(NSFW) Penis, Patriarchy, and Pleasure
This article was originally published on September 30, 2021 on my Medium page.
Disclaimer: I am not a licensed sexuality educator…yet. I just know some things that could be helpful.
Sooooo I was on my burner twitter account and I came across this particular comic. (It’s pretty explicit so be mindful of who you are around when viewing this image.) Now in the eyes of the original poster, this warranted a response rooted in leaving the partner and getting consumed with embarrassment because wtf is honest and effective communication. I saw this comic as a showcase of how patriarchy complicates the cultivation of sexual pleasure. Unfortunately, that nigga was not interested in that perspective so imma talk my shit right here. :)
Source: Idk who the artist is but I got this from Twitter.
Okay, but like what’s going on in this comic chile? I’m glad you asked that lovely question! For starters, the first image is a white person with long ginger hair (we’ll call them Ginger) holding what looks like a silicone penis extender because their partner has a smaller package. It’s clear that Ginger felt like the extender could be useful for their sex life. The second image is a depiction of the extender actually on the penis of Ginger’s partner with weird comments about the person’s penis not filling it up. The third and final image is Ginger on their back, spread eagle, anticipating penetration from their partner who is still wearing the extender. The thing that I was personally okay with was the idea of introducing a sex toy that could be useful in enhancing the sexual experience between the two people. That’s not an easy conversation to have with people because it can bring up feelings of inadequacy and embarrassment. In my experience dating cis men specifically, I’ve had one guy get really defensive about using toys and when we finally did, he was extremely insecure about it. So the fact that, in the comic, the partner wore the extender could perhaps showcase a commitment to maximizing what I call “the pleasure potential”. The problematic aspect of this comic is more about how Ginger was clearly addressing their partner’s penis and how the toy could “make up” for the lack of size instead of it being something that adds a different dimension. As if to say that people with small penises are going to be inherently subpar in the sexual experience. That’s not cool. Having a preference for larger penises during penetration is not the issue. However, if your preference makes it difficult to not view a partner with a smaller penis as inadequate, it might be time to reevaluate your sexual values. You don’t have to make people feel like shit for not having a big ass dick.
I see where you’re coming but wtf does that have to do with patriarchy? Don’t worry I gotchu. Something that I’ve noticed about how patriarchy has us all fucked up is how we obsess over people’s penis sizes. Just to be clear, EVERYONE does this in some capacity. The message pushed is that small penises are incapable of providing pleasure and bigger penises will get the job done. As someone who has had decent sex with someone with a small penis and not great sex with someone who had a bigger penis, this could not be farther from the truth. My friend and I have literally talked about how we really give big dicks too much credit and how we should really be expanding what’s important when it comes to sex like comfortability, chemistry, consent, etc. I’ve actually written about how “big dick energy” or BDE is an example of power dynamics that are reproduced by the gender binary and creates this pseudo-confidence based on penis size. And why is that? I think this can be better explained through examining the logic behind intersex surgeries. (Follow me, I promise this gets interesting.)
For class one day, I had to read an article titled “The Medical Construction of Gender: Case Management of Intersexed Infants” (1990) by Suzanne Kessler. Kessler conducted interviews with six medical experts, of varying job titles, in pediatric intersexuality. The article covers stuff that I won’t get into but I will share the following quotes:
“Money’s case management philosophy assumes that while it may be difficult for an adult male to have a much smaller than average penis, it is very detrimental to the morale of the young boy to have a micropenis.” (12)
“In the case of the undersized phallus [for a baby], what is ambiguous is not whether this is a penis but whether it is ‘good enough’ to remain one.” (13)
“One of the endocrinologists explains, ‘In the absence of maleness you have femaleness…It’s really the basic design’.” (15)
Now, I’m no intersex scholar. I have no clue as to whether or not this logic still prevails in pediatric intersexuality. However, I interpret these quotes as stating that having a big ass dick, even as a baby in the doctor’s office, is one of many keys to securing manhood and masculinity in this patriarchal society. And that’s tough. I mean think about it, one of the many insults we throw at niggas is usually hinting at them having small dicks. Of course, I am not one to place cis men on victim pedestals. However, I think there is something to say that penis size, like any other body part, should not be the main determinant in how great a sexual experience can be for people, especially if we shift our understanding that penetration doesn’t have to be the end all be all for sex. It’s more helpful to approach our sex lives with a certain level of pleasure-seeking curiosity, not criticism rooted in deficit. Am I guilty of this shit? Absolutely. But I see the error of my ways and I’m willing to shift my thinking regarding sex.
Things to consider:
How creative could you be in the bedroom if your genitals were not a part of it?
What could it look like for penetration to be an option rather than a requirement?
What does sexual pleasure actually look like for you outside of penetration?
What role does ableism play in how we navigate sex?
