Sex crusades in America, 2002

Thoughts? Theban horde, anyone?

Seriously, will this fuss wreck and bury it, or enhance its sales?

Potentially the latter, but I have my doubts. It's more of a hot-button issue than most, though arguably that could be due to misperception/description of the book's contents (maybe).

(Salon interview with author up here. The trick seems to be that no on in public discourse is able to keep in mind the basic historical fact that these arguments stem from: that our conception of the length of "childhood" and how long humans are meant to be sexually "innocent" has expanded tremendously in recent decades -- for reasons that make a decent amount of sense socially but seem to conflict with natural human development. People In Their Mid Teen Have Sex: they have throughout human history and they still do throughout the vast majority of the world. This fact doesn't mesh well with the rest of our society and how we'd ideally like to organize it -- the question is whether we be using culture to bend natural human development or making it accommodate it.)

Actually I meant "we should be," but I think "we be" adds some much- needed strut to that paragraph.

haha: "return to Victorian Values!!" => what, you mean when 10-yr-old prostitutes were legal?

People In Their Mid Teen Have Sex: they have throughout human history and they still do throughout the vast majority of the world

Then why wasn't I so blessed? Dammit. ;-)

(Ned: I have considered the possibility that those of us who weren't getting any at that point may indeed forever suffer from long-term sexual anxieties and unhealthy neuroses and compulsions and and fixations and fetishization-tendencies and just generally not be as comfortable and happy and non-conflicted about sexuality and it would benefit us to be. Basically I think the major dissonance between overarching American ideas about sex and the realities of sexuality in practice make it quite difficult to enjoy anything like a natural "healthy" sexual development, and every bizarre sexual fetish or activity in this country is a testament to how we've made the whole thing a minefield.)

And Jesus, despite all of these weird typos I swear I am not on drugs.

Nitsuh's on _DRUQKS_!

I heard a rumor that Nitsuh was dancing with Mr. Brownstone.

Basically I think the major dissonance between overarching American ideas about sex and the realities of sexuality in practice make it quite difficult to enjoy anything like a natural "healthy" sexual development, and every bizarre sexual fetish or activity in this country is a testament to how we've made the whole thing a minefield.

Nitsuh, as far as I can tell, most of the people that say they have a fetish call it "claiming their sexuality". But then, that means you have to define what a fetish actually is: it can run the gamut from taking pics of women's feet in high heels to those more extreme levels (that I won't describe here.) Fetishes were created to rebel against this country's "old-fashioned" values, anyway.

Apparently, these conservative groups are too blind to see that the more noise they make against this book, the more likely people will be to check it out....despite the negative reviews. Let people like Dr. Laura make more noise. There will be those that say, "If she hates it, it must be good". The scary thing is that some schools may decide not to stock the book, simply to satisfy these conservatives.

Fetishes were created to rebel against this country's "old- fashioned" values, anyway.

I think fetishes go back further than 1776.

Nichole: But see people tend to "claim" basically any psychological differences between themselves and the mainstream as part of an overarching identity, even when that doesn't need to be the case at all. My thinking is that a lot of fetishes are essentially neurotic, compulsions or fixations left over from the labyrinth of early sexualization in a culture that tries to pretend early sexualization doesn't exist: this, I think, is why so many of them coincide with ostensibly non-sexual things to which we attach those same sorts of aversions. (Feet, for instance, or urine: things people find distasteful and frequently try to hide from others.)

I'm not saying that these developments are necessarily bad, mind you -- I just think it's a sign of how completely vexed and fraught the entire process of sexual development has become that people come out of it with wildly different and often neurotic results. A culture of sort of "normalized" sexual development, on the other hand, would probably take the power out of fetishes (for better or worse, depending on the context), as well as reducing the thrills plenty of people get out of sexual deviance. We'd presumably stroll around being very sensible about it -- basically wiping out our approaches to it as sordid and shadowy and generally cleaning the place up a bit.

NB: I think more naturalistic approaches to sexual development would also do wonders for gender equality.

(NB In this world I think people would still have their fetish-topics but they'd be more likely to be natural -- i.e. instead of rigid neurotic fixations it'd just be "oh, yes, I really like that.")

My thinking is that a lot of fetishes are essentially neurotic, compulsions or fixations left over from the labyrinth of early sexualization in a culture that tries to pretend early sexualization doesn't exist....

Bitsuh (love the name change): For the most part, you might be right, though you probably won't get a fetishist to admit it. I think it's more a source of control and comfort: the participant can choose whether to actually do it (control); it is something to look forward to, after a stressful day.

I'd love to see a "Fetish Bill" make a pass though Congress; the politicians would die from heart attacks....;>

So fetishes aren't universal? Which cultures don't have them? I don't know anything about this subject.

sordid and shadowy = what i live for!!

My thoughts areth gastrick!

I don't have a fetish. Really.

Judith Levine (author of 'The Perils of Protecting Children from Sex') spoke to Salon from her home in Brooklyn, N.Y.

Debbie Nathan (Alternet article writer and one of the pre-publication review panel) is a New York-based writer.

Sexuality in the US may or may not start at 16, but sanity seems to begin just north of Staten Island.

Levine on oral sex:

'Not only do [kids today] do it more than intercourse, and maybe more than previous generations, but to me the interesting part is that they assign a different meaning to it than their parents' generation did. In my generation, oral sex was something you did with someone you were intimate with. For them, it's less intimate, and vaginal intercourse means more.'

Finally, an answer to my question 'What is the cultural meaning...?'

I also like her definition of a conservative: a liberal with a teenage daughter.

And why are people outraged over this book instead of Creating a Life: Professional Women and the Quest for Children by Sylvia Ann Hewlett? I think Hewlett goes out of her way to overstate her case, portraying childless women with careers as shallow pathetic creatures who should have been out making babies instead of channeling their energies into their work. I'm sure some women might have a couple of regrets about not having children, but I know for damn sure that most childless women are crying and pining their life away over the fact that they never reproduced. It's hardly the tragedy she makes it out to be.

Doubtless you meant 'aren't' rather than 'are.' And you're perfectly right from what I can tell.

The Earth's population jumped from1.5-1.6 billion at the beginning of the twentieth century, to 6 billion today. Estimates predict the number to reach 10 billion by the year 2050. More and more people naturally struggle for limited amounts of resources, which inevitably leads to war, pollution, genocide of other species, etc.

I'd say women who choose not to reproduce are the heroines of the 21st century.

D'oh -- I did mean "aren't". I guess I still have a contact high from the Dom Deluise homepage.

Thats what I told them Momus, but they just said how crowded it is in Holland and how nice everyone there is. Still, just look at India/pakistan! Nuclear holocaust in the making!

Today in The Globe and Mail, Levine makes the front page, which is a surprise considering how much coverage is given to the dead solders.

but the truth is that birth rates are plummeting everywhere, even in developing nations and the population will likely peak nearer to nine billion. the problem is not going to be overpopulation but a lack of children, what a depressing civilization it will be when everyone is old and in crown victorias. malthus was wrong, ehrlich was wrong. the biggest laugh is the thought that any talk about sex in the us is restricted, it is all most programs on television revolve around, it is sensationalized in the media at any opportunity, all advertisements are based on it and truly it is all so overbearing and obvious that it turns what should be exciting into something rather bland and impersonal. sex and the accompanying feelings are so naturally ephemeral though so i suppose it is little wonder it always leaves one wanting and in pursuit. maybe instead of a book about taching children sexuality they might create one to teach them how to have a relationship with someone of the opposite sex which involves things like talking, sharing common interests and goals and commitment. boo hiss.

Books for how to talk to someone miss the point. You go out and *talk* to someone.

why will it peak at 9 billion?

Because the 9 billionth and one person gets stuck with the check.

But Keith, don't you see any separation between Sex as Omnipresent Part of Culture and Actual Sex? Our entertainment revolves around desire more than the realities of sex or even intimacy: there is a post-Puritan taboo that accepts sex as frothy farce but not sex as reality, and it's precisely this focus on sex-as-concept rather than sex-as-reality (and the accompanying separation of sex and desire from quotidian "reality") that I'm saying creates this mass neuroses. We are constantly interested in it but not in it, not as a healthy workaday part of normal human relationships.

'Healthy workaday sex'? Yuk! Bitsuh, you pervert!

Yes, we humans... so Bonobo-esque! mATE FOR ENTERTAINMENT! sCREW EVERYONE!

Bono, das kränkliche Bonobo-Männchen, das 1980 von einem Schmuggler beschlagnahmt wurde und seither im Frankfurter Zoo lebte, mußte eingeschläfert werden.

but if we outlaw sex, only the outlaws will have sex

'bonos in the mist'

"erections in the hole"

I know for damn sure that most childless women are crying and pining their life away over the fact that they never reproduced. It's hardly the tragedy she makes it out to be.

Nicole, she's hardly the first to get her values screwed up. Time, last week, published this massive article on women, careers and fertility. 6 pages which basically said, "Once you're over 23, consider yourself past it, as your hopes for a large family is down the hole".

dry tone I suppose I should start digging my grave, right now.