As glad as I am that my upbringing was not stereotypically sexually repressed, I have to say that I envy my friend his easy personal integration of BDSM.
2. 1 wish this point had been made, over and over: "You might consider being careful with sex."
I recently read an excellent New Yorker article that reviews the new version of The Joy of Sex. It talks about the time when The Joy of Sex came out, as well as a similar contemporary feminist book, Our Bodies, Ourselves, and it points out that "both books espoused the (distinctly seventies) notion that sex could be a value-neutral experience, as natural as eating.”
"Value-neutral": that's a great way to describe the overall attitude about sex that I absorbed. As if sex were something I could do as an amusing diversion, with anyone, at any time, and it would always be fun fun fun! As if there was no need to be overly careful or sensitive -- sex was just a game I could play, like a sport -- where the worst that would happen if I screwed up might be a skinned knee.
I wish that there had been an emphasis on how emotions can really matter, when it comes to sex. I wish that there had been acknowledgment of the fact that we can really hurt ourselves, and others, when we're cavalier about sex. (Not that we always do -- but we can.) I wish I had understood sooner that sex is not always value-neutral; that everyone has all manner of different sexual needs and hangups, anxieties and strong emotions. I think maybe there are people out there who can have "value-neutral" sex -- where it's totally about physicality and nothing more -- but I am not like that, and I suspect that most people are not.
Which isn't to say that I think there's anything wrong with people who can have sex that's "value-neutral." (And maybe "value-neutral” is not a great term for it; I worry that I sound like I'm judging when I use that term.) I just don't think it's a good model for everyone, and yet I think that it has somewhat been promoted as if everyone "ought to" be that way.
I think that there are lots of people out there who feel as though the sexual liberation movement "failed" or "betrayed them," because they convinced themselves that sex is value-neutral and then got hurt. You see a lot of assertions along these lines in the conservative media -- for instance, here's a quotation from a synopsis of the book Modern Sex:
The 1960s sexual revolution made a big promise: if we just let go of our inhibitions, we'll be happy and fulfilled. Yet sexual liberation has made us no happier and, if anything, less fulfilled. Why?... sex today is increasingly mechanical and without commitment -- a department of plumbing, hygiene, or athletics rather than a private sphere for the creation of human meaning. The result: legions of unhappy adults and confused teenagers deprived of their innocence, on their way not to maturity but to disillusionment.... These beautifully written essays -- on subjects ranging from the TV show Sex and the City to teen sex to the eclipse of the manly ideal to the benefits of marriage -- add up to the deepest, most informative appraisal we have of how and why the sexual revolution has failed.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_018462