KILLING ROMEO
Cherished Myths and Sex
It had failed again. After reworking the plot for the fourth time, this amazing story had reached the most banal climax I had never imagined. What was it? It seemed to want something specific, but the hero couldn’t rise to it. Poor fella. But wait, what if it wasn’t a guy? What if, the protagonist was a woman?
Hm.
I’m Sorry, What?
Somehow, an element has escaped both notice and usage as metaphor or allegory in popular western literature. I guess some would say Who Cares? But considering how basic this thing is to our most applauded stories it almost seems like it could be a pivotal event, depending how rhythmic and persistent we are about it. It is the orgasm. Specifically the female orgasm.
If we have to at all (and I nearly think we must), we need to focus on the female orgasm because literature has dwelt upon men's experience unto absurdity. Ahab has caught and fucked that whale many, many times. We have fished that river, sailed that sea, climbed that mountain and dove that dark cave. In a literal sense, western dramatists and writers have come upon no male character who would not happily have come upon them first. According to literary tradition, all human drama is modelled upon a male sexual experience: Find fuckable person; fuck it; orgasm; go get a bite to eat. Yes, it’s true that writers have drawn out that basic plan into many really great tales but that is the basic format of a plot that is taught in school.
Who can blame us for wanting more? Not more of those but something of greater depth and meaning. We are seeking something that explains our place in the universe, and it may be right in front of us. The male experience has been held up and glorified plenty by men who perhaps didn't think there was another experience. And now it is the 21st Century; it's the future, people; we're ready to risk losing face in that fertile delta, and thrust deep into the vagina of the matter, if not the heart.
The Questions
Why the lack of female orgasms in literature to begin with? A glib question I admit, because the answer seems pretty clear, yet is it really that simple? Could we be avoiding something important by sloughing it off as male narcissism? We’re not just talking about what authority dominates society- or are we? Don't these allegories reinforce the narratives that support our attitudes toward the opposing gender?
What symbolism does the female orgasm offer society? This thrust engenders a nursery of other questions such as: What differentiates it on that level from male orgasms? It’s is a matter for ongoing negotiations. Here, at what appears to be the start of the inquiry, it seems like enough to establish the importance of the dialogue.
The third question must attempt to deal with the dynamics between men and women; Again, a matter for ongoing negotiations, but perhaps the debates can be framed so as to enforce some harmonious progression. We must compare the results of this inquiry to the narratives in use today. How do our myths and metaphors support or hinder negotiations between genders?
Foreplay
You wouldn't think women are important to men by surveying western literature. Quite the opposite apparently. Typically women are at best the side kicks. They are the reward for the heroic knight, in romantic tales. They are hapless victims to be rescued, most of the time. In almost all cases they are eye candy for manly men. Even the odd Hollywood badass female hero has to be smoking hot. Only Ellen Ripley, of the “Aliens” franchise, ever really challenged that stereotype, to my knowledge.
When writing a couple of short stories myself, I found that the gender of the protagonist- the “hero” if you like- could have a profound effect on the perspective of the story, ultimately changing the symbolism.
Two of the stories in my “Bad Dreams” anthology resolve conflicts at least partially through orgasm. Take my word for it when I tell you that it sounded strange to me as well, but when I attempted to remove those parts, the stories failed. It seemed that without the full-on vulgarity and the naked depth of that sequence, the transformations of the characters sounded hollow and unconvincing.
In “Momentum” the metaphors directly challenge the very idea of male dominance. The orgasm is a means of establishing links between individuals and the culture, between the culture's past, it's myths and ancestors, and the present. The transformation renders the individual capable of a very deep and natural access to purpose and meaning. They become a conduit to a spirituality embedded in the culture and bound to it's individuals.
In “Amorphophallus” a similar transformation occurs, but actually does happen from the perspective of a male. In this case, however, the conflict surrounds the protagonists need to fulfill a role that he has unconsciously been seeking. The symbolism is in the service of exploring the narratives bound into this new role, of exploring harmony without a power-centric authority preying on the population. Orgasm in this story is a semi mystical ego-removal in the sense that some hallucinogenic drugs are. But it is also a means by which the main character transforms into his own role as a critical catalyst.
Although there was a fair amount of construction involved in these stories, they were also typical of those I write in that they seemed to reveal themselves to me in little bits over time. Initially they were dreams I had years ago. Putting the dreams together into stories has fleshed out something that now seems more important than the overtly sexual action. It was only by working through them to the end that the allegories began to take shape and caused me to wonder what they wanted.
Because where are the massive life-changing allegories featuring orgasms in western literature? Everything is about a guy in a world in which women play a part. Granted they often play central roles as catalysts of change. Yes most stories revolve around a conflict or series of them that reach a climax, but the men own that climax. It’s a grand and singular ejaculation resulting in a restoration of harmony. And when it is not simply pornography, it's almost always about violence. In the world of men's literature the girl is a reward for triumph and achievement, because the world of the guy apparently revolves around the guy.
The Intercourse
Unless we suspiciously avoid the obvious we are led inexorably to the really important question: What is so damned profound about that? Answer: Nothing. The fact is that the biggest male orgasm, while impressive and quite deeply affecting, has nothing on a real female orgasm. I know. I've been there for several of them.
Nevermind the initial crying out, the complete loss of control on that part, there is an aftermath in which the woman sits nearby wordlessly evaluating something amazing. She seems kind of vacant at first, but actually is still experiencing the waves of euphoria. They gradually taper off like pond ripples except they are washing over her entire body. And then she will look at you- you who have long since moved on to having a smoke, or a bite to eat, or wondering what the score in the hockey game is- she looks at you in utter disbelief, as if to say “You did this?” because there was literally no way in Hell that anybody could have been expected to accomplish that, let alone you. And then there is a brief look where she is clearly wondering if she should let you live.
Who can blame her? It's dangerous knowledge in the wrong hands. But more importantly it exposes a simple truth; one that may be hard for many guys to see, but that real men already know. We are not providers in this case, but merely facilitators. The real factors that make a monster orgasm possible for a woman are almost entirely happening in her body. They are things like a buildup of tension in the small muscles, social stressors, idealized images of her partner and other considerations. The male's part in all of it is not minor but secondary. We have just been cruising on the benefit of the doubt for a really long time.
We are led therefore to a second truth, one which is of much greater explanatory value. It is the difference between the male and female orgasm; one is profound, and the other is simply not. We certainly can tell great stories that result in a climax in which everybody dies and something monumental happens, but even if we have ten thousand of these climaxes, they will never be profound unless we alter the definition of profound to suit it.
The Deep Thrust
This is why my tales were not working, because the nature of the climax was trite. They were boringly male and who would really care if some fantastically gothic character ultimately bit the dust, allowing the survivors to live on in peace? The stories would only work if the right sequences of the correct tension built up, and were then released in the kind of climax that created a truly profound experience. This climax would continue for much longer than the traditional swift ejaculation and result in something comparably profound to conception itself.
This re-formulation of a very old paradigm asks us to re-evaluate our expectations. What does conception as a climax mean? In that new evaluation, what does the role of the male now mean, and is it more or less than it was?
In the first place the role has a catalyst theme, and with it comes subtextual elements of correct-ness, of being the right fit. In those supporting themes come questions of men's behaviour. So on the surface, there seems to be nothing to tarnish the role or the symbolism of it, except that there is no primacy.
In the second place the sex itself is gravid with rich symbolism. There are themes of synergy and creativity mated with fulfillment and purpose. While an aspect of submission plays through it for both men and women, the symbolic value of sex adds to both rather than subtracting from either. The consummation results in conception, which is the driving agency behind some of our most cherished myths. When it does not result in conception, the result is a depth of personal revelation that many are uncomfortable with.
The feminine role in that symbolism of consummation, creation, fruition and fecundity is justly left for women to explore. I can think of nothing more pretentious than for a guy to tell women what their orgasms mean.
But I would argue against any impulse to put it down to simply spouting babies. I would argue that it is a rich and deep negotiation that can only be explored with a strict avoidance of cheap sound bites. It is worth it to make this about validation and spiritual connection. Not connection with men or even a man, (or a male deity) but with the space around her. I would make the argument that women cannot be confined entirely to the body they live in, but the space they inhabit. You certainly can reduce the woman's life to bills and security needs, but to actually understand the woman, you need to be able to sense that connection to the space around her, to nature and to the universe.
Under the present scheme of reduction you aren't making love to a woman, but just fucking a regularly debited conduit of money, a unit that places the woman as an object of gratification. She becomes a strange form of currency in a debate about personal power. In that scheme you aren't getting a real reaction because she is feeling like a blow up doll. It is when she feels like she is now being taken care of, like there is a source of strength to draw on freely, like she has been validated as a real live and vibrant being that she starts having those monster orgasms.
The Chit Chat Afterward
And that mad version of “relationship” is only slightly better for non-psychopathic men. Our narratives must tease the fictitious and often schizoidal lines between puissant angelic men of honor, scandalous rogues who are ultimately competent at everything and also capable of deep love and gigantic orgasms, gritty and capable men who will do whatever it takes to survive but also drink heavily and never get upset, and hard-working always available father figures who always know what to do and typically behave according to established norms. It's a comedy.
That is the dynamic that explains why men don't “supply” orgasms, and also why women don't “achieve” them. In our world, it is expected that we simply serve as production units. Producing any form of personal satisfaction or harmony is most often seen as irresponsible. Such things are supposed to only come from your job. The truth is that sex is a form of communion with nature both on a grand and spiritual scale, and on an individual level. The strength with which we deny that is the currency of our dissatisfaction.
Once a woman is placed in that role of transformation, the pieces seem to fall into place. The role of the male becomes more functional than central, and provides the missing conflict by misunderstanding that function. The role of the woman in the story reverts to a familiar and comfortable place as mother of the culture. Sex in that scheme is the all too familiar means of communion with our roles in the maintenance of life, with all of the sub-themes that come with that.
