Tuesday, August 30, 2011

Why Are We Such Prudes? Part 1

She is probably not a prude . . .
On Sunday, Silverfiddle joked that my post didn't use any vulgarity.  So to counter the lack of lewdness and salacious behavior, I've divised a two part article on how Jack Camwell views human sexuality.  Warning: it will be crass in parts.

Disclaimer: I'm not a hippie.  When it comes to marriage I'm fairly traditional.  I believe that marriage should be only between two consenting adults of sound mind and legal age.  If you're married, then your entire sexual self should be devoted to that person to whom you are married.  Cheating on your spouse is, in my mind, the ultimate betrayal that someone can perpetrate on another human being.

But if you're not married, then why does it matter whom you fuck?

Why should you even wait until you're married to have sex?  I think there's a lot of people in America who, if asked the question, would say that pre-marital sex is wrong.  Most Americans would probably also look poorly upon those who have sex with a partner that they're not even in love with.

What?  Sex for fun and not necessarily love?  I know, it sounds all hedonistic and horrifying, but lets consider a few things.  First off, how many people reading this article have never had pre-marital sex?  My guess would be that 99.9% of you did the deed before you were married, and even more than likely with someone who you didn't intend to marry.

I mean, c'mon.  We've all been in high school.  When you're a teenager you've got all those hormones coursing through your veins with reckless abandon.  You've just discovered that you are a sexual being, and that you'd likely have sex with a meat grinder if it was warm enough.  And even for those who presented themselves as being virtuous and above such carnal things often lost heart when standing at the precipice.  I know I did.

But why do we think it's wrong?  My bible knowledge on human sexuality is a bit fuzzy, meaning that I can't remember where or if in the bible it says that sex should only be done within the legal bonds of holy matrimony, but my guess is that even if the bible says that's the case, it's probably still not wrong.  How?  Well, we have to remember that the concept of marriage 2,000+ years ago was a bit different than it is now.  First off, they were indeed allowed to take as many wives as they could afford.  Secondly, there wasn't any legal binding about it, although marriage was considered a socially recognized institution.

But really, why should sex be limited to married couples?  Our biology tells us that we're not scientifically meant for monogomous relationships anyways.  One man could technically impregnate every woman in Europe that is able to bear children up until the day he dies.

I'm not saying that we should have sex, or try to, with every person we're sexually attracted to.  I'm definitely not advocating promiscuity.  All I'm saying is if two adults find each other sexually attractive then why should some people in society place a stigma upon them for doing the horizontal mambo?  If we're all creations of God, then that means every aspect about our nature is something that God intended for us.  Humans, like any other animal on this planet, are sexual beings, and human sexuality is a gift from God.

Humans are social animals, and we have no problem forming emotional intimacies with other humans.  Am I emotionally promiscuous because I enjoy becoming emotionally close to more than one person?  Of course not.  So why is there such a difference between that and physical intimacy?  Sure, it's extremely pleasurable (if you're doing it right) but there's nothing wrong with experiencing pleasure so long as you're able to moderate yourself and not become a slave to your desire.

So do we say sex should only be in marriage just because you think God says so?  If sex is a way to experience God's love for us, does that mean the only way we can experience is love is in a heterosexual marriage?

Today was not so gritty, but tomorrow will be.  We'll talk about some of the more deviant stuff, and why so many people have an aversion to it.

14 comments:

Anonymous said...

I believe it was Anatole France who said, "Of all the sexual aberrations found in mankind the one I find hardest to understand is chastity."

But then we should ask:

1.Is bad sex better than no sex?

2.Is friendly sex without love better than no sex?

3. Is sex in a loveless marriage out of a sense of duty better than hot passionate sex outside of marriage?

4. Should "decency" and "propriety" ever enter into sexual encounters, or is it better just to let go and let 'er rip?

5. Is no sex better than gay sex for a gay person?

6. Is masturbation a sin -- or merely means to relieve sexual tension?

7. Is it possible to have love without sex?

8. In a sexless marriage, should the partners be bound to the law against adultery?

9. Is artificial insemination a form of adultery in married women -- or of fornication in unmarried women?

10. Is sex primarily designed for recreation or only for procreation?

~ FreeThinke

PS: Jack, I left you a message on the Alban Berg thread. - FT

Jack Camwell said...

Yes I read it FT, I just didn't have anything substantial to add to the discussion. You said it all quite succinctly.

I'm really appreciative of these questions you've posed, and I'm going to use them for tomorrow.

Peter McCullough said...

The supreme court's decision to allow pornography into every home in America after 200+ years of our being uncomfortable with public expressions of sex, with the exception of the ever pajamas clad Hugh and his bunnies,is creating a shared schizophrenia; should one mastrabate on one's laptop or wait for the wifey to come home knowing that she may also have already done so on her office pc and toy (no pun intended) with her possibly having no interest in tending to your want/needs that evening. Technology has eliminated the moral dilemma and replaced it with a fork in the road. Decisions, decisions, decisions...

Anonymous said...

If halitosis is better than no breath at all, I guess masturbation follows suit.

Know anyone who is asexual? Never had it, never wanted it, perfectly content without it?

Yes, Virginia, people like that do exist.

Should we pity them-- or envy them?

~ FreeThinke

Harrison said...

If sex was only limited to married couples then there wouldn't be much of it.

Jack Camwell said...

FT,
Definitely pity. Sex is stupid awesome.

Harrison,
Hilarious.

Anonymous said...

Jack,

OFF TOPIC but if you're interested in Schoenberg, here's some startling pictorial insight by Kandinsky:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Arnold_Schoenberg_'The_Red_Look'_-_Kandinsky_1910.jpg

You might want to look into Paul Hindemith too.

~ FreeThinke

Anonymous said...

Another question for the court:

What do you think of the concept of SEX ADDICTION?

FT

Jack Camwell said...

http://christianfearinggodman.blogspot.com/2011/06/is-sex-addiction-real-or-excuse-my.html

There's my response to that =)

Just as a reminder, the second part of this article will feature the questions you posed here FT.

Jersey McJones said...

"Why Are We Such Prudes?"

Insecurity.

JMJ

Anonymous said...

Look forward to tomorrow, Jack. Thank you.

Jersey, I think it's more complicated than that. It's the product of acculturation -- centuries of tradition much of it based on superstition, but also on common sense. Adultery makes for bad blood in communities, starts feuds, often creates violence. All that's bad for kids -- death on family life. etc.

Does anyone know of any society where Mom and Dad have sex in front of their kids -- or anybody else's kids for that matter?

Have their been any societies where children are encouraged to have sex in front of their parents or their brothers and sisters?

I'm reasonably sure we all loved our mothers, and that they hold a special place in our hearts. Well, with that in mind I have to tell you it's impossible for me to think of my mother A) masturbating, B) sucking dick, C) having group sex, D) watching porn with delight, D) being unfaithful to my father, E) getting involved in a discussion like this one.

Prudishness is a pain in the ass, but there have to be some restraints and boundaries or Civilization is just not possible.

As a father how would you feel if you happened to see your teenaged son going into an "Adult Bookstore?"

How would you feel if you found out your twenty-year-old daughter had been having an affair with your best friend?

We have to see these things in perspective, or all hell will break loose,

~ FreeThinke

Anonymous said...

This is eloquent. I think that defines sex addiction -- or any addiction -- very well:

"There are men out there who have families, have been married for years, and for whatever reason cannot help but fuck every piece of tail that goes by. Then it gets so bad that he actually goes out looking for it because he can’t get enough. The appetite becomes so insatiable that it’s almost as if there’s a black hole left where his soul used to be."

When anything takes over your to the extent that it knocks out everything else that's worthwhile you're in big trouble.

Sex is wonderful. So is food. But out-of-control both can be a curse.

~ FreeThinke

Jack Camwell said...

I agree with all that FT. Like I said, there has to be limits to everything.

As I said in the beginning, I'm not advocating promiscuity or being loose with one's morals and dignity, just that we shouldn't have such constrictive views on sex, and that the idea of fornication being sinful is a bit outdated, I think.

Anonymous said...

There's an old saying I learned out on Long Island way back in the nineteen-fifties"

"Of all my wife's relations I like sex the best."

It's God's greatest Gift to us other than Life, itself. I just wonder why we either treat it so carelessly, or else seem scared to death of it? I hate the way so many have to think of it as "dirty" in order to get excited, and then fel guilty and ashamed once it's over. That's a terrible legacy from the Old Testament, I think.

Take care, Jack.

~ FreeThinke