Welcome to Issue #2! Today we address healthy masturbation, the difference between 'sex' and 'gender', and pro/anti-choice debate.




#1 I think I masterbate too much. Whats the average for the number of times a healthy young male masterbates? Is 21 times a day excessive?

Well for starters, it's spelled masturbate, with a u, not an e.

This question was posed to me on the SDSA Hour a while back and I answered it there, but I'll repeat my answer for the benefit of those who didn't get to hear it.

Masturbation, in and of itself, is not unhealthy. In fact, I encourage people to at least try it, to get to know themselves sexually. Some people aren't comfortable with it and that's okay. On the other end of the spectrum, sometimes people are a little too okay with it.

There's no real set number of times a day that's "unhealthy." You have to evaluate for yourself if your self-love habits are a problem. I mean, 21 times a day might not be a lot for one person, but it might be waaay too much for someone else. I feel that the amount of time you spend masturbating is only a problem if it prevents you from doing things you normally do. Are you slacking off on your homework or other responsibilities in order to masturbate? Are you pulling away from your other relationships because of it? Then it's probably too much.

You might also notice some physical problems - namely, rubbing yourself raw, literally. "Too much" masturbating, especially if you don't use enough lubricant, can chafe the delicate skin on your genitals. If it's starting to hurt, you should cut back or stop completely.

Also, how do you feel about it? Is it making you feel guilty or ashamed that you're spending time masturbating instead of doing other things? If you feel bad about it, you shouldn't do it, or you should step back and have a good talk with yourself about your values and what you care about in life.

Otherwise, go nuts.



#2 What is 'gender'? How does 'gender' relate to the 'sexes'?

Contrary to what some people might think, 'gender' and 'sex' are not the same thing. There are many different interpretations of both and their relation to each other, but one of the more popular ones is that 'gender' is a state of psycho-social identity, while 'sex' is a biological characteristic.

The Centre for Gender Sanity has a really great diagram that illustrates this very well. It emphasises the point that the concepts of 'gender,' 'sex,' 'gender expression,' and 'sexual orientation' are not rooted in binaries - rather, they are sliding scales and an individual may identify at any point of the scale, leaning towards one side or the other, or somewhere in the middle. Still yet, others might not identify anywhere on the scale.

Society, on the other hand, expects us to fall into a binary, and we are ostracised or stigmatised if we don't. As this diagram puts it, "Our cultural expectation is that men occupy the extreme left ends of all four scales (male, man, masculine, attracted to women) and women occupy the right ends. But a person with male anatomy could be attracted to men (gay man), or could have a gender identity of "woman" (transsexual), or could have a feminine gender expression on occasion (crossdresser). A person with female anatomy could identify as a woman, have a somewhat masculine gender expression, and be attracted to women (butch lesbian). It's a mix-and-match world, and there are as many combinations as there are people who think about their gender."

Gender Sanity admits, however, that life is more complicated than just a couple of spectrums, but this set of spectrums is at least a start. It encourages people to think more broadly about things. As the site says, "Why look at the world in black and white (marred by a few troublesome shades of gray) when there's a whole rainbow out there?" :-)




Pro- and anti-choice rant

This wasn't a question posed to me but it was brought up on one of the recent news posts, so I decided to address it.

There seems to be some concern about terms like "pro-choice," "pro-life," "pro-abortion," and "anti-choice." So allow me to explain from my feminist viewpoing.

Let me make something clear - I refuse to refer to people such as the Centre for Bio-Ethical Reform and the Genocide Awareness Project as "pro-life." They are not "pro" anything except "pro-control over women's bodies and the forcing of their beliefs on everyone else." As I have heard someone say, unless you're a pro-choice, vegan, anti-war, anti-death penalty person who cries knowing that houseflies and babies in Africa die every day, you are NOT pro-life. You are NOT. If these people were SO concerned about the welfare of these children, they would make sure that there was a support network for them after they were born. They would make sure that women who didn't want to be pregnant had easy access to contraception. They would crack down, hardcore, on sex offenders and rapists. They would advocate comprehensive sex education in schools so young people make responsible sexual decisions. They would be advocating for Plan B emergency contraception (the "morning-after pill", as it is also known) to be available without a prescription (which in Ontario, it thankfully is). They would adopt all the unwanted children and send help for AIDS orphans. But they don't. Thus, they are "anti-choice."

As mentioned, pro-choice and pro-abortion are not the same thing. To be pro-choice, is to believe that every woman has the right to choose what is best for herself, her life and her own body. Personally, I think I would consider an abortion if I was ever faced with an unwanted pregnancy, but I wouldn't automatically do it as if it were the only thing (pro-abortion), nor would I make anyone else choose it if they didn't want it (pro-choice). I would consider all my options and select the one that would be best given my circumstances.

Similarly, you can (and should!) take into account your own values and decide for yourself what you feel. If you decide that abortion wouldn't be an option for you, that it doesn't mesh with your values and beliefs, that's okay! But NOBODY has the right to force their beliefs and values on anyone else. If someone decided to carry a pregnancy to term and I thought it was a really bad idea, but it was what they really wanted and what would be best for them, I would be supportive rather than telling them, "Abortion would probably be best." Similarly, if you decide, "Abortion isn't for me," that's perfectly okay, but it's inappropriate to try to make someone else carry their pregnancy to term if they don't want to. I repeat: I believe that it is 100% okay to say, "I wouldn't choose abortion for myself, but it's not up to me to make that decision for someone else."

There are a lot of things one has to take into account when it comes to unwanted pregnancy. Circumstances of the pregnancy, one's plans, one's financial situation, one's health, one's age, one's family, as well as values and beliefs. It's a very, VERY personal decision to make, and a very sensitive one, and the last thing any woman needs is someone jumping down her throat telling her that THIS OPTION IS WRONG YOU WILL GO TO HELL IF YOU DO THIS. She needs support, not scare tactics. She needs to know all her options. She needs counselling, before and after her decision. If she decides she wants an abortion, she needs to be able to access a provider without undue hassle and it shouldn't cost her an arm and a leg. If she wants to carry the pregnancy to term, she should have access to proper pre- and post-natal care. Afterwards, if she wants to give the child up for adoption, she should have a reputable agency and be able to make a decision about what kind of adoption she wants and what kind of family will raise her child. If she wants to keep it, there should be support systems in place for child care expenses, education, etc., whatever is necessary. Pro-choice people believe all of this.

As you can see, it's not black and white. Everyone has their own values, beliefs and positions, and they're all very important in making PERSONAL decisions - not decisions for other people. Pro-choice people only have a problem with people who don't like abortion when they start preaching and acting like it's a terrible, terrible thing that'll be the downfall of the world. We have a problem with legislation requiring minors to get parental consent for abortions. We have a problem with the United States government refusing to fund anything having to do with showing abortion as an option, which leads to clinics closing down across the country. We have a problem with women having to spend exorbitant amounts of money and taking far too much time out of their lives in order to travel to the only clinic in the state, only to have to endure a "waiting period" and then return for the actual procedure. We have a problem with "crisis pregnancy centres" masquerading as legitimate medical and counselling insitutions when all they do is frighten young women with dogma and lies about abortion. We have a problem with people telling people who don't want a child to "give it up for adoption" when there are thousands of kids out there who will NEVER get adopted and instead will bounce around the foster system forever without a real home. We have a problem with people who hold huge posters of fetuses up along the side of the highway. And, as my rant about the GAP shows, we have a problem with the demonisation of abortion and the people who support it as an option.

Like it or not, abortion is an option. It is a very good option, and it's an option that every woman faced with an unwanted pregnancy, no matter what the circumstances, should be able to consider. Not only that, she should be able to consider her options with full support from the people important to her and her doctors and counsellors, and she should have full support no matter what she decides. This is pro-choice, and the angle that I and this column will take.





That's it for this month, folks. I'm away in Poland for a week, and I don't know when the next issue will be out, but don't forget to submit your questions for issue three!

Also, my column will be part of a new 'zine that is just starting up called Duck vs. Radish. It is being published by my good friend Peggy, who is including selected questions in the 'zine for all to read. The first issue is done, and if anyone wants a copy let me know and I'll hook you up - it's available in PDF and print form.