I Do Want to Have Sex. Just Not With You. : On Becoming a Domestic and Laboratory Goddess

Search

Profile

The Egyptian goddess Isis was celebrated as the ideal wife and mother. The blogger known as Dr. Isis has some fancy-sounding degrees and is a physiologist at a major research university working on some terribly impressive stuff. She blogs about balancing her research career with the demands of raising small children, how to succeed as a woman in academia, and anything else she finds interesting. Also, she blogs about shoes. In fact, she blogs a lot about shoes.

...And behold, he raised the motherfucking Jameson on high as Isis bedecked her feet in glory, and the masses were sated. -- The Holy Gospel According to PhysioProf

Sb/DonorsChoose Drive

Widget doesn't work?
Here's my giving page.
Thanks!

Other Information

« The Birthday of My Motherhood... | Main | Burning Jams for the Gym... »

I Do Want to Have Sex. Just Not With You.

Category: Feminist Stylings
Posted on: July 10, 2009 11:46 PM, by Isis the Scientist

Today is Dr. and Mr. Isis's wedding anniversary, marking yet another year that St. Mr. Isis has tolerated his wife's absolute lunacy. Dr. Isis is a tough woman to be married to. I work a lot, I'm not home a lot, I hate to do laundry, I own way too many shoes (at least so says Mr. Isis), I've largely kicked him out of the master bathroom and closet, and sometimes I toy with him and test his love for me purely for sport. We've been together a long time. I have to keep our relationship novel somehow.

Three years into our marriage I went to Mr. Isis and told him there was something I wanted to discuss. I told him I thought our sex life had gotten stale and that I wanted him to let me pee on him. In reality, I had no interest in this. I just wondered if he'd say "yes" and, if not, how hard I'd have to push to get him to say "yes."

Figure 1: Mr. Isis sensed that I was less than sincere in my request. Mr. Isis is an incredibly patient man.

Dr. Isis is excited to celebrate the beginning of her wedded bliss. So tonight she went over to one of her favorite little places and bought a little black something to wear to dinner with Mr. Isis tomorrow night. She's not going to lie. She's hoping that after Mr. Isis sees this little black something, he's going to show her a little bit of the what is, if you know what I mean.

Thinking about this as I tried on beautiful dresses this afternoon and marveled at the perkiness of my own amazing rack got me to thinking about something one of you little muffins sent me this week. Blog darling LostMarbles wrote me the following:

Dear Dr. Isis,

I am an admirer of your hot feminist stylings. I am also masochistic enough to have "feminism" as a search term for Google Alerts. I usually ignore the blatantly misogynistic results I get, but this morning as I was reading through my feed I noticed a post that had the phrase "Isis the Scientist" in the half sentence blurb and I had trouble ignoring things that are abso-fucking-lutely disturbing in content and malign the Goddess. I thought you might want to know about it as I don't know how much time you have to google yourself between doing hot science and doing your domestic goddess work.

My friend Hex and I also wrote a reply to that post in my blog.

Forever your humble worshiper,
LostMarbles

In his post, the cocknozzle in question has this to say about me:

Lately I've been seeing a lot of feminists (Isis the Scientist is one example, the Errant Wife is another) shrilly insisting that women should be able to wear provocative clothing without having men ogle them, or that women whoring around will not inspire violence.

"Shrilly" cracks me up. It makes me think of Laverne and Shirley and I loved those crazy bitches as a kid.

Video 1: Except that Dr. Isis is way hotter than both Laverne and Shirley. As I ponder this further and think of fellow blogger and childhood bff Minerva, I realize that in our duo I would probably be Laverne. But I digress...

You can read the rest of the post if you've got brain cells to spare, but I warn you you'll be a little dumber afterwards. I mean, I'm warning you that the dude's links include posts and articles like "Arguments against Women's Suffrage," "Sorry, but women are dependent on men," and "Sorry girls, we men can be better parents than you." Seriously, I don't want to hear about it if you go over there.

When I first read the post I forwarded it on to my favorite foul-mouthed blogger with a simple "ARGH!" He replied that trying to argue with this guy would be like trying to argue against the Time Cube guy. I didn't know what the Time Cube was, but I feel exponentially dumb after Googling it. My eyes also bled a little.

But, while this guy is certainly 3+ standard deviations over crazy, I remembered this afternoon as I asked the age old question, "does this make my ass look big" that his viewpoints have been echoed recently by media outlets less likely to be thought of bat shit crazy. Earlier this week while I was on hiatus Bioephemera wrote about an article printed in the Telegraph that claimed that researchers believe that women who dress promiscuously are more likely to be raped.

Bioephemera writes:

Wow. . . coming off the Silence is the Enemy rape awareness initiative, it's more depressing than usual to see the Telegraph's latest bad science reporting. Their story implies that rape victims deserve blame for what happens to them:
Women who drink alcohol, wear short skirts and are outgoing are more likely to be raped, claim scientists at the University of Leicester (source).
Ben Goldacre of the excellent Bad Science blog didn't think so. So he tracked down the (student) author of the (unpublished) (MS) dissertation cited by the Telegraph. She said the article was completely wrong:
"We found no evidence that women who are more outgoing are more likely to be raped, this is completely inaccurate, we found no difference whatsoever. The alcohol thing is also completely wrong: if anything, we found that men reported they were willing to go further with women who are completely sober." (source)
Goldacre then asked about the "provocative dress" claim: while there was a slight correlation, it was "not statistically significant." In fact, the researcher said "I told the journalist it isn't one of our main findings, you can't say that. It's not significant, which is why we're not reporting it in our main analysis."

Today Carl Zimmer reports that the article has mysteriously disappeared from the Telegraph's website. Mysteriously.

Figure 2: Perhaps the irresponsible journalism fairy came and took it away?

Pondering all of this in my bra and panties in the dressing room in between hot dresses largely made me angry. You see, I very frequently receive comments on this blog scolding me for mentioning sex or hot shoes (or whatever else I am up to) and then saying that rape, mail order brides, or sexual advances in the workplace are unacceptable -- as if in order to not have to tolerate inappropriate advances or sexual violence I must become a sexless creature.

That puts the responsibility on the victim and that line of thinking simply makes me angry.

One of the things I have had to come to terms with as I have explored the nooks and crannies of my own feminism is the fact that I enjoy sex and that I need not feel guilty about it. Maybe my enjoyment of sex is rooted in the patriarchy. Who knows, but it remains as fact. I will admit that there are times I want to arouse my partner, yet I fail to understand how choosing attire that I know will excite him could ever, ever, ever be interpreted as a free pass for every other man to hop on for a ride. The fact is, I want to have sex, but I don't want to have sex with everyone.

I especially don't want to have sex with the dude who called my "shrilly," although I do wonder if he likes being peed on.

I fail to understand how the choices one woman makes in her attire cost her the right to say "no." And, I fail to see how my decision to dress a particular way for a night out with my partner cost me the right to say I don't want to be ogled in the work place or be treated unequally because of my gender. I hate the notion that men are will-less beings, incapable of controlling their own primal urges unless I keep my ankles covered.

How can some men continue to tell me that they are better than me at math and science and also tell me they lack the ability to not put their penis in me just because my skirt is too short? Certainly solving an equation takes more concentration. I know that it certainly takes more time.

The terms "promiscuous" and "whoring" bother me. Tomorrow night I intend to wear a dress that falls above my knee (as opposed to my more subdued work attire), but I don't think I am more likely to sleep with any more men than if I wore one of the knee-length skirts I typically sport. Even if I did, I still have the right to choose who I let worship in my temple.

But, none of this has two balls to do with the workplace, where ogling, grabbing, and sexual suggestion are inappropriate and being a sexual being outside of work does not preclude someone from wanting their coworkers to behave professionally in the workplace.

I realize that I may not be getting anywhere with this, except to say that I think it is acceptable for women to be dichotomous sexual beings inside and outside of the workplace. I think that saying "yes" to one person does not obligate us to say "yes" to everyone, and I think that wanting to attract a partner does not cost us the right to say "no."

Most importantly, I think it's important that we continue to say that, whatever the situation, sexual violence and assault are never the fault of the victim, despite the loud voices to the contrary.

Find more posts in: Brain & Behavior Information Science

Share this: Facebook Twitter Stumbleupon Reddit Email + More

TrackBacks

TrackBack URL for this entry: http://scienceblogs.com/mt/pings/114621

Comments

Brilliantly said, Isis.

Posted by: Hena | July 10, 2009 11:59 PM

Fucking aye.

Posted by: MFA Mama | July 11, 2009 12:30 AM

Also thanks ever so much because now I have to wake someone up and ask them if they'd let me pee on them. No, it can't wait for morning, either.

Posted by: MFA Mama | July 11, 2009 12:32 AM

It makes me want to hurl, knowing there are sick fucks out there like MCW.

Posted by: ktbug ladydid | July 11, 2009 12:46 AM

Amen Dr Isis - I also have an urge to ask that question - although tbh he probably would say yes just to be peverse :-p

Posted by: Eppendork | July 11, 2009 4:02 AM

I told him I thought our sex life had gotten stale and that I wanted him to let me pee on him. In reality, I had no interest in this. I just wondered if he'd say "yes" and, if not, how hard I'd have to push to get him to say "yes."

Now that is just F-ing weird. Next ask to see if he will take a dump on you. I have a post in moderation in a different thread.

Posted by: Danimal | July 11, 2009 7:27 AM

Slight correction: Male Chauvinist Woman is in fact a woman. The fact that her blog address just says "malechauvinist" is, I admit, a pretty powerful red herring. This certainly doesn't stop her from being a cocknozzle, though. Good word. I think I'll take it.

Posted by: Learn Hexadecimal | July 11, 2009 8:34 AM

Gah. What horrid-ness.

This makes me want to go wake up about-to-be-Mr.FabulousShoes with his favorite breakfast of fresh apple & pork sausages and eggs over easy just for being a great guy.

Blech. I'll have to shower first, of course.

Posted by: Dr.FabulousShoes | July 11, 2009 8:58 AM

One of the best posts on the topic out there. Thanks from one smart, sexy mama/ professional to another.

Posted by: E | July 11, 2009 9:24 AM

Exactly. My shorter version of this lovely rant would be: it's not my fault you have a penis. Your penis is your problem, not mine!

Posted by: antistokes | July 11, 2009 9:38 AM

Isis -- As long as we agree that "ogling, grabbing, and sexual suggestion are inappropriate", can we also agree that overtly sexual clothing is inappropriate for work?

Posted by: Anonymous | July 11, 2009 10:09 AM

An old guy's perspective, It might be fair to blame a teenage boy's repetitive motion disorder on provocative dress, but not sexual assault, that's got little to do with sex, and a lot with assault. BTW, having participated in raising a child, I've had enough experience with bodily fluids (and solids) to last a long time. Do find the time to listen to Cheech & Chong's "Stoned in court", an interesting solution to sexual predation is offered.

Posted by: Tim | July 11, 2009 10:35 AM

The trouble with "overtly sexual clothing" is that oftentimes it isn't. I hate shopping, and every once in a while I'll go to the store to buy clothes, and many of the shirts there are low cut. It's the normal style, and I'm not going out of my way to find the special modest section (which there isn't, and my husband doesn't have to go out of his way to find the modest section in male clothing, because it's all modest). So while my own mother thinks I'm sufficiently covered, and I'm certainly not showing anything, my male coworkers get uncomfortable if I lean over (which I do sometimes in order to do my job). I think it's their responsibility to not think of me sexually and to not look down my shirt if my movement affords them that view. And I can assure you, I am about as unsexual as you can get.

Posted by: Sara | July 11, 2009 11:35 AM

Beautifully written, Isis. And LostMarbles and Hex did an excellent job as well. Thanks for expressing my frustration with these idiots so eloquently.

Isis, though, got a true ROFL from me with, "I especially don't want to have sex with the dude who called my "shrilly," although I do wonder if he likes being peed on." True that, friend. True that.

Posted by: postdoc | July 11, 2009 11:58 AM

"How can some men continue to tell me that they are better than me at math and science and also tell me they lack the ability to not put their penis in me just because my skirt is too short? Certainly solving an equation takes more concentration. I know that is certainly takes more time."

I may need to quote this at some future point. When I do, consider it a prayer to Isis. Genius.

Posted by: QoB | July 11, 2009 12:14 PM

Enjoyment of sex rooted in the patriarchy??!?? WTF??? I really HATE the myth that men want sex all the time and ("normal") women just, well, tolerate it. When women lose their sexual appetite -- now THAT is a problem more likely to be rooted in the patriarchy! The inclination to be desirable is normal and natural (and it is true for both sexes). Some women feel sexy in high heels and short skirts and some women feel sexy in combat boots and chains hooked to their belt loops. It doesn't matter. What does matter is having the right to express our sexuality in a way that feels good to us without fear of being violated. And men who form opinions on the virtue, availability, intelligence, character, etc., of women based on how we dress *are* violating women. Since when does a man in a suit and tie, t-shirt and jeans, flannel shirt and work boots, shorts and Hawaiian shirt...lead us to draw conclusions about his sexual appetite and/or moral depravity? I guess women are naturally better scientists. We require more data.

I do believe that people should dress appropriately for their work. (Interns with bare bellies or sports logo t-shirts come to mind.) And this is true for both men and women.

Posted by: Catharine | July 11, 2009 12:19 PM

"it's not my fault you have a penis. Your penis is your problem, not mine!"

I'll accept that overtly Pontius Pilate dance move, if you'll accept my equally hand-washing rejoinder: it's not my fault you have breasts and chose to expose large portions of them in public today. If your mostly-exposed breasts end up in my field of vision, that's your problem, not mine!

I do promise to try not to pee on you, though.

Posted by: Jarrod | July 11, 2009 12:19 PM

I'll accept that overtly Pontius Pilate dance move, if you'll accept my equally hand-washing rejoinder: it's not my fault you have breasts and chose to expose large portions of them in public today. If your mostly-exposed breasts end up in my field of vision, that's your problem, not mine!

Blah, blah, blah.

Posted by: Isis the Scientist | July 11, 2009 12:35 PM

Anon@11, oh how I love your suggestion. Where do you put the arbitrary "inappropriate" line for women's choice of attire? Last I checked, rape is popular in burka-covered Pakistan. By suggesting a restriction of women's attire, you are supporting that women are not only responsible for their behavior, but also responsible for men's inability to control their hard-ons, sexual advances, and abuse toward women. It's delusional to think that women covered head to toe in "conservative" paper bags will magically stop men from having erections every 10 seconds. What's next? Suggesting that women not paint their nails because red is the monkeybutt mate-attraction rape-me-now color? or not wear bling to avoid assault and robbery?

Can I suggest that we get rid of those construction signs that advertise "Men at Work" since I seem to have the urge to drive over the cones while simultaneously ripping off my clothes? Those signs make me all hot and bothered by promising studly men ahead on the road, what more can a girl want?! WOW WEE! *smacks dashboard, pedal to the metal* YES YES YES YES!!!1!!!!1!! Whoops, sorry. I'z distracted, couldn't keep my eyes on the road. Damn, those signs should be banned for public safety reasons, the wimmins can barely drive straight as it is! I haven't even seen any Men at Work yet! (they must be under cover? ooooo, hide and seek! YES! vroom varooom)

Posted by: jc | July 11, 2009 12:39 PM

it's not my fault you have breasts and chose to expose large portions of them in public today.

To be honest, I don't- all of my clothing is lab appropriate. Heck, most of my t-shirts are from the men's section, and I own one single, solitary (knee-length, too) skirt. However, many of my female friends at the labs I work in do wear low cut stuff (under the lab coat). I have no problems at all with this, so long as safety requirements are followed.

Besides, claiming 'it's not my fault you have teh boobies' means that you are not taking personable responsibility for your actions. Men can 'help' grabby hands, etc. I don't mind looks, honestly, although I know a few gals that do. Humans in general tend to be highly visual. But, no touching!! It's my body, not yours, even if I'm running about butt naked!

Even in grade school it irked the hell out of me that boys are allowed to take their shirts of in public, but a girl doing so is illegal. At the very least, boys should have to cover it up too!

Posted by: antistokes | July 11, 2009 12:44 PM

I suspect that many of the men who take this sort of line, are suffering a problem that I too occasionally suffer - jealousy over the fact that women get to wear much cooler clothes than men. Now my personal reaction to this is to accept that it is what it is and occasionally wear what, before I put it on, was considered women's clothing.

Not that it's any justification, but I suspect that we would see less of this sort of attitude if men had better accessories and could dress in a slinky black thing once in a while...

Posted by: DuWayne | July 11, 2009 12:50 PM

Word.

Posted by: Candid Engineer | July 11, 2009 1:48 PM

lolol I look, I flirt, I know how to keep my hands to myself.I also know when the afore mentioned activities are inappropriate. And i agree, just because you are nekkid or nearly so, does not give me the right to touch without your invitation.

Posted by: wanderer | July 11, 2009 2:07 PM

There are surely some choice quotes from this entry for your t-shirt line, no?

Happy anniversary to you and Mr. Isis, boy does time fly! That was one hell of a wedding.

And, thanks for making me Shirley. :)

Posted by: Minerva | July 11, 2009 2:49 PM

"Most importantly, I think it's important that we continue to say that, whatever the situation, sexual violence and assault are never the fault of the victim, despite the loud voices to the contrary."

Well said!

It's absolutely true, but don't forget the converse: people shouldn't assume that because becoming a victim is not a moral failing, there's nothing that can be done to protect themselves and others from becoming a victim in the first place. Everyone can help prevent violent crime. Avoid traveling alone at night, don't leave drinks unattended, walk in a confident and self-assured way, learn self-defense, etc. This is equally true for men and women, and helps prevent not just rape but all kinds of violent crimes.

Posted by: Matt Springer | July 11, 2009 3:25 PM

Fucking rights!

Happy Anniversary. Mr.Isis is a lucky man!

Posted by: ScientistMother | July 11, 2009 4:37 PM

I still have the right to choose who I let worship in my temple.

Well said, friend Isis. Happy anniversary to Mr. Isis and you.

Posted by: Gingerale | July 11, 2009 5:23 PM

Oops. Totally forgot the point of this post. HAPPY ANNIVERSARY!!

Posted by: Danimal | July 11, 2009 8:29 PM

My scientific research says men who feel their helpless right to sexually attack and abuse women solely due to their male rigid penis self-worship tend to get bullets in their skulls or balls cut off by well equipped prepared women in certain progressive female populations. I'm a fan of Hothead Paisan twisted comic.

That ignorant male blogger ranting that misogynistic stuff is probably the most phallus worshiping pretending he's straight-homosexual around living in denial by hating on women in society and expressing his sexual frustration through illogic wishful thinking. Don't you know that's how goddesses of old suddenly turned into warrior violent male Gods of patriarchal/pastoral Middle Eastern religions now leading Judeo-Christian-Islam?

My opinionated view is a bunch of dick worshiping men around campfires fires finding wild excuses for their anger or frustration with women's power in village life, family and their ancient roles and the men usurped them, through violence/wars/raping. Look up 'The Myths of Male Dominance', 'The Satanization of Women' and 'When God was a Woman' lets you see how the context of human history has changed around the world.

Posted by: megan | July 12, 2009 12:13 AM

I know I was warned, I should have listened. I feel like I need a shower after reading a few entries on that blog and the links. How can anyone loath themselves so much and not realize it?

Posted by: Noadi | July 13, 2009 12:03 AM

Enjoy your night out, Isises!!
Brilliantly written, goddess.

Posted by: Callinectes | July 13, 2009 1:34 PM

It may be that women are just as bad naturally at self control as men, but in a patriarchal society they have been conditioned to exert it more than men in most situations. By which I mean to say that men are not necessarily any worse than women, but are given by society more free reign to act out than women are.

While I would like to think that men are not so idiotic that they are simply unable to control themselves at the slightest hint of sexuality on the part of any woman in sight, I do deal with the real world on almost a daily basis. The average man is nothing to be proud of in terms of self control, and half of them are worse.

The subset of men who feel they have the right to act in any way they see fit and who also just happen to be sexist misogynistic douchetards seems to also overlap with being outspoken in demanding their innate right to be so. And defenders of such behavior whether male or female are simply anti-woman.

Shade in and shut up.

Posted by: Rev Matt | July 13, 2009 3:27 PM

Isis, when these results were presented at a conference,

http://aac.asm.org/cgi/content/full/47/12/3713?view=long&pmid=14638471

I asked the author if he cared to comment on the effect of UTI status on the relative effectiveness of the common folk remedy for impotence, the golden shower. A UTI would increase nitrite levels in urine, and so should provide increased delivery of NO to the skin. Tumescence is known to be mediated through NO, so there is plausible physiology behind an increased effectiveness with a UTI, and especially after eating a meal rich in nitrate.

He declined to answer. I suspect that he didn’t have data with a sufficiently high n to consider presenting it.

Posted by: daedalus2u | July 13, 2009 6:52 PM

You know, I'll never understand some people's need to stubbornly, obtusely cling to this ludicrous idea in the face of all evidence and common sense. I'll never get what deep need is being met by the constant victim-blaming bullshit.

I mean, really. Suppose all that were true (which it's not), and self-defense courses and wearing the proper attire and never having a drink in a bar really did protect women from assault. WOULD IT MATTER? Would it make it less WRONG and IMMORAL and CRIMINAL for a man to rape a woman after she danced on a table naked in public?

Again, and in perpetuity, cause and effect being conflated, blah blah, wrong end of the stick, blah.

Posted by: Cara | July 14, 2009 5:39 PM

"3+ standard deviations over crazy" - best phrase ever.

Posted by: Avery | July 15, 2009 3:38 PM

@Cara well said. Regardless of whether the woman wears a miniskirt or a burkha rape happens everywhere. Though as you quite correctly point out, it doesn't matter if she was dancing naked on a table, that still doesn't make it OK to rape her. No means no.

Posted by: Rev Matt | July 15, 2009 5:38 PM

OMG, I think I forgot to say waht an AWESOME anniversary post this was! You rock, Isis. Whatever you're wearing.

Posted by: bioephemera | July 18, 2009 10:19 PM

Although it's probably a dangerous thing to mention here, I have been accused of being a tad bit chauvinistic. But, I think this arcticle is so very dead on. In fact, this article and some of it's following posts are so pointed I'm thinking of taking back all the mean things I've ever said about feminism. It irritates the hell out of me that prevailing "wisdom" *cough* bullshit *cough* would actually be enough to make a journalist IGNORE the words of a scientist about his or her OWN STUDY. I do have a feeling the journalist may have just been trying to sell a sensational story but that is a lousy excuse for the outright deception.

A side note, however: Though the sexy undergarments/clothing a women is wearing might not be saying "I want you" to the general population (see a doctor if they are) it is a deadly accurate (good) sign if you're on a date with her, in a relationship with her or hitting successfully on said women in a bar.

Posted by: puc | August 1, 2009 9:04 AM

having a penis is not a problem. Not any more than having a vagina is a "problem." Interesting view of men being expressed here. The typical male is apparently a crazed uncontrollable rapist. But no I don't think so.

Posted by: linix | November 18, 2009 9:59 PM