Can we play with language about sex?

[Heather]

For years and years, pretty much every day, given what I do for my living, I have wished we could all break out of the common frameworks of sex as something where one person is doing and the other person being done-to; where one person is "giving" and the other "receiving." The way people talk about intercourse as "penetration" is another example of this kind of framework, that whole business again suggests someone is active, the other passive.

I think we are so, in long need of, instead, frameworks, and language that reflects them, that make clear when people are engaged in sexual activity together EVERYONE is doing. Everyone is both giving and receiving, all at the same time, if they are touching each other, or otherwise intentionally sharing expressions of sexuality together. No one is being done-to while someone else is the doer if both people truly are taking part in sex of any kind together, both really present, and no one person active while the other is passive, like a toy or doll.

One of my very favorite things about young people as a population is that I have always felt like y'all have a creativity and flexibility of language that, later in life, a lot of people don't seem to keep as much of.

I've heard a lot of ideas about alternate language like this from colleagues of mine who are my age or older, but much less than I'd like to from younger people, who I find just are more gifted in this department.

So, what do you think?

[Redskies]

I would really love to hear ideas too! I feel mostly ok about how I describe intercourse, but oral/manual sex is a completely different story. I regularly feel completely stuck for a concise and not odd-sounding way to communicate which way around - eg, which person's mouth and which person's genitals - without it sounding like either the genitals-person is passive or the mouth-person doesn't have as sexual or as enjoyable an experience. Case in point: "genitals-person" and "mouth-person"... yeah :p