Paradoxes

How does one define "sanity" or "healthy" while living in an "insane" and "unhealthy" world.

I would like to be a person who is completely free of capitalism; how do I achieve that living in a capitalistic society? I could perhaps go live somewhere and grow my own food and build my own house using tools I made for myself and sew my own clothes which I've woven myself if I can perhaps find a community in which I can barter with and for those things which each the other needs. Will they let me in for free or do I have to pay admittance thereby requiring capital? How do I get there? Drive? More money for vehicle and gas. Walk? How do I feed myself along the way? More money. Do they own the property outright? Taxes? More money. My point being, it may be doable but how do I get from here to there without, in some small part, participating in the capitalistic society in which I don't want to participate? The same paradoxes apply when discussing sex.

What is healthy sex? What is a healthy sexual self-image? Who decides? Based on what criteria and standards which are in turn defined by who? And of those definitions, how do I know which are truly healthy and which are derived from the definer's, possibly twisted possibly not, view of the world? How do I know my own definitions are healthy? Is BDSM healthy? Those who participate believe it is. As for me, it doesn't do much for me. Does that mean I'm not healthy? Does it mean they're not? There may be great minds out there who have that answer; I'm not one of them. And of the "great minds," are they healthy enough in their own sexuality to decide and define? Is it healthy to constantly look to get laid to the exclusion of any other activity? I've known men and women who go through their lives (or part of their lives) doing exactly that. I have other interests as well as sex. Who's "right"? Me or them? Both? Who decides?

My point being, how does one take information which we've internalized and examine that information without projecting our internalized information on the internalized information we're examining?

As to defining the opposite of sex-positive...why define an opposition to an already conflicted area of discussion? Instead of "either/or" why not discuss things as "both/and" and see where that leads us.

I'm curious as to why you would ask if I'm for "limiting rights" rather asking in what ways I can see expanding or increasing our rights and/or participation in the debate. My post dealt mostly with, what we refer to around here as "the law of unintended consequences" or "be careful what you wish for."

For example, speaking of government , women's rights activists wanted a famous woman to appear on U.S. currency; remember the Susan B. Anthony dollar? Well, we got what we wanted. Not quite how we wanted it, but we got it. Women's rights activists wanted the police to more seriously address issues of domestic violence and to protect women from men who abuse them. Now, in many places, when the police arrive at a domestic violence call, both parties are taken in. Women's rights activists wanted women to live safe lives away from their abuser. We now have women's shelters. The abuser stays in the home; the woman hides for her life leaving behind her home, job, friends and family. No-fault divorce so women could leave bad relationships. Say buh-bye to alimony and many forms of financial support for women who, many times, have no other form of financial support. Child custody was historically given to men as their "rights" of property. Women's rights activists fought against this and won the right of women to gain custody of their children. Single-parent households in which the single parent is a woman are traditionally one of the poorest demographics reported in the U.S. Again, unintended consequences. (note: broad brush applied for brevity)

So my point is, let's have all the ducks in a row before be start legislating or limiting or even defining what is or is not "right."

For starters, we live in a world in which we still have to define healthy sex as 'consensual'. Why is that? Why is 'consensual' not just a given, inherent in the definition itself? Perhaps it implies we need to step back and look at "relationships of power;" not just within the context of the sex act, but within our broader view. Why do I see healthy sex frequently defined as between consenting 'adults'? Is sex only healthy if one is an 'adult'? At what age, chronologically or otherwise, do we switch from child to adult? All of us identically? Girls the same as boys?

Oh, hell, for that matter is sex healthy? Some people view sex in any form at any time as unhealthy and/or sinful. (I think Paul's writing is the best/worst example of that.) Do they get a seat at the table? Or do we label them sick and repressed while they label us sick and perverted? Who's right? Who decides? The medical community from whence there once was a missive in which girls were warned their uterus would atrophy if they pursued a higher education? The psychiatric community from whence came the definition of homosexuality as a perversion and who once defined a slave who was unhappy being a slave as one who had a mental disorder (the name of which escapes me at this moment)? The church? Yeah, that's worked well. /sarcasm to the church part.

So let us all talk and debate. That's a big positive as far as I'm concerned. Sex is a topic of conversation that can be discussed in the light of day rather than hidden away while each person wonders if they're weird or stunted or repressed or...or...whatever. Let's have an old-fashioned, 60s type consciousness raising (yikes! I used 60s as old-fashioned! *sigh* Guess what that makes me?) Let's start talking again about what's what for us. You know, you've read them or heard them. "Wow, women can climax multiple times?!" "Wow, women can climax?!" "Is it only a climax when it's vaginal?" "Where is my vagina?" "Vagina, hell! Where's my clitoris?" "My what does what when I climax?!" "Oral?! Ewwwww." "Oral, mmmmm" "Is the 'g' spot real or did some guy make it up?"

So let's talk...again. Let's define, together with each other, for ourselves and for each other, what sexual health is, what healthy sex is. Then, when we've defined the myriad healthy sexual experiences and sexually healthy bodies, let's talk about what's "right" and what's "wrong". Some strippers love the attention and feel powerful using their bodies in that way. For some it's a soul-destroying way to make money. For others it's somewhere in between. Some women enjoy making money for providing sex; they feel powerful, beautiful and they can pay the rent or go on a cruise. Some are coerced or know no other way or feel unworthy of anything but. And others are somewhere in between. It's my job to define what "is" for me and, sometimes, it's my "job" to share what "is" for me with others to see if that's what "is" for them. And sometimes it's my job to listen or help those who are hurting or validate and celebrate those who aren't. And sometimes it's my job to just shut-up. Which I will do right after I note; as you may have noticed, I don't view this as a binary, on/off, black/white, yes/no, good/bad, issue - there's just too much "in-between" in there.