During the 1960s, the so-called 'sex-positive movement' [1] began, offering a counter to the prevalent culture of the preceding decades in which sexuality was regarded as something that should not be brought into the public view. As quoted from sexologist Carol Queen on the Wikipedia entry for the movement: "'Sex-positive' respects each of our unique sexual profiles, even as we acknowledge that some of us have been damaged by a culture that tries to eradicate sexual difference and possibility."
It is of course generally wonderful that people are left free to express themselves and develop in the way that works best for them. To not have to hide aspects of themselves, or to feel forced to behave in ways that are considered to be socially acceptable, when it is not what makes them happy. A big example of that is the freedom to develop intimate relationships with others without having to perform the socially acceptable matching of appropriate genitals and social status.
The second part of Carol Queen's quote in the same article however touches on the issues with sex-positivity: "It’s the cultural philosophy that understands sexuality as a potentially positive force in one’s life, and it can, of course, be contrasted with sex-negativity, which sees sex as problematic, disruptive, dangerous. Sex-positivity allows for and in fact celebrates sexual diversity, differing desires and relationships structures, and individual choices based on consent."
The keywords here are 'potentially positive'. This is the part that gets easily overlooked by those who most loudly clamour in favour of the sex-positive movement into the mainstream. The primary issue and reason why sexuality isn't something positive for everyone is all too often caused by sexuality. Perhaps ironically, sex-positivity can be the thing that is disruptive and dangerous, if not outright traumatic.
It is one thing to celebrate sexuality and one's preferences there, but it is all too easy to forget that in the real world actions also affect others. Just because someone's sexuality leads them to prefer under-age boys or girls, or leads to them not respecting personal boundaries in the case of assault and rape in what is often a display of dominance and control, this does not mean that any of this is good, or deserves to be celebrated. Even if it is how their sexuality expresses itself.
Such acts of trauma consequently leads to traumatised individuals for whom sexuality and even physical contact have taken on a distinctly negative slant, often reinforced by successive further negative experiences with sexuality and with putting one's trust into others. Because ultimately sexuality is not about genitals, or even physical intimacy, but about feeling comfortable and safe enough to express certain desires.
It can also be said that the focus on sexuality diminishes the individual instead of enriching them. Whereas Humanism is about individualism and the role of the individual in a society, the sex-positive movement redirects attention away from the person encoded in the neurons of the brain, and back down to whatever sexual features their body have and what they do with them, while reinforcing social pressures about sexuality being something that shall and must be part of one's life.
To those who suffered traumas or for whom the concept of sexuality simply holds no appeal, the public display of or references to sexuality can be something that's undesirable, or even re-traumatising. I have seen examples of the lack of understanding here in a variety of forms, such as in posts on Twitter which included a couple of photos of homosexual couples kissing and an accompanying text that effectively concluded that anyone who dislikes that Twitter post or unfollows the person posting or retweeting it must be homophobic.
I do not like seeing people kiss or hold hands. I know many others who do not care for this either. It does not matter whether the people doing the kissing or hand-holding are hetero-, bi-, tri- or homosexual, the core of the problem is the display of sexuality. Some of us do not care to see it because we consider sexuality something private for a couple and get annoyed when people start kissing and fondling in front of them. For others it acts as a trigger for traumatic experiences, bringing back painful memories or even provoking full-blown Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder episodes.
The reasons for my negative attitude towards sexuality are legion, but I do not feel that it is something that necessarily needs 'fixing'. In fact, I feel that in many regards those views that I hold are the more mature ones, as they are born from experience instead of starry-eyed ideals. When I walked through the Red Light district in Amsterdam and saw the prostitutes behind glass in their sterile, tiled rooms, I did not see it as a symbol of the liberation of sexuality, as some have referred to it. Instead I saw and felt just the sadness and loneliness of the tragedy of what others have described as 'masturbating together'.
To be held captive by one's carnal desires and the associated sexuality, to be blind and ignorant to the wider picture, and to put the desires of the flesh above exploring the incomparable beauty of another person's mind as all of us work in communion on a better world for all. To me that is the true tragedy and crime against humanity on view here.
Maya
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex-positive_movement
No comments:
Post a Comment