reposted from tumblr
Whoooo, ranty-thinky time!
Other than the obvious feminist criticisms of the term "virgin" -- in this case, meaning someone who has not engaged in partnered sexual activity -- I don't like that word and don't apply it to myself because it exists within a binary framework that I do not consider myself to even be a part of. Like, there is a line, and on either end is a dot, one labeled "virgin" and one labeled "not-virgin*," and there is the expectation that everyone falls onto one side or the other at some point in their lives.
I am 26 years old and have never engaged in partnered sexual activity, and I refuse to call myself a virgin. It frustrates me when I talk to people about this, and they call me a "virgin," and I then have to correct them by saying, "I'm not a virgin, I've never had sex." Why the distinction? Because I feel as far as my personal experiences go, I have never, am not, and (most likely) will not engage in partnered sexual activity. (This is for a variety of reasons, though I definitely define my asexuality and aromantism as being as a part of that.)
So, I feel like it's weird and inaccurate to call myself a virgin when I don't think I even fit into that binary setup in the first place, as it isn't even part of my plain of experiences. It would be like calling myself a "non-skydiver" because I have never gone skydiving, and I can confidently say that I will never go skydiving and the activity doesn't interest me in the first place.
It also doesn't even fit into how I define myself and my worldview (because I know some people use "virgin" as a way to define themselves, how they interact with the world, which is perfectly fine for them). I know some people personally define sexual activity as a way to structure themselves and it colors their views on human relationships and politics and art and etc., etc. But for me personally, it's just a thing that people do. And I were to engage in it, it would pretty much just be a thing that I do. So to me, it isn't really anything too different from, say, cooking, or going to work, or skydiving.
I'M PRETTY SURE THIS POST MADE NO SENSE
*Side rant: Why is there a clear, consistently-used term for someone who has not engaged in partnered sexual activity ("virgin"), but there is not a clear, consistently-used term for someone who has? There are plenty of words used to describe someone who has had sex, depending on the participant and circumstance (such as "adult," "mature," "a real man," which themselves are all problematic). It definitely seems to be a case of the unlabeled norm. Not having partnered sex gets a label, because it is a (seen-by-most, temporary) deviation from the norm, the norm being that everyone eventually will engage in some kind of partnered sexual activity. LANGUAGE AND SOCIAL CONSTRUCTIONS YOU FASCINATE ME AND ALSO FRUSTRATE ME