In defense of the sanctimonious women's studies set || First feminist blog on the internet

On Disclosure

It’s sex day at Feministe!

I wanted to clarify my earlier comments on the “numbers talk” a bit, and flesh out some ideas/questions that came up in comments.

First, the clarification: when I’m talking about a “numbers talk,” I’m talking about the sort of conversation that arises when people have attitudes like this:

One 24-year-old Washington reporter agreed that “redos” of previous partners can keep your number below the slut threshold, defined by two of her male friends as “less than 20.” She thinks she is “chaste’’ with a number of six, but admits she sometimes subtracts one or two when telling a guy her romantic history. She said she kept dating Mr. Six after she’d lost interest simply because she didn’t want to up the number to Mr. Seven.

One 25-year-old writer in D.C. said his ideal girl’s number is one or two fewer than his. When he had “the numbers talk’’ with one date, she gave him an answer that he found both satisfactory and sexy: “Enough to know what I’m doing.”

Hugo had a post about this last year, in which one of his students had a similar problem:

I heard from a former student the other day wanting a bit of advice. Her boyfriend recently left her, ending a two-year relationship. The reason? He couldn’t “handle” her sexual past. When they started dating, he was a virgin, while she had had a modest number of sexual partners (she didn’t specify a number to me.) Their relationship had been going along swimmingly until that fateful day when he chose to ask her “So, how many men have you slept with?” She chose to answer truthfully, and things were never the same. For the remaining months of their relationship, he alternated between pestering her for details of her past, and calling her a “slut”. (Why she put up with such demeaning and inappropriate behavior is another topic altogether.) Finally, unable to cope with the truth of the disparity in their experiences, he dumped her. She was devastated.

Even people who make their living writing about sex shy away from giving out their numbers:

My number’s higher than 20, but that’s all I’ll say, because even I’m not immune to the potential judgment around this issue. I don’t want the future parent of my children, or even my next fuck buddy, to discount me off the bat because of my lurid past. For Bosnak, who explores in her novel various reasons a girl might take a tumble, there’s no room for regrets. “[My sexual partners] make me who I am; I’ve learned lessons from all of them. Rather than thinking of all the reasons I shouldn’t have slept with them or wishing I hadn’t, I look back and say, ‘You know why I did? He was the best dancer or I was on this guy’s motorcycle and it was so fun, I just went for it.’ “

But earlier, Bussel notes that Bosnak declined to quantify her own number of sexual partners.

Now, I was mostly focused on the “slut” number for women and the reasons why women shouldn’t answer numbers questions, but in comments, both FoolishOwl and Linnaeus (as well as StacyM in another thread) pointed out that men who have low numbers are under pressure to lie, inflate, exaggerate or what have you lest they be thought of as less than manly, or — an even bigger sin in some quarters — gay. So chalk one more bit of damage up for the patriarchy.

I still maintain that a contextless demand to know the number of sexual partners one has had in the past is beyond the pale and doesn’t merit an answer because it’s really nobody’s business. One may certainly volunteer that information, or it may be an organic part of a conversation about sexual histories, though the person divulging the information should always retain the ability to decline further answer. But if someone’s asking you so that they can be assured that you’re not a slut (or that you are), or that you aren’t as experienced as they are, or that you’re more experienced, then you may want to consider that a red flag.

Several people noted that they figured out from piecing together information over time that they knew, at least roughly, how many sexual partners their SOs or spouses had in the past. That’s not exactly a “numbers talk.” That’s an unfolding of trust over time, and that’s a whole ‘nother ball of wax. Still, several people said that their spouses hadn’t disclosed everything, even years later. That before there was a “we,” there was a “me” and a “you,” and that “we” don’t necessarily need to know all the details of “you” and/or “me.”

Let me say this: I think that there are very few mandatory disclosures in sexual ethics, and those mostly revolve around disease status or prior sexual violence (giving, not receiving). One is always, always entitled to break it off or decline sex with anyone at all for any reason at all, but one just doesn’t have the right to demand answers about anything but disease status or criminal record relating to sexual violence.

There was a case raised in the thread below of a woman who contracted HIV from her husband, and who successfully sued her husband for lying about his prior homosexual history. While I certainly think that people who go so far as to get married ought, as a matter of full disclosure, ‘fess up about potential disease vectors, I also think that any particular kind of sex isn’t more worthy of disclosure than others. So, since homosexual sex isn’t a guaranteed path to seropositivity, nor is hetero sex a guaranteed bulwark against it, I think the husband had no particular duty to disclose his gay past. However, I do think he did have a duty, assuming he had unprotected sex prior to meeting his wife (or afterwards), to find out his HIV status prior to having unprotected sex with his wife.

But, again, that’s an issue of disease status, not sheer numbers of partners. And you can have one partner (or even, in the case of some diseases, no PIV or PIA partners) and still have an STD that needs to be disclosed. I still can’t conceive of a reason why anyone could demand of me to know, without context, how many sexual partners I’ve had, and I can’t conceive of a reason why I might demand the same. Even in the case of an STD, what difference does it make short of shaming the other partner?

I also want to stress, strongly, that while I do not think that any person has the right to demand information from a potential partner, I do think that, should that partner choose to disclose information — particularly sensitive information — that that disclosure should be looked upon as a gift, something not to be abused. So if your female partner voluntarily discloses that she has had a more-extensive sexual past than you perhaps feel is consistent with non-sluttitude, you have an obligation not to use that information against her later on. Or if your male partner discloses that he’s had a *less* extensive sexual past than might be considered “manly,” you have an obligation to focus on what he brings to the table *now,* not what he might have brought in the past.


15 thoughts on On Disclosure

  1. As soon as people realize we’re all animals things will move more smoothly.

    Ruff…ruff.

  2. Here’s a question: I always hate when the numbers game comes up, because exactly what makes a number? Does only penetrative sex count, or do you have to count oral and/or handiwork? Because I generally go by the penetrative counts, and thus look very, very chaste – but honestly that’s because it’s not my favorite thing, I have issues with it, and it takes a certain kind of relationship to get me even to consider it. OTOH, I’ve probably had close to a hundred if you count the other kinds, which apparently makes me possibly the midwest’s most giant slut.

    Personally, my serious partners all know this, because it’s one of the ways I vet a relationship. If a man is at all squicky about the fact that I’ve had sexual relations whenever I wanted with whomever interested me, numbers be damned, then he is clearly not someone who can respect me the way that I deserve.

  3. I am still confused about your STD ‘fess-up requirement. Which STDs are you refering to? Presumably, if you knew you had chlamydia, you’d be getting it treated, and wouldn’t have it for long, obviating the need for disclosure. HPV? Well, most of us who’ve had sex have it. Herpes? Which kind? As much as 90% of the population has the mouth kind. Is that really even an STD? What if you haven’t had an outbreak in years? Are you really mostly referring to HIV? If so then say so.

    On a side note, do you really expect men to confess past sexual violence to new or potential partners? Granted, I would want to know this too, but a disclosure conversation just doesn’t seem pragmatic. Can you really imagine this conversation? How on Earth would it go?

  4. Exactly where on the Slut-O-Meter do you get into the red zone? Is 5 okay but 10 not so good? What happens if you get to 72? Do you get reprimanded by the Slut Police or officially taken off the market? At some point can you reset to zero?? Like after a period of voluntary or involuntary celibacy?

    It was disturbing to read that this is something that is keeping women from moving out of a relationship that would otherwise be done. Yikes. If its time to move on its time to move on. Put the notch in your bedpost and go.

    I have been married twice, one kid from each marriage. When I’m asked how many sex partners I’ve had I say “at least two” to overstate the obvious. I leave it open-ended so as not to lie but to imply that’s all the info you’ll be getting on that point.

  5. Here’s a question: I always hate when the numbers game comes up, because exactly what makes a number? Does only penetrative sex count, or do you have to count oral and/or handiwork?

    If you’re female, it’s the number of partners you’ve had penetrative penile-vaginal or anal sex with, plus the number of dudes you’ve given oral sex to. “Sex” with other women doesn’t count, cuz that’s not real sex. If you’re male, it’s the number of women you’ve vaginal or anal sex with. How many times you’ve gotten or given head isn’t relevant.

    Hope that clears things up! Now get out the calculator, start adding, and report directly to your male partner, who should inform you of whether or not you’re sufficiently virginal to fuck.

  6. I generally go by the penetrative counts, and thus look very, very chaste – but honestly that’s because it’s not my favorite thing, I have issues with it, and it takes a certain kind of relationship to get me even to consider it. OTOH, I’ve probably had close to a hundred if you count the other kinds, which apparently makes me possibly the midwest’s most giant slut.

    Go you! During my more prolific period, I had a significant bias against penetrative intercourse for lots of reasons, so my count by broader measures is several times the number of folks I’ve have intercourse with. There’s a lot to be said for that, as it acts as a great risk-reducer with casual partners and encourages less scripted, more imaginative sex.

  7. I am still confused about your STD ‘fess-up requirement. Which STDs are you refering to?

    Anything that can still be passed along. So, herpes, even if you haven’t had an outbreak in years — yes, because there’s always a chance, and the person whom you’re bedding should be able to take that risk into account. A long-cured case of chlamidya — no.

  8. along with the ‘fess-up requirement is a get yourself tested already and use condoms requirement.

    here’s a thought – maybe number of past partners isn’t relevant. I say number of current partners is relevant, or at least the existance of current partners should be acknowledged.

  9. Frumious, most people have a conversation about whether they are going to be exclusive, unless it’s clear from the circumstances that an encounter is just a trick (using the term in the non-sex work sense). For some folks, it simply does not matter — when I was in a completely open relationship, for example, I would never have though to ask. With casual partners I generally didn’t have penetrative sex, and I didn’t care if my partner’s last and next sexual encounter were with the entirety of the swim team. My PO, on the other hand, told me about her other lovers, and what she didn’t tell me I didn’t need to know. As I said on the last thread, though, those that care are welcome to ask, and to walk away if they get an answer that they don’t like, or if they don’t get an answer.

  10. In commenting on these threads, I’ve been thinking about an interesting issue: whether I need to know how my partner identifies. There are all kinds of identities. I broke off a fuck-buddy relationship once with a partner who was a conservative because I couldn’t handle the politics. Some people, as it came up on the last thread, care about their partner’s sexual orientation, etc.

    The one that I keep thinking about is gender identity. Piny has posted a little about the difficult disclosure issues and the rejection stuff. I’ve met some transpeople, but I’ve never had a transgendered sex partner, and I hadn’t thought through these issues. That’s cisgendered privilege.

    Now that I’m thinking about it, I don’t know what the fuck to make of how I feel about my sex partners’ gender identity. If a woman comes up to me and asks if I’m interested in bottoming, I probably am, perhaps especially if she’s gender-variant. (I might be interested in topping, too — I switch). But I’m only okay with that if she identifies as female. She can have bigger lats that mine, she can be wearing boy clothes and a strap-on harness. If she identifies as a woman, I’m playing with a gender-variant woman. But would I turn down sex with someone who presents as female if he generally identifies as male? I wouldn’t consider a biologically male partner who wanted to role-play a woman but identified full time as a man. Does the fact of female genitals, or genes, change that? Well, best I can tell, for me it doesn’t. Plus, it seems disrespectful. If I wanted to fuck some dude, but only if he pretended to be a woman, am I not really saying that I see him as a woman after all? But I don’t. If some guy identifies as a man, I take him at his word. I don’t fuck men.

    But then, I have to ask myself, what does it mean that I’d turn down an interesting partner just because of how my potential partner sees hirself? If the genitals are irrelevant, am I not really saying that what I need is to be able to tell myself that I’m still straight? Which is a little unsettling, because I’ve always thought that my self-identification as straight was sort of more descriptive than normative: that I wasn’t that attached to it. (Plus, I’ve gotten straighter. Years ago, though I never fucked men, I greenlighted MMF threesomes with gay and bi men that for various reasons never happened, where it was clear to everybody that it would have involved some man-on-man sex. I don’t really feel that way now, and I’m not sure why that changed.)

  11. Thomas, Many people I know have sex by the third date, but wait a lot longer to talk about whether they are in a relationship. Some of them think it is not the business of a potential sexual partner whether or not they have a current sex partner.

  12. Frumious, if they think it’s not their place to ask about other partners until they’ve had sex with someone a few times, presumably they are acting and protecting as if they are not the only one. Once they are having sex, they can either keep on that way, or have the talk about exclusivity (which is not the same as being in a relationship, though obviously related).

  13. I’m always squicked out by the way the men in these articles cheerfully admit a blatant double-standard.

    There’s just something disgusting about having sex with a woman when, by your standards, it’s bringing her closer to being an unlovable slut

  14. presumably they are acting and protecting as if they are not the only one

    yeah, presumably. right.

  15. Well, remember that I said that one has an obligation to disclose one’s disease status, and I think that includes, “I have no idea and have not been tested.” But once someone tells you that, whether they have one other current sex partner, none, or fifty really does not add much to the analysis in my view.

Comments are currently closed.