Here is a great comment from Independent Radical which I thought was worthy of further exposure.
I do not particularly want to validate “sexual liberation” as an aim. It sounds a lot like “economic freedom”. Neither sex nor the economy are human beings. They are not even sentient beings. Thus hating sex is a victimless crime and women should have every right to hate it, given what is often called “sex” nowadays.
Are gentle hugs and kisses considered “real sex”? No, they are only “foreplay” and once you have completed your foreplay you have to move on to “real sex”, which used to mean vagina intercourse, but that is no longer enough nowadays. Now you have to practicing oral, anal or sadomasochism to be “sexually liberated”. Of course, sadomasochism is viewed as an adequate substitute for vaginal intercourse rather than foreplay, even though it does not even involve people touching each other’s skin. It is no longer acceptable for women to only consent to vaginal intercourse, it is seen as stepping stone to acts that supposedly represent higher levels of “sexual liberation”, which naturally make one wonder what will come next? Pornographers have done everything short of murdering women to pursue “sexual liberation”.
I see this as the natural outcome of wanting to liberate sex rather than human beings.
Even is sexual liberation were about the liberation of human females through sex and even there is so much more to genuine freedom than the freedom to have sex, particularly if you talking about the kind of mindless, loveless sex favoured by liberals.
How about the freedom to actually find love, instead of just pursuing empty physical pleasure? How about the freedom to have a healthy body that is free from pain instead of having to constantly alter your body for the sake of sexiness? How about the freedom to speak your mind instead of having to regulate your every word regarding sex and female bodies to ensure that people who find violence and degradation sexy do not get offended? How about the freedom to substantially change the world for the better (e.g. ending environmental destruction, poverty, etc.)? While sex can be pleasurable, all these things are way more important to long term human wellbeing than sexual arousal.
The pursuit of sexual liberation should be secondary to these more essential pursuits and it should be carried out with the recognition that sex ought to be an egalitarian, loving experience (which means that it should take place in a society that already values such things, not a highly hierarchical one like ours). Liberal attempts to improve sex always centre on physical pleasure, rather than on other concerns. Thus outright domination and submission is considered perfectly fine so long as it generates sexual pleasure. If we radicals are going to try and improve sex, we need to ensure that equality and love are valued too, instead of physical pleasure being the centre of everything.
I may not want women to think of England (although England has done some pretty cool things when it was not being a brutal empire, LOL), but I do not want them fantasising about six packs, biceps or whips either. I think it would to stretch (and an act of capitulation to the pro-pornography side) to say that I wanted to “liberate sex” in any form. I will just stick to liberating humanity, as well as promoting love and equality within relationships.