual gratification, not just a way in which they learn to devalue themselves and get terrible sex tips.
I really enjoyed reading the experiences of all these different women. It would be great to see a book that collected these experiences and didn't use them to (badly) make a point. I think a lot of them speak for themselves about our need for better sex education and more discussions about sex. But the book lost a little something when the author stepped in with her own dire monologues, constantly shaking her head at the Kim Kardashians and Miley Cyruses of this world.
Her examples are interesting and they are shocking, but they don't add up to what she claims they do. And occasionally I stumbled across one that was obviously just stupid. For example, this is how she gives evidence for vagina-shaming in society:
Oh, hell. This was a joke that RP made when he posed with a bunch of nude models. The statement was so hyperbolic that it's really embarrassing the author tried to use it as "evidence".
Orenstein is great at working her audience and keeping you hooked, but if you're the kind of reader who likes to look a little deeper and question things, it's likely you'll see right through this.
Also: I really hate books, you know. I'm allergic to books.
Blog | Facebook | Twitter | Instagram | Youtube | Store
This book does a lot of good. I mean, firstly, it is so readable and compelling that it is easy to speed through the chapters and finish the book in a day. Secondly, it gets its strength and arguments from a series of interviews and anecdotes that Orenstein has gathered from young women across the United States, which offers a personal, funny and often shocking look at the issues.
Thirdly, the stories from these girls and women kind of prove what I think is our ultimate failure on sex - regardless of issues relating to sexual and hook-up culture - and that is our need for better sex education.
I was pretty shocked when I came over to California (I know this differs a lot between states and schools) and discovered that a lot of kids didn't receive any kind of sex education until high school (at least age 14). I've always been dissatisfied with what we got in the UK, but I can at least say that we got the standard mechanics of sexual intercourse and safe sex methods by the time we left junior school (age 11). The truth no one wants to talk about is that a significant number of kids have had some kind of sexual experience before the age of 14.
That being said, throughout all school, our sex education was limited to the fundamentals of heterosexual sex. There was no discussion about homosexuality, masturbation, foreplay, anal or oral sex. I consider my high school a liberal one (the sex education teacher stood at the front of the class and literally said "Sex is great. I have sex. I love sex. But you have to know how to protect yourself from STDs and unwanted pregnancy. This is a condom." - best message ever??), and we still got no mention of these important things - some of which the majority will experience at some point.
The stories Orenstein shares show how we are doing teens a disservice by not educating them on sex and, by doing so, forcing them to find out for themselves on that completely reliable source of information - the Internet.
That's the good thing about this book. The problem, however, is that Orenstein's research claims are a little sketchy and she doesn't cite references or use footnotes in the body of the text to make it clear where she's pulled her "facts" from. Maybe this is just something that bothers me personally, as a former Politics student, but I like traditional Harvard or Chicago styles of reference (with it clearly noted as and when it appears in the text), not just notes and bibliography in the back.
Unfortunately, a lot of this book is the author’s own opinion, roughly backed up here and there by a quote from an educated, upper middle class young woman. And sometimes she seems to use a single girl’s testimony to draw a huge conclusion about the nature of sexuality and sexual relations. All experiences are, of course, valid and important, but just because I can find you a witness testimony of a Muslim committing a crime, or a self-proclaimed feminist hating men, it doesn't necessarily say something about the entire population of Muslims or feminists.
Generalization is one of the oldest mistakes in the book.
Some of her ideas about oversexualization are really interesting and I do think it's time to take a look at it again. Feminists today, myself included, have reclaimed sexuality and started the sex-positive movement. Why should we cover up?! If we want to wear short skirts and skimpy bikinis, then good for us! I think we're discouraged from considering why women feel the need to appear "hot" in a way that men don't; we're encouraged to not ask questions because "yes means yes" and I think there is room to question that ideology and wonder how much of it really is empowerment (not saying I agree, just that I think there's an opening for it).
But, like most influential people and convincing politicians, Orenstein makes a lot of shocking, interesting and emotive points, and never backs it up with any real evidence. Kind of like Donald Trump.
As I said, she makes many great leaps between one girl's story and her conclusions about society in general. And, for every horror story, I can come back with a very different tale from my own experiences. Because virtually all her points are based on anecdotal evidence, I’d like to reply with some of my own. There are many experiences out there, and you know what? I personally had very different ones.
- Orenstein claims that men have expectations of girls when it comes to sex because they watch porn - in other words, they expect a blow job, expect a woman to objectify herself, and don't care if she has an orgasm. The thing is, I know guys like this exist. Yes, they really do. Me and my friends fondly refer to them as "assholes". But I, for one, have not had this experience with men. Growing up, during my first sexual experiences, I swear the guys were at least as nervous as I was. Maye because they'd watched porn and seen penises twice the size of their own and women screaming like banshees. I've never actually known a guy expect a blow job. And, generally, I've found from my own experiences and those of my friends, a lot of guys are more embarrassed by the possibility that they wouldn’t satisfy, than annoyed if the girl doesn’t get them off.
- Orenstein claims that women feel the need to be sexual and embrace hook-up culture, though many don't really want to participate. Again, I'm sure this is true of some women, but I honestly don't think this is part of a bigger trend in society. To be honest, I think it strips a lot of women of their strength and agency, given that many young college women I know chose not to participate in hook-ups and no one gave a damn. Orenstein seems to underestimate girls' ability to say no, AND their ability to say yes and mean it. Because at the other end of the scale, you have one of my close friends from college who did participate in hook-ups and - she tells me and I truly believe - she did it not because she felt she should, or for some self-validation, but because she likes sex and wanted to.
- Orenstein claims that women are more concerned about being sexy and getting sex "right" for men than actually enjoying the sexual experience. I think there's some level of truth to this, especially with early sexual experiences, but the author leaves it unexplored. I think both boys and girls are concerned about doing the right thing and getting sex "right" when they first start out. I don't believe it's gender-specific and it seems kind of natural. Plus, sex for me really is about two people (if it wasn't, masturbation is a much quicker and easier option). It's natural to want the other person to enjoy it, to find you attractive, to have your desire fuelled by theirs. Wanting to know how to do it "right" for them is not a bad thing. It's not something I've felt the need to do because "I'm a woman and I need to please a man". There is something extremely exciting about turning your partner on, and to turn that into a gender politics issue is a gross oversimplification of sexual desire.
- Orenstein claims that these angry teenage boys and young men expect certain things from girls they hook up with. She cites one example of a guy storming out on a girl because she wouldn't give him a blow job. Again with those assholes - but can we really call this a societal trend based on a single (or few) bad experiences? I'll throw you back another anecdote of my own - this time, an extremely embarrassing one. It happened one drunken night in my second year of college (uh oh). I had been dancing with and kissing this guy all night, and afterwards he walked back with me (the assumption of sex was in the air). We got to my place... did I give him a blow job? Did I use my knowledge of porn to go through the motions of what is "right" to do? Ha! No, I threw up in my sink and passed out on my bed. And what did this angry young man with sex expectations do? He held my hair while I puked, pulled the bed sheet over me after, and left me sleeping. Then he texted me the next day to see if I was alright.
Unlike the author, I'm not trying to draw sweeping generalizations from this. I'm not claiming this says anything about society and sex, or that it somehow undermines the negative experiences of other women. But I am showing how easy it is to throw out single examples on both sides - the good and the bad - and how there are many different experiences. Using one to make a statement about the whole of society is ridiculous.
I also wish, for example, that she'd considered how porn is a way for some women to get sexual gratification, not just a way in which they learn to devalue themselves and get terrible sex tips.
I really enjoyed reading the experiences of all these different women. It would be great to see a book that collected these experiences and didn't use them to (badly) make a point. I think a lot of them speak for themselves about our need for better sex education and more discussions about sex. But the book lost a little something when the author stepped in with her own dire monologues, constantly shaking her head at the Kim Kardashians and Miley Cyruses of this world.
Her examples are interesting and they are shocking, but they don't add up to what she claims they do. And occasionally I stumbled across one that was obviously just stupid. For example, this is how she gives evidence for vagina-shaming in society:
If that weren’t enough to plunge the average young woman into a shame spiral, heartthrob actor Robert Pattinson, whose fame and fortune were forged from the erotic fantasies of teenage girls, breezily confessed to Details magazine, “I really hate vaginas. I’m allergic to vagina.”
Oh, hell. This was a joke that RP made when he posed with a bunch of nude models. The statement was so hyperbolic that it's really embarrassing the author tried to use it as "evidence".
Orenstein is great at working her audience and keeping you hooked, but if you're the kind of reader who likes to look a little deeper and question things, it's likely you'll see right through this.
Also: I really hate books, you know. I'm allergic to books.
Blog | Facebook | Twitter | Instagram | Youtube | Store