The 4B movement exploded into the public consciousness online. But is women's abstinence a way of reclaiming “girl power” after losing our rights, or a distraction from it?
i’m a little confused at all the negative responses the 4B movement is getting in the United States. even if it is ultimately ineffective, why is it getting so much pushback that some women are choosing to abstain from sex? and comparing it to what conservatives want anyway is just not true. the different is choice.
in Korea, the movement was also born out of poor gender relations, similar to the U.S. right now. so there’s really no difference in the motivations as you are suggesting.
i just subscribed to column and i like your ideas but i just want to stress that both abstinence and celibacy can absolutely be empowering choices for women. i really want sex columnists to move away from the idea that having sex is the only pleasurable sexual experience. sometimes saying no is pleasurable too.
i hear you, and appreciate the thoughtfulness of your comment! i agree that the desire to not have sex is just as valid as the desire to have sex, and i’ve personally felt empowered by saying no at different points in my life. what i’m trying to point out is more that individual empowerment is not necessarily the same as collective empowerment, and while not having sex is a valid individual solution or harm reduction strategy, it doesn’t necessarily further the feminist movement (gender equity/the collective liberation of all women) if it isn't also changing our material conditions. it also wouldn’t be so appealing to give up sex if the alternatives weren't so dire—ideally women would be free to make these choices based on their own desires, not the fact that having sex is dangerous and dissatisfying, imo.
i think it's important to examine the factors that shape our choices, as well as the choices themselves. when i wrote this, 4b had yet to receive much pushback, and it felt important to articulate this as a counterpoint to foster discussion. TLDR: abstinence is not inherently empowering, and neither is sex, though each can be experienced that way by individual women.
You absolutely CANNOT convince me that anyone doing "4B" was having any fun whatsoever with dating to begin with. For some reason that I still don't understand, covid lockdowns ruined whatever didn't already suck about dating.
My understanding is that 4B isn’t saying women have to be abstinent:
+ they are more than welcome to have relationships with women (and thankfully, women’s sexuality is way more fluid than men’s);
+ women are also allowed to have sex with themselves (the sex toy industry is already taking note)
It’s more about de-centering men and creating fulfilling lives - that includes plenty of sex, if that’s what women want! - without them.
Burned Haystack Dating Method has over 100,000 women & non-binary people in the FB group, and 4B is a big topic there. Would be keen to hear your take on BHDM and B2B and how you see it relating to sex/dating.
Wow man. Powerful! I can’t even begin to tell you how much the patriarchy shakes in fear at the prospect of queer women dating queer women, and women staying home to masturbate.
I don’t think the 4B movement is incompatible with an active sex life for straight women. The aim of 4B is to not have serious relationships with men. That means no long term boyfriends and marriages. However you can still have casual sex with a select few exceptionally good looking/hot men.
This way you “punish” the majority of men since their only sexual option was in a long term relationship, but at the same time meet your sexual needs via top 5 to 10% good looking men.
Good looking men will be exempt from your political animosity. They can have whatever views doesn’t matter. You can even “hate fuck” extremely good looking men.
Officially you will keep your 4B rhetorical stance of boycotting men. Under the radar you will keep casually sharing and fucking a handful of good looking men.
The best thing about casual sex for women is that women don’t need to be good looking to get it regularly. Thanks to men’s low standards for casual sex, any below average looking, short, fat unremarkable woman can have casual sex with super good looking tall fit generically blessed men.
Yes, so much to quote! Just one: "But a collective feeling isn’t the same as collective action."
This (and the other trends mentioned) reminds me of "I did a thing." Usually, the thing is just being a human being with a cute quirk associated with it. Everything seems so hyped up with little substance to fuel it, and maybe this is what social media has brought us, the ease of being a part of a collective. What a blessing, what a curse.
In all fairness, the 4B movement wouldn't be revolutionary to me because I'm pan, polyam, and married to a man who shares my ideals.
But no matter relationship status and/or sexual orientation, vetting our dates better and keeping boundaries intact should always be... "a thing." Sorry, had to.
I loved reading this and really admire how clear and politically precise your writing is! So many great insights in this post, but I especially liked this: “I worry that abstaining—or simply talking about abstaining—under the label of 4B gives women the illusion of participating in a radical feminist movement, when all it really amounts to in the U.S. is an individual lifestyle choice.”
Great column! I never heard of 4B until I read about it in your column, but I think your analysis of the movement in the US is spot on. As is your skewer of social media - I feel lucky that I can live my life with minimal contact. (One of the few advantages to being old).
4B is so performative and hysterical, a very fem-brained concept, that it’s the perfect ironic metaphor, for women and politics.
And it’s of course entirely superfluous. Any woman who so broken by an election that she seethes for weeks and doom pills herself about all the rights she has supposedly lost, isn’t very likely to have sex or relationships anyways.
It’s like a vegetarian promising to abstain from meat.
To men sex IS a bargaining chip. So that is where you are wrong.
It is the only thing they understand, and that's why it worked in Korea. They did change society.
It will work in the US, and in the same way.
When the birth rates drop very markedly within the next few years as they already are (it will not happen overnight), I'm sure there will be lots of think pieces like this by the true intellectuals asking what happened.
Desiree, did you ever think about what if your political and moral ideals were bad as you claim men's are? Do you believe there's any chance your view of the world isn't correct and the fears you have are not rational ? Could you give me a percentage or do you think that you're a 100% right?
Such a great read! This touched on so many of my thoughts on the "movement" (I hesitate to call it such) and its lack of substance in the States.
And it makes me feel some type of way that the original movement in South Korea actually gives up completely on changing men's perspective, in contrast to the American 4B mission to use sex as a tactic to change men who voted for Trump.
And besides it not being effective as a demonstration form, I don't think it's accessible. Sex workers can't abstain, and a sex strike won't stop men who chant "Your body, my choice".
After seeing a production of Lysistrata many years ago, I've contemplated how effective a sex strike would be. The only way it would work is if EVERY woman in the country participated, regardless of political affiliation. Even more so, women would need to live away from men, forming all–female cities where men are banned; creating an all–female economy and limit trade with men. But men, rather than consider changing thier collective behavior, would find ways to undermine these efforts through burning these cities down (think Tulsa massacre), creating laws to ban their creation, or find ways to squeeze women off from resources (water, power grids etc). I recall watching a docu about an all–female town in Kenya. The men were so incensed by its formation that they constantly try to invade it or harass its inhabitants.
That said, there have been successful "abstention campaigns" in smaller countries. In Iceland, women went on strike from all work, including working in the home and childcare. It sent a major message to Icelandic men that they needed women to function. Laws were changed.
i’m a little confused at all the negative responses the 4B movement is getting in the United States. even if it is ultimately ineffective, why is it getting so much pushback that some women are choosing to abstain from sex? and comparing it to what conservatives want anyway is just not true. the different is choice.
in Korea, the movement was also born out of poor gender relations, similar to the U.S. right now. so there’s really no difference in the motivations as you are suggesting.
i just subscribed to column and i like your ideas but i just want to stress that both abstinence and celibacy can absolutely be empowering choices for women. i really want sex columnists to move away from the idea that having sex is the only pleasurable sexual experience. sometimes saying no is pleasurable too.
i hear you, and appreciate the thoughtfulness of your comment! i agree that the desire to not have sex is just as valid as the desire to have sex, and i’ve personally felt empowered by saying no at different points in my life. what i’m trying to point out is more that individual empowerment is not necessarily the same as collective empowerment, and while not having sex is a valid individual solution or harm reduction strategy, it doesn’t necessarily further the feminist movement (gender equity/the collective liberation of all women) if it isn't also changing our material conditions. it also wouldn’t be so appealing to give up sex if the alternatives weren't so dire—ideally women would be free to make these choices based on their own desires, not the fact that having sex is dangerous and dissatisfying, imo.
i think it's important to examine the factors that shape our choices, as well as the choices themselves. when i wrote this, 4b had yet to receive much pushback, and it felt important to articulate this as a counterpoint to foster discussion. TLDR: abstinence is not inherently empowering, and neither is sex, though each can be experienced that way by individual women.
thank you for this kind, effective response. totally see your point and sorry i got so passionate in my comment LOL!!
no need to apologize, i liked hearing your perspective and it gave me an opportunity to clarify mine <3
You absolutely CANNOT convince me that anyone doing "4B" was having any fun whatsoever with dating to begin with. For some reason that I still don't understand, covid lockdowns ruined whatever didn't already suck about dating.
This. It’s entirely performative.
Some thought-provoking writing - love it!
My understanding is that 4B isn’t saying women have to be abstinent:
+ they are more than welcome to have relationships with women (and thankfully, women’s sexuality is way more fluid than men’s);
+ women are also allowed to have sex with themselves (the sex toy industry is already taking note)
It’s more about de-centering men and creating fulfilling lives - that includes plenty of sex, if that’s what women want! - without them.
Burned Haystack Dating Method has over 100,000 women & non-binary people in the FB group, and 4B is a big topic there. Would be keen to hear your take on BHDM and B2B and how you see it relating to sex/dating.
Wow man. Powerful! I can’t even begin to tell you how much the patriarchy shakes in fear at the prospect of queer women dating queer women, and women staying home to masturbate.
🤪
The way women do that is by being abstinent. Hence the four rules.
There seems to be lots of hairsplitting around here because nobody wants to be brutally honest about male behavior because everyone is too scared.
I don’t think the 4B movement is incompatible with an active sex life for straight women. The aim of 4B is to not have serious relationships with men. That means no long term boyfriends and marriages. However you can still have casual sex with a select few exceptionally good looking/hot men.
This way you “punish” the majority of men since their only sexual option was in a long term relationship, but at the same time meet your sexual needs via top 5 to 10% good looking men.
Good looking men will be exempt from your political animosity. They can have whatever views doesn’t matter. You can even “hate fuck” extremely good looking men.
Officially you will keep your 4B rhetorical stance of boycotting men. Under the radar you will keep casually sharing and fucking a handful of good looking men.
The best thing about casual sex for women is that women don’t need to be good looking to get it regularly. Thanks to men’s low standards for casual sex, any below average looking, short, fat unremarkable woman can have casual sex with super good looking tall fit generically blessed men.
Yes, so much to quote! Just one: "But a collective feeling isn’t the same as collective action."
This (and the other trends mentioned) reminds me of "I did a thing." Usually, the thing is just being a human being with a cute quirk associated with it. Everything seems so hyped up with little substance to fuel it, and maybe this is what social media has brought us, the ease of being a part of a collective. What a blessing, what a curse.
In all fairness, the 4B movement wouldn't be revolutionary to me because I'm pan, polyam, and married to a man who shares my ideals.
But no matter relationship status and/or sexual orientation, vetting our dates better and keeping boundaries intact should always be... "a thing." Sorry, had to.
Great post. Thank you.
I loved reading this and really admire how clear and politically precise your writing is! So many great insights in this post, but I especially liked this: “I worry that abstaining—or simply talking about abstaining—under the label of 4B gives women the illusion of participating in a radical feminist movement, when all it really amounts to in the U.S. is an individual lifestyle choice.”
Great post! I especially love the last paragraph. There is way too much void screaming and not enough political action. 🤩🤩🤩
Great column! I never heard of 4B until I read about it in your column, but I think your analysis of the movement in the US is spot on. As is your skewer of social media - I feel lucky that I can live my life with minimal contact. (One of the few advantages to being old).
Gollllly I want to quote-share so much of this.
We need more love, not less. I’m sharing mine, if anyone wants a counternarrative 🫠
Damn, so many good points!! This was an excellent piece, found myself nodding in agreement the whole time.
Thank you for this!! Those are my thoughts exactly.
oh i cannot wait to read this. another banger!!!!
4B is so performative and hysterical, a very fem-brained concept, that it’s the perfect ironic metaphor, for women and politics.
And it’s of course entirely superfluous. Any woman who so broken by an election that she seethes for weeks and doom pills herself about all the rights she has supposedly lost, isn’t very likely to have sex or relationships anyways.
It’s like a vegetarian promising to abstain from meat.
To men sex IS a bargaining chip. So that is where you are wrong.
It is the only thing they understand, and that's why it worked in Korea. They did change society.
It will work in the US, and in the same way.
When the birth rates drop very markedly within the next few years as they already are (it will not happen overnight), I'm sure there will be lots of think pieces like this by the true intellectuals asking what happened.
None of the experts know anything.
Desiree, did you ever think about what if your political and moral ideals were bad as you claim men's are? Do you believe there's any chance your view of the world isn't correct and the fears you have are not rational ? Could you give me a percentage or do you think that you're a 100% right?
In another comment, the author asserts that people are afraid to talk about “men’s behavior”.
Honestly, this alone should answer your question.
Such a great read! This touched on so many of my thoughts on the "movement" (I hesitate to call it such) and its lack of substance in the States.
And it makes me feel some type of way that the original movement in South Korea actually gives up completely on changing men's perspective, in contrast to the American 4B mission to use sex as a tactic to change men who voted for Trump.
And besides it not being effective as a demonstration form, I don't think it's accessible. Sex workers can't abstain, and a sex strike won't stop men who chant "Your body, my choice".
If the women in the US are doing EXACTLY what Korean woman are doing, how on earth are they not giving up on men exactly like the Korean women have?
And it worked.
After seeing a production of Lysistrata many years ago, I've contemplated how effective a sex strike would be. The only way it would work is if EVERY woman in the country participated, regardless of political affiliation. Even more so, women would need to live away from men, forming all–female cities where men are banned; creating an all–female economy and limit trade with men. But men, rather than consider changing thier collective behavior, would find ways to undermine these efforts through burning these cities down (think Tulsa massacre), creating laws to ban their creation, or find ways to squeeze women off from resources (water, power grids etc). I recall watching a docu about an all–female town in Kenya. The men were so incensed by its formation that they constantly try to invade it or harass its inhabitants.
That said, there have been successful "abstention campaigns" in smaller countries. In Iceland, women went on strike from all work, including working in the home and childcare. It sent a major message to Icelandic men that they needed women to function. Laws were changed.