Naked on the Internet review

Naked on the Internet Last night I finished reading Audacia Ray’s Naked on the Internet. I was motivated to read it fast because I’d promised to write this review on the June 10, but once I started reading, I knew I would’ve devoured it the way I did no matter what.

I was totally blown away by this book. I had high expectations anyway, because Dacia is super smart and a kick-ass writer, and because the topic is fascinating and basically uncharted territory as far as books go. (Oh, and because I love to see my name in print, and there’s plenty of it in chapter three.) But the finished product was even more amazing than I’d expected. Just… damn.

Instead of spending the entire post gushing about the book’s awesomeness, I want to focus on a few specific things that really stood out for me.

In chapter one, while talking about the differences and similarities between lifecams and other types of webcam projects, Dacia writes:

The degree to which women who operate lifecams have had to be on the defensive about their choice to keep their cams uncensored (hence the entries in their FAQs and blogs that speak to the issue) is indicative of the fact that many people feel conflicted about seeing sexuality as part and parcel of the scope of a woman’s life.

I had a bit of an “a-ha!” moment when I read that - not because it’s some completely new concept that I’d never considered, but because it’s something I’ve long seen as a fundamental, pervasive societal problem with how we understand sexuality, but I’ve struggled to put it into words.

Society has a need to compartmentalize women’s sexuality, and even though I understand the historical “whys” and “wherefores” behind it, ultimately whenever I pursue this train of thought I’m left with a big WTF. I think this compartmentalization - whether forced onto women by others, or by women feeling that they have to conform to it - is the unifying feature behind countless pieces of the Bullshit Puzzle, and we can’t successfully solve problems on a piece-by-piece basis until we undertake the radical task of addressing this compartmentalization.

A little later in chapter one, while talking about Ana Voog’s pregnancy, Dacia writes:

[B]ring a baby into the picture, and suddenly people are up in arms about whether a woman who’s making homemade porn (even if that’s not what the women themselves choose to call it) is fit to be a parent.

I was talking about this with Figleaf when he was visiting last week. I asked him if he ever worries about being “outed” because he has children. He was pretty confident, almost to the point of seeming dismissive, in his answer that no, he doesn’t worry, and why should he? Of course, this is how it should be - a foregone conclusion. The fact that adults have sex lives - which they experience and express in myriad ways - and raise children should be ridiculously mundane. And yet, unfortunately, in the minds of many, it’s not - and especially when the parents in question are women. For some reason, female sexuality seems to be a much bigger threat - to whom or to what, is the part I can’t figure out.

One other thing that stood out to me was this bit in chapter three:

[T]hough many women have the potential and the drive to be freer, they still feel the sharpness of societal constraints when they’re moving around the world outside the blogosphere.

I can relate to that so, so much. Even though I have a ton of ideals wrt sexuality and I try to live as authentically as possible - because anything else feels destructive - the reality is that I still live in a larger world that, for the most part, is very sex-negative. My personal feelings about sexuality and sexual empowerment don’t negate the power of the double standard, the madonna/whore dichotomy, or a society that has legal buy-in to the idea that (for example) a woman who goes to swinger parties is an unfit parent. And on a smaller scale, sometimes even hanging out with local bloggers, many of whom I’ve come to consider close friends, I feel like I have to “tone down” my interest in and enthusiasm for sexuality. I try to actively fight against these kinds of inner reactions, but old lessons die hard.

I could go on writing about every part of the book I underlined or drew exclamation points next to, but if I did that, we’d be here all night. So in conclusion, I’ll just say, flat-out: READ THIS BOOK. I am in awe of it, and I guarantee you will be, too.

*Poof!*

Fancy that… I don’t exist!1 (Dan Savage’s take on Joan Sewell’s I’d Rather Eat Chocolate: Learning to Love My Low Libido.)

See also: “Chocolate” and sex (figleaf’s post on the matter). He’s actually read the book, which I suppose I’ll do at some point. If I was able to make it all the way through Female Chauvinist Pigs and Pornified without taking a claw hammer to my eyes, I can probably manage the trifecta. Anyway, figleaf is much more charitable than I imagine I would be. But who knows, maybe I’ll surprise myself with a sudden stroke of even-temperedness after reading the book. Stranger things have happened.

Anyway, if after hearing about yet another book that reinforces the tired old dog-and-pony show of men being ravenous sexual fiends and women just wanting to cuddle and bake, you feel the claw hammer inching dangerously close to your eyes, I suggest you hop on over to Sexerati and read Lux Nightmare’s interview with Dacia, about her forthcoming book Naked on the Internet. (Full disclosure: I was interviewed for this book, during which time I talked about being ‘libidinous’ and dealing with male partners who didn’t want sex nearly as much as I did.) Amazingly, Dacia’s book operates on the premise that women are individuals with unique sexual identities.

Asexuality is, of course, just as valid a sexual identity as any other. But no matter what identity one is talking about, a problem arises when one extrapolates their own preferences/experiences to the entire rest of the world. I completely agree with Rachel Kramer Bussel’s point that it’s important for women to speak their truth about their lives. (Coincidentally, I just left a comment to that effect yesterday on a radical feminist blog where I think my presence might be less-than-appreciated, but which I read and find interesting nonetheless. In fact, I’ve spread that mantra all over the blogosphere in recent months.) But again, the problem comes with making the logical leap that your personal experience is representative of the world at large.

Okay, morning rant over. Now to come up with good questions for the would-be interviewees in the previous thread!

1 Ed. note: I am, generally, no fan of Dan Savage, and this column does a good job of proving why. You can cut the self-congratulatory male privilege with a knife. I’m citing it, however, because David IMed it to me first thing this morning and got me thinking about Sewell’s book, which I had conveniently pushed to a far corner of my mind several days ago.

I know famous people

Holy crap - Dacia is going to be on Geraldo at Large tonight! It airs at 8:00 p.m. on Fox News. (Yes, I will willingly be watching Fox News! Stranger things have happened.) I assume they’ll be discussing her book Naked on the Internet. If Geraldo is mean to her I’m going to fly to wherever he is and personally kick his ass - so consider yourself warned, Mr. Moustache.

I will Tivo it, of course. I wonder if there’s a way to get it from there to YouTube?

Update: Actually it won’t be on tonight. See comment for details.