From the "Letters" section of the Tuesday, August, 23, 2005 edition of USA Today, page 11A:
"Elizabeth Sandoval's definition of a neo-feminist, 'One who respects her body so much that she won't allow it to be used as someone's playground,' is neither new nor feminist. I believe she is guilty of being a weak-minded woman by unknowingly endorsing common thought on sexual norms.
Perhaps a neo-feminist should be 'One who respects her body so much that it is her own playground.'
The major cultural flaw regarding sex is that it is something women 'give' to men. It isn't.
Women frequently deny themselves the right to enjoy sex because we've been socialized to believe it is dirty and evil. And, by extension, that our bodies are dirty and evil. Some research suggests that centuries of this thought have dimmed our ability to climax as easily as men do. In this world, where drugs such as Viagra and Cialis are readily available yet doctors still don't fully understand the anatomy and function of the female body, it is irresponsible to perpetuate the archaic notion that sex is a gift.
If abstinence is for you, great! However, don't condemn the women in this world who engage in sex. How is the pleasure of sex different from the pleasure of food, sleep or exercise? It isn't. So, if you enjoy a decadent dessert, a sound afternoon nap or an hour of yoga, then you're guilty of using your body as a playground.
Furthermore, it is irresponsible to lump all men into the category of those who brag to their buddies about sexual 'conquests'. True feminists understand that some men are valuable partners in the struggle for equality.
The sooner we all realize that, the better off we'll all be.
Melissa Combs
Ann Arbor, Mich."
"It's an unhealthy thought that likens sex to dessert. After all, no one ever got pregnant off of a strawberry shortcake. Some would contend that's what condoms and the pill are for, so you won't get pregnant off of sex either. So, it would seem, both are simply an avenue to a pleasurable experience, and what's wrong with that?
Nothing is wrong with pleasure, but something is wrong when you relate a person to a strawberry shortcake as a means to a pleasurable experience. You value strawberry shortcake for what you can get out of it; you value people for their inherent dignity as a human being. And if your estimation of their value leads you to a short-lived sexual fling, what does that say about your powers of valuation? But if that estimation leads you to a self-sacrificing and death-do-us-part loyalty, it says something quite different.
It's prudish to find abstinence old-fashioned, it's not like sleeping around is anything new either. It's time to end the tradition of scoffing--treating someone's body like a dessert only gives you empty calories. The true adventure of freedom is in living chaste, and preserving sex for your spouse."
