[Anne Bryant-Hamon]

Whoa, whoa, whoa.

See, that's the judgmental thing I was talking about last night. Sexual preferences are not about morality or political correctness. They just are. Some people are just wired one way or another; this makes the light go on, that does not, and that's just a physiological reality.

Rose,

I submit to you that there is not a human being on earth who is not "judgemental" about many things. Sometimes we call it 'opinionated'. Other times, the cry of 'judgemental' goes forth - usually when we hold a differing opinion than the one stated.

For myself, I feel disrespected if a man can only think of me as a sex object or a type of animal. If that makes me judgemental, then okay. That doesn't mean I don't like various sexual positions. But this poem clearly has some anger/disrepect issues implied throughout. It's not just a playful sex poem.

Anne

[Marybeth Rua-Larsen]

I was really wowed by this poem when I first read it (and still am)-- such an open, honest and frank perspective, and so well executed. I confess that all the opinions expressed here have forced me to look more closely at certain words and lines to explain why I came to a different conclusion about what I think the poem implies.

I never really took the speaker seriously in her musings about her lover being gay...I just took them as musings and speculation to explain his behavior in bed. Does the behavior result from his being gay? from him having too many previously talk-happy lovers? is he just uncommunicative? a guy who needs to be in control (when he keeps flipping her over, doing it "his" way)? She's looking for some way to explain a consistent pattern of his sexual behavior that she doesn't like. But...I actually find that this reveals as much about the speaker as it does about him. She seems to give him all the control, or allow him to take it, and she never questions him about it or voices her objectiions.

Finale

How you'd begin would never be the same;

I notice he's always initiating sex...not her, which tells me she's waiting for him and giving him control rather than taking it.

at times you'd even face me for a while.
But always, in that drive before you came,
you'd flip me over, finish doggy-style.

She seems unhappy with this behavior -- yet she accepts it for whatever reason and doesn't question it, object to it, or ask for something different.


Another funny thing: you'd never try
to steal a peek at me when I undressed.
I wondered if you'd rather have a guy,
if that was why you covered up my breasts.
Or maybe I was wrong, and you were straight,
but ex or mama used to yak, yak, yak;
you'd shove my mouth into the pillowcase
to face an uncommunicative back.

All these questions she has, and speculation, yet there's no evidence she ever questioned him about any of it. Rather than confronting him or questioning him, she leaves the relationship (that's not stated, though...maybe he left, but if he's getting it his way all the time, why would he?)

I haven't met her yet, your newest friend,
and yet I'd bet my butt about the end.

Is she justifying her own uncommunicative nature here and blaming the end of the relationship on him? If he behaved with HER this way, she assumes he would behave with all women this way. I thought she was in a bit of denial about how her own choices impacted the relationship. To me, "uncommunicative" cuts both ways in this: he didn't seek out her preferences, and she didn't voice her concerns. I'm not sure the author is really making a deep statement here, however...but I enjoyed the humor and thinking about the larger issue of sexual communication.

[Rose Kelleher]

Anne, I think you misunderstand me. I'm not arguing in favor of treating women like animals or mere sex objects. I'm questioning your assumption that a man who "likes it" a particular way (this way, that way, in an airplane, on a trapeze, whatever) is a misogynist. (At least, that's what I got from your post - sorry if I've misread.) A person's likes and dislikes, IMO, are much more complicated than that. You can't just say to yourself, "Intellectually, morally, I believe such-and-such, so from here on in, I resolve to like sex this way, as it's more compatible with my world view." It just doesn't work that way. That's all I'm saying.

[David Anthony]

This delighted me when I saw it submitted to '14 by 14', and the other judges no less.
I think it's the "yak, yak, yak" that makes it special.
It's not at all about anal sex, of course; but hubby (in the aftermath) is suspected of having that preference.
I read a comment afterwards by the author: this originated in a poetry class when people were asked to list all the things they would write about and all the things they wouldn't. They were then directed to focus on the latter.
Demonstrates yet again the versatility of the form.

[Anne Bryant-Hamon]

Anne, I think you misunderstand me. I'm not arguing in favor of treating women like animals or mere sex objects. I'm questioning your assumption that a man who "likes it" a particular way (this way, that way, in an airplane, on a trapeze, whatever) is a misogynist. (At least, that's what I got from your post - sorry if I've misread.) A person's likes and dislikes, IMO, are much more complicated than that. You can't just say to yourself, "Intellectually, morally, I believe such-and-such, so from here on in, I resolve to like sex this way, as it's more compatible with my world view." It just doesn't work that way. That's all I'm saying.

Rose,

Perhaps we are talking past each other. Because it is not the 'doggie syle' sexual position that makes me feel that this poem is about a man who at leasts (dislikes) women. That point is woven throughout the whole poem, as I read it. The N. is speculating and ranting throughout about lack of COMMUNICATION or at least his desire not to "connect", "commune" with her except on a physical level. Perhaps the author will tell us if this is what she was trying to convey or not.

"Yak, yak, yak" is not funny to me - it is a slant against women because they talk more than males. The poem screams, shut up and let's fuck. And I find that insulting. Not the sexual position, Rose - but the dominating spirit coming from the male is for me a turn off. For me, THAT is the characteristic that ruins a man. I realize there are many men in the world like this - and apparently I have anger issues with them They can all kiss my ass (if you know what I mean).

Anne

[John Hutchcraft]

Anne, the narrator is holding up the man as an object of ridicule, and for the very reasons that you dislike him. "Yak yak yak" is the narrator mimicking (what she imagines to be) the man's voice. The poem does not scream "shut up and let's fuck"; the narrator is pointing out that the man is weird because he wants her to shut up and fuck.

[Anne Bryant-Hamon]

Originally posted by John Hutchcraft:
Anne, the narrator is holding up the man as an object of ridicule, and for the very reasons that you dislike him. "Yak yak yak" is the narrator mimicking (what she imagines to be) the man's voice. The poem does not scream "shut up and let's fuck"; the narrator is pointing out that the man is weird because he wants her to shut up and fuck.

John,

You sound very CERTAIN about your opinion. Did you get this from the author of the poem we are discussing? I'm just wondering where such certitude comes from. I've not claimed to be CERTAIN about the author's intent - I've just been telling you how I read this poem.

Maybe those who say we are scrutinizing too much are right. Perhaps the author just dashed it off with the intent of being funny. I mean it did make at least a couple of people laugh. I have a sense of humor. But the poem didn't come across to me as being funny.

Anne

[Laura Heidy-Halberstein]

Originally posted by John Hutchcraft:
Anne, the narrator is holding up the man as an object of ridicule, and for the very reasons that you dislike him. "Yak yak yak" is the narrator mimicking (what she imagines to be) the man's voice. The poem does not scream "shut up and let's fuck"; the narrator is pointing out that the man is weird because he wants her to shut up and fuck.

True, but I think he wants her to shut up and fuck because (and this is what N is thinking) that his mother or his ex-wife/girlfriend was always "yak, yak;
yaking." I don't think she's mimicking him at all - only mimicking what she perceives as what his psyche might be rebelling against.

Or maybe I was wrong, and you were straight,
but ex or mama used to yak, yak, yak;

I think there she's saying that maybe she was wrong in thinking he was gay - maybe he only wanted to head off the constant talking he was conditioned to expect from women by his previous relationships with either his mother or his ex.

At least that's my take on it.

[John Hutchcraft]

Well, Anne, I am certain - that it's my opinion. No better and no worse than yours. You don't find my take persuasive? Okay.

Editing in: Lo, your take is exactly what I was implying when I wrote "the narrator mimicking (what she imagines to be) the man's voice."

[This message has been edited by John Hutchcraft (edited May 07, 2008).]

[David Anthony]

Originally posted by Laura Heidy-Halberstein:


Or maybe I was wrong, and you were straight,
but ex or mama used to yak, yak, yak;

I think there she's saying that maybe she was wrong in thinking he was gay - maybe he only wanted to head off the constant talking he was conditioned to expect from women by his previous relationships with either his mother or his ex.

At least that's my take on it.

--That is exactly my understanding of it, Lo.

[This message has been edited by David Anthony (edited May 07, 2008).]