Saturday, June 18, 2005

Let's talk about Sex

Got your attention, didn't I? This got my attention too:
It can be fun, dangerous, a total high and despite the fact that it can also break your heart, more and more women are doing it. It's that uninvolved liaison with a guy you go to bed with, but aren't committed to. Your one night stand.

Pops up on the MSN Today window every time I sign on to MSN. Well, no. Not the same article, but similar ones. Before I offer my opinion though, let's take a look at what the article is, or is not about.

"It wasn't always this way - even a generation ago, casual sex was relatively unknown for women. Men could sleep around and be regarded as 'sowing their wild oats' without a hint of criticism. But a woman who had casual sex was, and often still is, more likely to be labelled a 'slag' and seen as 'unnatural'."

Hmm. I notice a slight bias in the tone here.

"Casual sex is now more acceptable than it was because nowadays women have the freedom and opportunity for uninvolved lovemaking; we meet men through work, through friends or even through the Internet. We also have easy access to contraception and protection, making it far safer to have sex with no nasty repercussions."

Ah. Nasty repercussions like getting pregnant? I see. Funny. I thought getting pregnant was something of a miracle. Y'know. Gift from God.

" a survey in the States commissioned by the Oprah Winfrey Show, 50 per cent of respondents said that casual sex was worth it. They thought it exciting, enjoyable - and a statement of their sexual identity, a reflection of the fact that as a 21st century woman, they wanted to be free to have sex when and with whom they wanted."

So, if I am to be a 21st century woman, I should want to be free to have sex when and with whom I wanted? Oh dear.

"So that's the good news. Sadly, here's the bad. The other 50 per cent of Oprah respondents thought that casual sex wasn't worth it - and 80 per cent of them have had regrets. It isn't the morality, it isn't even a feeling of shame. The main reason that casual sex may not deliver is that we often want more than just the instant hit it offers - and even if we didn't want more when we started, we do when we finish."

Yes, that is bad news. 'That' being the fact that women didn't want to have casual sex not because of morality or a feeling of shame, but merely because it doesn't 'deliver' the way we want it to.

Admittedly, this is an msn article, and so is not a reflection of the singaporean woman the way a Today article, for example, would. But it is a reflection of the way more and more people are thinking. Or at least it would seem so, wouldn't it? The way this article is written, one would think almost everybody was dying for casual sex, and just cant figure out why it isn't 'delivering' for them. Which of course, in this world of almost negligible moral authority, is a self-fulfilling prophecy. Tell everyone that everyone, deep down inside, wants to have a fling with the guy down the street, and everyone would probably belive, and eventually end up wanting it. Of course, I'm making gross generalisations. But this article really did annoy me. And before you accuse me of being narrow-minded and conservative, read the rest of the article here. And then let me state, for the record, that I am conservative, so accusing me as such wouldn't hurt much; I am not, I hope, too narrow-minded - but I do like having my own stand.

Sex is not something to be ashamed of; neither is sexuality - both are gifts from God. But sex isn't, and cannot, be casual. Even the article admits that "physiologically, sex creates a flood of hormones that naturally create a bond. Oxytocin (the same hormone that women release while breastfeeding) makes us feel close to a partner and dopamine makes us feel content in his company, both of which are released during sex." Does that sound like something casual to you? Sex is the ultimate, but not the only, act of making love between a husband and wife; it forms a bond probably nothing else can. Is that really something we want to do with every other male within a 500m radius?

I know for a fact that many girls don't take casual sex lightly. That most would wait for marriage before doing anything. Why then do we let the rest of the world have their, and only their opinion heard?

Don't get me wrong. I have nothing against people involved in casual sex. I do, however, have something against the people and institutions which make these people believe that casual sex in not only alright, but to be desired - if we are confident enough. That's like don't wanna have casual sex?'s ok darling. You'll like it soon enough - it's just a matter of getting used to it. Don't worry, nobody will blame you...yet. Wait. That is what they're saying.

If ever articles like this make it to the mainstream newspaper (mainstream being stuff I read ;) like Today, Streats, TNP and Straits Times), I'm writing in.
Morality isn't a disease.

No comments: