Let’s Stop Getting Penetrated and Start Circluding

The power of language in sex and why words matter

A nut screws onto a bolt. A sock envelops a foot. A mouth closes around a piece of pastry.

A womb holds a fetus. A blanket swathes an infant. Warm water engulfs a bather.

A chest contains a treasure. Silk paper enwraps a gift. A coat cloaks its wearer.

A vagina circludes a penis.

Our language is full of examples where the acts of enclosing, enfolding, or surrounding, are active ones. When it comes to sex, on the other hand, these roles are almost exclusively reversed. Here—whether we talk of straight or gay sex, with a penis or a toy—the act of penetration insinuates that the one penetrating is active and the one being penetrated is passive.

The phallus actively fucks; it thrusts, bangs, drills, stabs, screws, plunges, and plows.

The vagina (or mouth, or anus) passively receives.

Why is it like this? Is the act of being on the receiving end of penetration really a passive one? And, is it possible that the language we use to talk about sex (deliberately) disempowers those on the receiving end of penetrative sex?

What if we changed the way we speak about certain sex acts? What if we make the act of receiving an empowered one?

What if we stopped being penetrated and started circluding?

Long before I heard the wonderful word circlusion, proposed by writer Bini Adamczak as an antonym to the term penetration, I discussed these concepts with a close girlfriend.

Together, we rejected the notion that the act of penetrating was the only active one in the equation. Instead, we entertained the idea that absorption; taking in a penis (or a dildo) is in fact both powerful and empowering.

How do we determine what’s active and what’s passive in sex?

Making and holding space, receiving, and accommodating may not appear active from the look of them, especially not if we use synonyms like pushing, forceful, or energetic. But, if we look at other equivalents to the word active, such as purposeful, engaged, rolling, or flowing, they do much better jobs of describing the concept of circlusion.

Apathetic, indifferent, or static, on the contrary, which are synonyms for passive, are not fit to describe the act.

Receiving penetration is not passive

For my friend and I, as two women with vaginas, who happen to, most often, be on the receiving end of intercourse, neither of us felt content with the idea that our roles are inactive. If we look at the vagina itself, it prepares by swelling, lubricating, opening up to enclose the penis or dildo, and further, the pelvic floor muscles clench and contract in waves. We continue to move with our partners to control the angle, depth, and rhythm throughout.

The same goes for anal sex, which demands an incredibly active role in circlusion to make it enjoyable for everyone involved. Also, if we look at a mouth giving a blowjob, I’m sure we can all agree who the most (obviously) active part is.

At a loss for language to describe the act of receiving penetration without insinuating passiveness, or even disempowerment, we were thrilled to learn this new word.

The term circlusion proposes a shift in the framing of sexual power and politics. Where penetration insinuates pushing into something, circlusion means pushing or sliding something onto something else. By changing and adding to our vocabulary, we get to shuffle around both power and the active/passive roles in sexual interactions.

The one who acts holds the power

Coming from the world of BDSM, I continue to observe that the one penetrating is the one in charge. And regardless of whether the submissive has the actual power to stop an action at any time, the perceived power lies with the dominant partner.

Stereotypically, we see that the top penetrates the bottom, either with a penis or a toy, and, more commonly than not, you’ll find men to lean dominant while women submit. In the cases where these roles are reversed, you hardly see the submissive male penetrate his Mistress, instead, she might peg (or otherwise penetrate) him.

In general, the act of penetrating connotes power. Being penetrated therefore gets linked to disempowerment.

Is it possible to imagine a world where a dominant circludes their submissive’s penis or strap-on without loss of (perceived) authority? Further, can we get to a place where the act of taking in, enveloping, or cloaking, in a sexual context, can be viewed just as empowering as fucking, thrusting, and banging?

I’d like to propose that it’s possible, but that it demands a shift in the power associated with body parts; the phallus vs the vagina, anus, or mouth. On top, we need to move away from penetration as superior to circlusion.

We live in a yang-centric world where so-called masculine traits such as forceful, energetic, and strong are assigned a higher value than their feminine, yin, counterparts. Being soft, calm, and yielding are not directly productive and thus less attractive features in a society that prioritizes constant output.

In Chinese philosophy and cosmology though, these opposite or contrary forces are complementary and interconnected in nature; they depend on each other for balance.

I view it as somewhat unfortunate that we assign gender to these qualities as I believe that the concept often gets misunderstood as male and female rather than traits that exist independently, in all of us, regardless of sex and gender.

We need input in order to have output.

As more and more of us are experiencing burnouts and exhaustion from trying to keep up with this constant demand for action and productivity, we’re (re)learning that rest and downtime are needed to fuel our energy; yin and yang have to coexist in order for harmony to prevail.

Therefore, going back to the bolts and the nuts; when a nut screws onto a bolt, the bolt simultaneously drills into the nut. When the sock envelops the foot, the foot wears the sock. When the mouth closes around the piece of pastry, the pastry enters the mouth.

It’s always a two-way street.

The word intercourse has two meanings and also refers to communication or dealings between individuals or groups. Sex with a partner (or plural), much like communication, also can’t take place without at least two active parts.

Therefore, for it to be called sex, all parts involved must be active in some way, meaning that both penetration and circlusion are, per definition active. Further, where two parts are needed in order to make a whole, one can not be of higher value than the other.

In the end, this means that penetration can’t happen without circlusion, and vice versa. So the next time you get it on, keep in mind that you’re not just penetrating or being penetrated, you’re also being circluded or circluding…

Sources: Mask Magazine, Terremoto, Loverecords Magazine