Sex: Two to Tango
ray
::27 jan 2007 :: 12:43pm
Alright. I’ve got a ton of stuff to post, but I think I’ll stir some stuff up and see if we get some comments rolling in.
Recently I was flipping around the channels and happened upon a rerun of an old Sex and the City episode. I always liked this show when it was on, because it was like spying on the enemy is some weird way. Anyway, this episode had Carrie swooning over her new beau. They’ve got it all: the witty banter, the flirting, the romantic dinners. Everything’s going smoothly until…the scene change to the bedroom. They’re having sex, he’s on top and she’s lying rigidly still on the bottom, looking off to the side wishing to be anywhere else but there. Fast forward to the next scene, the coffee kvetch, where she’s telling the other gals how awful it was.
Duh. Of course it was awful. Why? You weren’t participating.
"Fuck me badly once, shame on you. Fuck me badly twice, shame on me." says Samantha, advocating that Carrie breakup with him. Because, of course, if the sex is bad it must be the guy's fault, right?
Hmmm.
If you can expect to have great, mind-blowing sex (or even adequate sex, for that matter) just lying there, I’d like to know where you got your sense of entitlement. Here’s a thought: view sex as a participatory effort. It’s not a movie where you just sit back and watch (unless several hookers are involved, I guess); it’s usually a two-player sport. So you want great sex? Try getting into it and giving some great sex. Want more/better foreplay? Try doling some out. And Carrie, if you want your lover to be able to read you for what you want, you have to give off some cues, some road signs as to where he should go, not just stare off into space. Communicate.
Maybe I’m a little overly testy, but I thought we had the battle of the sexes decades ago. Me? I’m all for equality, not just in the workplace, but in the bedroom, too.
So what do you think? Is good sex the responsibility of all involved parties, or is the onus solely on the man because, hey, the woman is letting him have sex with her in the first place? What makes the good sex good and how can we avoid the bad?
that's the 'quiet sex' episode. and i dont think it's so much about carrie blaming berger for GIVING her bad sex… more about the fact that there was no passion between them… as the episode reveals later, berger wasnt enjoying himself either. and let's face it, it isnt like he was really TRYING (there is plenty more he couldve done above and beyond missionary position to get her off if that was really his passion and goal). both berger and carrie are lifeless in bed together. i dont think the episode blames anyone for bad sex… and i DO think it's reasonable to break up with someone when there is no attraction or passion. who wants to work on the sex when youve *just* started dating (like berger and carrie)… shouldnt it at least have some passion (even if there is still plenty to work on outside of that?) … i think this was the point of carrie's conversation at brunch… to ask whether it was right or wrong to break-up with a really nice person who she liked just because the sex was unexciting. and she doesnt… she decides to spice it up for him and make the sex better.
this seems a pretty simple question you have posed here, mr ray. can you really envision someone saying it is only the man's responsiblity?
sitc is notorious for set-ups that portray the lead actresses in selfish and unflattering light — all the while making them out to be the victims.
i think the issues you have are probably more with the show than with reality. and its tough for me to comment as, if i have seen the episode, ive long since blocked it out of my brain.
so yes, ill vote for 'it takes everyone working together to really get somewhere interesting.' but go ahead — somebody disagree somehow.
oh — i'll try to challenge myself: what if you are roleplaying? i know someone in college who (i was told by him) roleplayed with his then girlfriend. he was the undertaker, she was the dead. he dug her up by pulling her out of the covers.
so maybe her responsibility to good sex then is to lie there and pretend to not enjoy it. hm. im not sure in what universe that qualifies as good.
and im creeping myself out, so im stopping until someone else tries to chime in here.
sorrysorrysorry but it's sAtc. not sitc. yes, i'm an asshole.
i think if one watches more than an episode or 6 and follows story lines, the series shows itself to be a lot less two-dimensional than it may seem to be.
but i have the bias of being a satc devotee. although, thankfully, not so much as lindsay lohan (google it!).
ill admit to even owning the first 3 seasons. why? cause costco carried them when they came out, i didnt have cable to watch it at all and there were virtually no other tv shows out on dvd yet.
actually, they have been awesome to own when girls have come to visit (carter). i dont believe, though, that the storylines carry the characters through. i stand on the 'spoiled and entitled' side of that fence.
shrug.
i'd advise you to watch it all and make a more educated decision. i don't believe the series truly hits its stride until the 4th or 5th season. there are some elements of fantasy to the program, but overall it is more than solid.
maybe i can teach a college class on it one day.