Resolution To Resolve the Sex/No-Sex Class Distinction

Photo by Flickr user The Infamous Gdub. Used under a Creative Commons license.

In comments to last year's post, SnowDropExplodes expands on my hasty conclusion with a reminder

Rather than having it taken away, it is rigorously enforced by social expectation, and the boy becomes identified only with his sex drive and little else. On the face of it, that looks like fun, and is experienced that way by some, but the competition with other boys to prove oneself to be identified with sex in particular, is endless and impossible to satisfy.

I've been brooding for a day or two about another new book by Evolutionary Behavior grandpa Desmond Morris that Abby O'Reilly mentions (Big theme in the book? Surprise! Men behave the way we do because we're "expendable," who knew? And guess what? It's *genetic!* So, I guess, that means it's ok plus we can't change it! Also, presumably, get used to those genetic high-heels girls, God, or at least Darwin says you want 'em. %E!#$&@%!!) But searches to make the memes more inescapable, unavoidable, and animalistically unalterable notwithstanding, moving into the next year I'm going to try to spend more time examining, and inviting others to examine, ideas about expendability of male *sexuality.* (Note: Victorian men referred to orgasms as "spending!" Not *quite* for the same reasons but... hmmm.) I'm also going to note pretty much the *only* thing I ever learned *and liked* from Newt Gingrich and that's that humans tend to waste, expend, and otherwise misuse that which they perceive to be free or cheap. And whereas the "no-sex" class paradigm both prescribes, describes, and perhaps proscribes women's sexuality as difficult, even dangerous to obtain (in every dimension from frequency to orgasmic difficulty) for men as the sex class orgasms are cheap, disposable, and -- even when pregnancy is a wanted, planned outcome -- at best a minor contribution.

Bottom lines for exploration in 2008:
- Continue unpacking the lie that women must be incredibly high-cost sexual and social female eunuchs as defined by Germaine Greer
- Continue unpacking the lie that men, for all that conservative, anti-feminist happy talk, are sexually and social cheap and interchangeable.
- Find ways to better encourage men to begin noticing and responding to feminist overtures with the result that, eventually, even the seemingly intractably bitter who comment at Men's News Daily and the seemingly no-less bitter women who comment at Women's Space discover that even if they never become bestest friends they at least recognize they're Scott-Adams'-style natural allies. (Despite drawing Dilbert, and writing, um, *generously* chain-pulling posts, Adams also comes up with shockingly sensible observations and proposals. Occasionally. Like this time.)
- Oh yeah, and *especially* for those of us who are heterosexual, as long as we're exploring, let's explore some new ways to be healthy, happy, and horny-together human beings without dragging quite so many misery-inducing stereotypes into bed with us.