Sex, sin and filth - part 2

"You f*cking c*nt".

(I'm using "*" because I don't want an age warning page on my blog. Even though it goes against my principles!).

Let's try another variant:
"You eating nose".

Hmm, doesn't work, why?

Eating, like f*cking, is a pleasurable bodily activity.
A nose, like a c*nt, is an opening to our internals.
So....?

"You intellectual dwarf" rarely has the same sting as "Small/limp dick!"
"Slag" easily outpowers "Excessive shopper!"
"Drunk" is kindly compared to "Wanker".

So, and this is a rhetorical question, why do aggression and insult always call upon sex and sexual parts?

I said it was rhetorical, here is the answer: Suppression/Repression.
The only competitor to sex/sexual parts is bodily excretia. Kids start out with smelly poo, piss, (simply because parents don't like it) and work their way up to d*cks and c*nts.

Another rhetorical question - why did Janet Jackson showing a glittery star covered nipple cause more outcry (and changes in broadcasting rules) than images of zhombies eating living people's heads?

Supression and repression.

In the same way that "Ban abortion, save lives" generates passion whereas "Save the (already born) children" stimulates apathy. The moral high ground can be taken without shifting that lazy arse. And picketing an abortion clinic is closer to home than some weird African state. And unborn babies aren't drug takers and shoplifters are they. Unborn babies are still adorable angels.

There are several roots to this madness.
1. Sex is a free, non-taxable, pleasure. How do we control the peasants if they have this free pleasure?
2. Sex can tend to lead to tenderness and intimacy. You can't start a war by saying "Make love better than those bloody Germans".
3. Supression/repression creates a self-fullfilling prophecy. The sexually repressed/frustrated then do behave badly - so sin can then be almost accurately attributed to sex. (In fact, it's lack of sexual outlets, but lets not become sensible about this eh).
4. Sex sells - but only because it represents something not available. How many men really will get to f*ck that model in the advertisements? Why, of course they will, if they buy xyz..... How many overweight middle aged women will get to maul that 20 year old hunk dripping water down his superb torso? Of course they will, if they buy xyz....

I stated in part 1 that sex is not important unless there is a problem with the sexual aspects of a relationship. Same goes with day to day living.
The sexually repressed, guilt ridden, damaged sections of humanity do what people always do - they mask their problems and passionately condemn all areas where others aren't sharing the problem.
Look at ex-smokers and their fanatacism towards non-smoking.

And these fanatics spread their illness like a virus, contaminating the healthy.

Ask them to explain why victorian men went wild over piano legs, muslims go out of control over an exposed head of hair, yet europeans don't go on a raping spree after a day of bikinis or exposed breasts at the beach - silence is the reply. Silence or lies and denial. Of course those europeans have become uncontrolled sex maniacs!

Rape is always used as the bogey man of sex, the result of sexual freedom. Two people kissing passionately in a film will lead to an increase in the numbers of rapes - won't it!?
These preachers never bother to discover that most rapes have nothing to do with the sexual act as such - rape is about control, and raping a woman provides that sexual stigma that increases the power. It would be interesting to see if rapists turned to crushing hands if hands became the objects of repression.

There are four aspects of sex that stands it apart from other bodily activities.
1. It can lead to unwanted pregnancy. (A matter of education, held back by repression/suppresion).
2. Sexually transmitted diseases. Funny isn't it, this is more a bogey man that the equally fatal hepatitus spread by unwashed hands and cooking/eating.
3. The man goes inside the woman, invading her internal space. (So does someone sneezing next to you, with some very unpleasant side effects at times). So does someone shooting you or sticking a knife into you.....(see 4. below). We could talk about intimacy here, but many women do enjoy non-intimate sex - so it really is a red herring. It's a mind set thing.
4. Stigma. A woman allowing a man inside her carries so much baggage. We all know the "men sowing their oats is natural and OK, women doing so are slags". No stigma attaches to a knife wound, no blame shed towards the woman. But if she is raped......!!!!!


I've rambled a bit here, pull me in - start commenting on this blog!!

Sex, sin and filth....Part 1

When I started this blog, I had an opening page that promised many topics. I deleted that when it became obvious I wanted to cover relationship stuff for quite some time. I've been using intermissions to slip across other topics, but nothing in depth really.
My topic todays is a "tweenie", not totally relationship, not totally something else....

There's a saying in some parts of the counselling world - "If the sexual aspects of a relationship are fine, sex is totally unimportant. It only gains importance when it's a problem".
Pretty anti 1st generation Freud eh? (He actually debunked his sex theories later in life, his 2nd stage that many ignore or never even knew about. For the record, he declared his earlier research was based on a lousy and prejudicial selection of subjects!)

We, as humans, manage to push most aspects of our lives into needlessly complicated and myth ridden areas. We can come up with distorted, obsessional over emphasis on just about everything we do (or don't do).
Sex is just one of those areas.

We also love to claim lack of control in our lives, especially if we can attribute activities to genes or animal heritage or both. "I can't help it, I'm just being the alpha male" and that sort of crap.

Before delving into sex and co, I'm going to make a pretty radical statement.
"I have yet to find any aspect of our lives and behaviour that cannot be strictly under the control of our own conscious decissions (excluding the EXTREMELY RARE misdevelopment or misfunctions of our physiology)."
So, for example, ALPHA MALES act like ALPHA MALES simply because they are being taught to! Now, not in the far distant past.

OK, sex.....

We have bodies. Those bodies have parts. Those includes tits, bums, penises and vaginas.
We like to use those parts of our bodies, all of them, for many things.
Take our hands. We can use them to hold things, push things, we can touch others with them, and we can hurt others with them. We don't declare them no-go bits or assign sin to them.
Ah, you may say, there is a fundamental difference between a hand and a penis! Hands aren't under the control of hormones! (Well, not directly, the argument may go...).
So, the sexual organs are in a different category, so the argument goes.

Hmm, so that means they must be covered up and declared nasty?
Look, let's get real. Hormones etc do have direct effects on those sex parts (making them sensitive, erect, la de da) - but those direct effects are minimal. It is in the mind that the effects have real power. Covering the bits up will not make much difference there. Oh, but seeing bits leads to excitement and lack of control.... Bullshit.
We have Victorian men being driven into animalistic rampancy by the sight of an uncovered piano leg, Muslim men by a woman's hair, but Swedish men blithely indifferent to six foot tall busty blondes swanning around the beach. Hmmm.

We need to separate reality from guilt/sin/fanaticism if we are to tackle this sex subject sensibly.

Part 2 coming....

Absence makes the heart......

I could make excuses - novel and short story taking priority, non-literary pursuits (planning and running a holiday camp for twenty kids), even being hassle bound fighting the condo management over their letting our pool go dark green with algae pollution......

Truth is, though, I just wanted a break from thinking too much.

I will soon be back with further posts.