'I think suggesting people have sex responsibly and safely is very different from saying they shouldn't have it until they are married.'
Absolutely! The abstinence-only movement seems to use 'marriage' synonymously with 'responsible and safe and secure' and doesn't really seem to educate people about sexuality and consent and open communication and lots of other important stuff...
I like this article on the American abstinence-only movement. http://newhumanist.org.uk/1849 Lots of scary stuff on sex being terrible outside of marriage and automatically (without learning or talking or practicing, from wedding night onwards) awesome within. (though also yay for sex-positivity and for Christian sex manuals and sex toy websites without porn on.) Hijacking medical ideas ('low self-esteem') and changing laws and doing *so much harm*... *sigh*
And in terms of hostility: yes, it's annoying. Lots of people from 'both' 'sides' are very hostile towards the other's choices, and it's a shame. I've had long, interesting conversations with an abstinence-only Christian friend, and we broadly agree in the fundamental - that sex is awesome and special and a great gift - and differ completely in its execution.
Alcohol and the Iranians: prohibition isn't the answer - changing peoples' attitudes is, and thankfully lots of people become more sensible in time...
Burlesque - as I said recently regarding cosmetic surgery and feminism, 'there's a difference between cosmetic surgery and the beauty industry: one also includes reconstruction and necessary functional changes (eg. for burns victims) and the other is *everything* that enforces stupid beauty standards and shoves them at us *everywhere* and cosmetic surgery is part of that.'
I think this is similar - the sex industry has *utterly vast* amounts wrong with it, and female objectification (in general) helps perpetuate the sex industry and the suffering of those affected. However, there are pockets of people who work as prostitutes, dancers and so on *with full consent and choice.* They are the *absolute* minority (and of course the ones we hear about the most: the happy hookers, the Belle de Jours) and the focus on them is harmful in perpetuating the myth that *most* people in the sex industry are there by consent.
Burlesque (ie. the modern movement) is complicated: certainly pole/lapdancing and many forms of 'burlesque' are simple and strippy and objectifying. But the focus seems (to me) to be on creativity: on the dance itself, not the reveal, and so people cheerfully do burlesque in diving suits, they strip down to t-shirts and shorts and stop, they simply dance. Stripping or not, I like burlesque when done in a positive, non-shouty and non-scary way: both as an observer and as a person who performs.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
dancing_serpent
(no subject)
Date: 2009-11-09 05:47 pm (UTC)Absolutely! The abstinence-only movement seems to use 'marriage' synonymously with 'responsible and safe and secure' and doesn't really seem to educate people about sexuality and consent and open communication and lots of other important stuff...
I like this article on the American abstinence-only movement. http://newhumanist.org.uk/1849 Lots of scary stuff on sex being terrible outside of marriage and automatically (without learning or talking or practicing, from wedding night onwards) awesome within. (though also yay for sex-positivity and for Christian sex manuals and sex toy websites without porn on.) Hijacking medical ideas ('low self-esteem') and changing laws and doing *so much harm*... *sigh*
And in terms of hostility: yes, it's annoying. Lots of people from 'both' 'sides' are very hostile towards the other's choices, and it's a shame. I've had long, interesting conversations with an abstinence-only Christian friend, and we broadly agree in the fundamental - that sex is awesome and special and a great gift - and differ completely in its execution.
Alcohol and the Iranians: prohibition isn't the answer - changing peoples' attitudes is, and thankfully lots of people become more sensible in time...
Burlesque - as I said recently regarding cosmetic surgery and feminism, 'there's a difference between cosmetic surgery and the beauty industry: one also includes reconstruction and necessary functional changes (eg. for burns victims) and the other is *everything* that enforces stupid beauty standards and shoves them at us *everywhere* and cosmetic surgery is part of that.'
I think this is similar - the sex industry has *utterly vast* amounts wrong with it, and female objectification (in general) helps perpetuate the sex industry and the suffering of those affected. However, there are pockets of people who work as prostitutes, dancers and so on *with full consent and choice.* They are the *absolute* minority (and of course the ones we hear about the most: the happy hookers, the Belle de Jours) and the focus on them is harmful in perpetuating the myth that *most* people in the sex industry are there by consent.
Burlesque (ie. the modern movement) is complicated: certainly pole/lapdancing and many forms of 'burlesque' are simple and strippy and objectifying. But the focus seems (to me) to be on creativity: on the dance itself, not the reveal, and so people cheerfully do burlesque in diving suits, they strip down to t-shirts and shorts and stop, they simply dance. Stripping or not, I like burlesque when done in a positive, non-shouty and non-scary way: both as an observer and as a person who performs.