Follow Up: “Toward a Global History of Same-Sex Sexuality” by Rupp and “Compulsory Heterosexuality and Lesbian Existence (1980)” by Rich

I think these two articles are really thought provoking. Rupp and Rich both look at what same-sex sexuality is. Rupp views same-sex sexuality through a historical text. She describes different examples throughout history and the world of sexual acts, just between men or just between women. She also delves into what Anne Fausto-Sterling talks about over whether or not there should only be two genders. Rupp brings up the idea that same-sex sexuality may be same-sex domination, especially for men. I think that this is a too narrow view of sex. I do think that same-sex rape has to do primarily with domination, but I am not sure how far that extends into all sex. Rupp’s article made me question where does love fit into intercourse? Historically sex does not require love and that is true today too. Sex is a biological act, so why do we tie love to sex? Clearly today love is not a perquisite for sex for everyone, but for some people it is. Love can also mean different things for people. A girl may love her girl friend, but only engage in sexual acts with men. Perhaps this has to do with what Rich argues in her article about “compulsory heterosexuality.”
Rich argument surprised me. In her first paragraph she suggests that heterosexuality takes away from the feminist movement. She goes on to explain that heterosexuality is a way for men to dominate women, and if not enforced on women for thousands of years, many women would not think that they are homosexual. I think this has some validity to it. If society told us that homosexuality was the norm, and that was what is acceptable, maybe more people would be gay? On the other hand, I would disagree with some of the things that Rich says. She seems to be arguing that feminists should all be lesbians. I think that this goes against some of her complaints that heterosexual feminists are not open to lesbian feminists. Isn’t that hypocritical? Many of her views are very extreme too, such as saying that all sex with men is subordinate. Can’t women make other women feel inferior too? Also what happens to women who prefer sex with men?
Something that caught my eye was when Rich writes how women use sex so as to get attention from men. While saying that all sex is just a way to get attention is too extreme, it is an interesting point. Many girls today feel like they have to be sexual for men to like them. I bet that most girls in this class (and guys too for that matter) know multiple girls who have gone farther with a guy in order to a) impress him or/and b) get him to give her attention. As I said today in class I had a friend who had sex in eighth grade. She did not have sexual desire yet, but she felt like her then-boyfriend might break up with her if she did not have sex. He did not force her to physically, but mentally?