 | The “O” FactorBy Grace O'Neill |
True story: A few nights ago, my good friend Marvs hosted her annual holiday extravaganza party—complete with arts and crafts project and numerous viewings of A Charlie Brown Christmas. The crowd was a nice blend of friends/ acquaintances/ exes/ crushes/ drunken hook-ups/ and of course a few delegates from the hetero contingency. Leave it to egg nog and latkes to bring together the most random groups of people, right?
So halfway through the night, after the paper menorahs had been colored—my own rainbow colored one effort evoked a round of “Jesus, O’Neill… You’re soooo gay”—all the lezzies migrated towards the couches and proceeded to have a discussion on one of our all-time favorite topics… Sex.
Here’s how the conversation started. My friend Jackie O (No, that’s not her real name but she literally looks like Jackie, down to the matching pearl necklace and earrings) was lamenting an episode with a past girlfriend. While remunerating the status quo d-bag ex moves, all of which the girl in question had executed, she suddenly blurts out, “ and then she said we didn’t actually have sex since she never took her boxers off. But she definitely came. So I’m confused. We had sex, right?”
Naturally, this comment evoked two very different reactions. The members of the hetero contingency proceeded to head towards the front door in a panicked herd while a wave of laughter/sheer disbelief washed over the lezzie round table.
Even though Jackie O’s comment wasn’t meant to be anything more than a “I’m processing out loud” kind of remark, it left me pondering a very simple question… What really constitutes sex?
Now, I’m not socially inept nor was raised Amish; I am very well aware of the Birds and the Bees. And thanks to my numerous years spent trying to prove that my love for softball and Ani DiFranco was merely a fluke, I’m not in the gold star club. But in the vast land of lady loving, the standard (read: heterosexual) Sex-Ed derived definitions just don’t apply.
Unlike our straight and gay male counterparts, us lesbians have a wide array of definitions when it comes to sex. Fingering…Cunnilingus…Fisting…Strap-ons… Tribadism… in short, sex to a dyke is like the word snow to an Eskimo. We have a million and one ways of saying it…and showing it…and experiencing it. For example:
Is it sex if at least one person still has some items of clothing on?
Is it sex if only one person receives?
Is it sex if nothing was inserted anywhere?
Is it sex if you were really drunk and barely remember what happened, much less her name?
Is it sex if you can’t stand to, or just can’t bring yourself to, look at the girl the next morning?
Is it sex if she claims she’s straight?
Is it sex if she claims to still love her ex?
Is it sex if it’s a Tuesday at 3pm with all the lights on and a dog barking in the background?
My personal definition boils down to what I fondly call the “O” factor. And it’s really simple. If someone hits that “O” moment, whether it be clothed/unclothed, giving/ receiving, two handed/one handed/or even no hands at all, then guess what… it’s sex.
But of course that’s just my two cents on the subject. So ladies grab your keyboards and weigh in because as we all know sharing is caring 
Receive blog posts by email
December 18th, 2008 at 2:15 pm
In my mind, it’s sex when you’re naked, or mostly naked, and another naked or mostly naked person has access to your private bits, and is trying to give you an orgasm. I came up with this definition in high school, when I got tired of hearing Good Christian Girls talk about how they let their boyfriends put it “next to the hole” but not in it, or they wouldn’t be virgins anymore.
My cousin once said “So, you don’t really have *sex*, do you?” To which I answered “I have plenty of sex, but I’m not about to explain it all to you.” Since when should the actual mechanics of what you do or don’t do in bed validate your sex life? In my mind, this ties into the question of validity of lesbian relationships. Why is a hetero relationship, or one between two men (an argument I’ve heard!) more valid than mine because it involves putting a penis somewhere?
December 18th, 2008 at 2:36 pm
I’ve had to have this conversation numerous times with straight friends, and it turns out that lesbian “sex” is really hard to define. I have thought about it a ton, and in my mind you are on the right track with your O-Factor reasoning but it needs to go one step further. This is how I define sex for straight people when they say something stupid like “lesbians never actually have sex because there’s no penis”:
Sex is initiated when at least one of the parties involved contacts another involved party, directly or indirectly, with the INTENT to cause orgasm. Sex is completed with achievement of orgasm by one or more involved parties OR when as few as one of the parties involved decides to shut down sexual activity. This accounts for a variety of scenarios when orgasm cannot be or is not desired to be achieved (as in the case of my ex, whose anti-depressants made orgasms difficult, but that didn’t mean she couldn’t still have her fun). It is also broad enough to include things like phone sex, if you are willing to accept aural (no, not oral) stimulation as “contact.”
December 18th, 2008 at 3:02 pm
I believe the correct term is “Innuit.” They don’t prefer “Eskimo.”
December 18th, 2008 at 3:02 pm
Inuit. Sorry. I’m an Idiut.
December 18th, 2008 at 3:39 pm
Oh. Lightning… You and your puns
December 18th, 2008 at 3:57 pm
I like a definition a friend’s ex used to use…if you coulda/shoulda/woulda used latex, it was sex. That is to say, if somebody somewhere thinks there should’ve been safe sex involved (fingercots? dental dams? condoms on your sex toys?) even if you didn’t even consider actually using them (or, if, kudos for you, you actually did use them), then it was sex. Basically, if there were fluids….
So in her definition, if you were both fully clothed and grinding on the dance floor, but you’re just…real easy, then no, you don’t have to count that person on your “how many people have I..” But that doesn’t mean it won’t still be awkward to see her in the morning when you’re sober.
December 18th, 2008 at 5:33 pm
’tis simple
’twas sex
next thing you know we’ll have to start calling “no backsies” – as a wise friend said – to make it official
stop trying to define lesbian sex and just enjoy it!
December 19th, 2008 at 6:23 am
sex = orgasm doesn’t work because there are a lot of girls out there who don’t O every time they have sex, but it’s still sex….. how about this for a new definition: would your mum run away screaming if she walked in on you and your partner doing whatever it is you’re doing? yes = sex. no = not sex.
December 19th, 2008 at 12:18 pm
If the “O” factor is what determines sex…there may be some problems….
– there is a number of straight/gay women who have NEVER had an orgasm (I know…it’s terrible), but they have certainly had sex.
- most don’t get an O from giving.
- I have, admittedly experienced the “O” factor several times in my dreams both now and as a youth…did I deflower early? have I cheated on my gf? I don’t believe any of the two are true.
oh well…you have to go with something I suppose…and I am tempted to agree with you, that unless you’ve had the almighty O…you likely, at least not in my book, have not had sex – at least the way it was meant to be.
December 20th, 2008 at 2:07 pm
this definition makes my brain hurt – i felt like i was reading a text book – and who the hell are ur striahgt friends neway – ask them to define their sex lives – i know plenty of “straight” people that have had penis in vagina sex and say it doesnt count – becuz he was ugly or because she was drunk or bcause they just dont want it to becuz they cant stand that person anymore
December 20th, 2008 at 2:10 pm
i think for most of us the answer to this question is yes if we r going nething other then kissing our partner on the lips lol – so if im feelin my girl up top thats sex – nooooo – i;m wioth crazy cakes – just enjjoy it – i really havent tried to define it since i was at the bi stop on the train on my way to lesbian and trying to figure out my sexuality lol
December 20th, 2008 at 3:33 pm
You make unusual spelling decisions.
December 20th, 2008 at 3:48 pm
to get back to an earlier topic… what about stone butches?
December 22nd, 2008 at 9:36 am
I’m pretty sure my definition, convoluted as it is, has room for stone butches.
December 23rd, 2008 at 3:53 pm
i agree with meara – it’s sex when there is fluid exchanged.