tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9124539381685751273.post1037936610667994992..comments2023-06-19T04:35:06.263-07:00Comments on Skeptic's Play: Beyond sex-positivemillerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05990852054891771988noreply@blogger.comBlogger12125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9124539381685751273.post-76202535606625203472011-08-04T15:13:43.433-07:002011-08-04T15:13:43.433-07:00Great post! People need to start respecting everyo...Great post! People need to start respecting everyone's orientations without trying to impose their own views on them. And I agree with intrinsicallyknotted.Anonhttp://slutlyfe.wordpress.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9124539381685751273.post-81888617755822768592010-08-17T01:46:53.843-07:002010-08-17T01:46:53.843-07:00I think the insistance- "yes, we like sex. Ju...I think the insistance- "yes, we like sex. Just in a very strict, christian, heterosexual set of circumstances" is because they know that they need to be at least a little bit sex-positive to get any sort of popular approval.SlightlyMetaphysicalhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17891271827553008521noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9124539381685751273.post-38290770946408918432010-08-16T22:20:54.148-07:002010-08-16T22:20:54.148-07:00Slightlymetaphysical,
Isn't there always somet...Slightlymetaphysical,<br />Isn't there <i>always</i> something brewing about asexuality and sex-positivity? Sure seems like it to me.<br /><br />I bring up celibacy because it's obviously an issue that will resonate with my mostly secularist audience.<br /><br />Another issue that may resonate: pre-marital sex! Proponents argue that it's great because sex is great and it's important for couples to know they're sexually compatible before they marry. Opponents argue that sex is great and super-special, and should be saved for couples committed enough to marry.<br /><br />Why are both sides so careful to offer arguments that strongly affirm the value of sex? I mean, out of sex and marriage, I would have thought marriage was the more special of the two. Obviously I just don't get it.<br /><br />(Note that I am not criticizing abstinence until marriage in general, but criticizing a particular reason why people value abstinence until marriage.)millerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05990852054891771988noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9124539381685751273.post-75038940247287358162010-08-16T06:08:43.606-07:002010-08-16T06:08:43.606-07:00er... why this particular belief or behavior shoul...er... why this <i>particular belief</i> <b>or behavior</b> should be immune...Larry Hamelinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08788697573946266404noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9124539381685751273.post-62302943032426536542010-08-16T06:07:40.029-07:002010-08-16T06:07:40.029-07:00I phrased my comment... as saying that ideas and b...<i>I phrased my comment... as saying that ideas and beliefs couldn't be criticised.</i><br /><br />I didn't read <i>you personally</i> as saying so; I meant only that people who do in fact believe that their own opinions should be immune from criticism regardless of their content often use this phrase.<br /><br /><i>[C]riticism of someone's beliefs about sex... should never be pushed to criticising them for not having sex.</i><br /><br />We are in agreement on this point. The controversy is about why <i>this particular</i> belief should be immune from criticism.Larry Hamelinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08788697573946266404noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9124539381685751273.post-67981776680079705012010-08-16T05:02:36.937-07:002010-08-16T05:02:36.937-07:00Barefoot bum:
I just realised that I phrased my c...Barefoot bum:<br /><br />I just realised that I phrased my comment in ways that I probably shouldn't have on a skeptic blog, such as saying that ideas and beliefs couldn't be criticised. What I meant was that of course we should question ideas and beliefs. After all, how else could someone come to an informed decision? However, criticism of someone's beliefs about sex, which I think are especially important if they believe that sex is wrong, should never be pushed to criticising them for not having sex- the decision to not have sex lies entirely with the person, even if it's based on bad decisions.<br /><br />And I agree with you 100% that we need to criticise certain institutional norms.SlightlyMetaphysicalhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17891271827553008521noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9124539381685751273.post-23009479300088956482010-08-16T03:15:51.422-07:002010-08-16T03:15:51.422-07:00you want to focus on your relationship with god, y...<i>you want to focus on your relationship with god, you should be respected in your wishes not to have sex.</i><br /><br />First, the phrase "respect one's wishes" (and its variants) is a red flag.<br /><br />There is a <i>truth</i> about asexuality. miller demands respect, in my reading, for the truth about asexuality: people should not say false things about asexuality and asexuals. He is not making the blanket statement that we should respect (in the sense of refuse to criticize) an opinion just because it is an opinion. People can still have false opinions which are deserving of criticism.<br /><br />If an individual freely chooses to be celibate for whatever reason, this decision is exempt from criticism not because it is a decision, not because it is freely chosen, and because it rests on opinion, and not even because it necessarily rests on a true opinion, but because the decision does not materially affect me. (There are some more sophisticated criteria, but this criterion will suffice for a comment)<br /><br />When, however, an institution establishes an institutional norm, we are outside of the domain of individual decisions that materially affect only that individual. We are always justified in critically examining institutional norms, especially of institutions such as an organized religions that claim substantial privilege to influence and establish <i>societal</i> norms.Larry Hamelinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08788697573946266404noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9124539381685751273.post-34970986031819223382010-08-16T02:27:59.204-07:002010-08-16T02:27:59.204-07:00I dunno if you wrote this post in a vacuum or if, ...I dunno if you wrote this post in a vacuum or if, like me, you've been following the hints of this argument, this percieved opposition between sex-positivism and asexuality, brewing in the community for a few weeks. Either way, I consider this post to have summarised that argument, resolved it and made it worthless to discuss.<br /><br />And then opened a bigger and older can of worms with your take on asexuality/celibacy. I've got to admit, I can see a lot of flaws in the cult of celibacy, and I'd love to quash it completely, but celibacy itself just means not having sex, for whatever reasons. And the point is, however good or bad your reasons are, whether they're interpersonal or through lack of options or because you don't like sex or because you're asexual or you want to focus on your relationship with god, you should be respected in your wishes not to have sex.SlightlyMetaphysicalhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17891271827553008521noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9124539381685751273.post-69476508888987115562010-08-15T12:40:23.341-07:002010-08-15T12:40:23.341-07:00Intrinsically Knotted,
I don't really want to ...Intrinsically Knotted,<br />I don't really want to overthink the terms, because <i>all</i> of the terms are ambiguous. The problem with "sex-positive" is ambiguity; it nearly implies sex-normativity. The problem with "sexual freedom" is also ambiguity; it nearly implies that there are no norms to be applied, when clearly I have norms against clerical celibacy to start.<br /><br />In asexual discourse, it makes more sense to call myself sex-positive. No one interprets this as sex-normative. Instead, it's interpreted as active opposition to antisexual attitudes which occasionally appear in the asexual community. Asexuals, after all, are not immune to believing that everyone should behave like them. Luckily, antisexual attitudes are usually short-lived.millerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05990852054891771988noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9124539381685751273.post-4830857190199515032010-08-15T03:59:23.755-07:002010-08-15T03:59:23.755-07:00don't look for a diagnosis and don't offer...<i><b>don't</b> look for a diagnosis and don't offer advice until someone explicitly asks for it.</i><br /><br />I would also add: don't prompt someone to ask for a diagnosis unless they show clear evidence of distress and unhappiness.Larry Hamelinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08788697573946266404noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9124539381685751273.post-53785950491296631572010-08-15T03:57:44.034-07:002010-08-15T03:57:44.034-07:00People do not tend to think things through. Normal...People do not tend to think things through. Normally, we don't <i>have</i> to think things through; we can do quite a lot (perhaps almost all) of our day-to-day cognitive work with fairly straightforward rules and shortcuts.<br /><br />I'm just the same way, frankly. But, as a hetero/vanilla-sexual white Western middle-class male who has spent a great deal of time hanging out with a wide variety of people of different backgrounds, I've added an extra meta-rule: look for a diagnosis and don't offer advice until someone explicitly asks for it. I've also had the benefit of some formal training is sex education and information.<br /><br />People, I think, are pleased with themselves that they've learned <i>one</i> new set of rules (sex and uncommon sexual practices are not <i>evil</i>), and they have an irrepressible desire to show off their new-found open mindedness.<br /><br />And, to be fair, asexuality is fairly uncommon, and the concept that most people do want sex and one of the big problems of society in general is sexual repression.<br /><br />I think people you mention who self-identify as sex-positive <i>mean</i> well, although they are without a doubt mistaken about asexuality at a couple of levels. I've found that a flat, unequivocal, nonjudgmental correction is very effective in educating such people.<br /><br />(Your analysis of clerical celibacy is spot on. Celibacy is not bad per se; the problem with clerical celibacy is first that making any requirement or restriction on consensual sexual practice a condition of <i>anything</i> else is terribly bad, and making celibacy per se a condition reveals an underlying sex-negative and sex-choice-negative attitude.)Larry Hamelinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08788697573946266404noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9124539381685751273.post-90748411043221116632010-08-14T23:58:25.091-07:002010-08-14T23:58:25.091-07:00Is "sexual freedom" perhaps a better ter...Is "sexual freedom" perhaps a better term for the combination of views you would promote? It certainly has some ambiguity and could easily be misinterpreted, but it would imply the idea that people should be free to enjoy whatever kinds and amount of sex they want (including no sex).<br /><br />The idea of sex-positive individuals criticizing the idea of celibacy reminds me of something I hear sometimes among young women like myself who like to knit: some of my friends have been knitting away when they have been approached by another woman who proceeds to berate them for letting down the feminist cause by doing "women's work". Apparently being feminist or sex-positive are not about choice, they're about reacting to traditional stereotypes by conforming to the opposite stereotype.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com