Do You Feel Lucky?

(and feel free to comment! My older posts are certainly no less relevant to the burning concerns of the day.)

Tuesday, December 23, 2014

Attraction, Perversion, Discrimination, and the Natural.

A minor manifesto on the general topic of sexual attraction. Beg pardon.


*clears throat*.

This is either going to be, ought to be, or isn't remotely going to be controversial/ unpopular/ belaboring the obvious of things that needn't even be said. I honestly have no idea how people will react. I don't really care, because a natural fact trumps all the conditioning in the world.

No one can tell me any basis for sexual attraction is wrong. Or bigoted. Or discriminatory. And it does not matter what the basis is. What thing I notice that prompts attraction, or engages enrapture. NO POSSIBLE BASIS for sexual attraction can you tell me is bigoted, oppressive, or "discriminatory" in the politicized sense of "prejudicial on unjust grounds."

Sexual attraction can be strongly preferential FOR or strongly aversive AGAINST:

* certain body types, whether weights or heights

* certain suites of facial features, whether associated with typical ethnicities or otherwise,

* certain sets of complexions, or coloring or intensity of hair,

* certain personality types or abilities or talents,

* INTENSITY of hair?? You know what I mean. THE POINT STANDS.

* certain religious, political or other affiliations, creeds, or persuasions,

* certain predilections for certain urges or perversions -

None of that is discriminatory (in the political, social justice sense) in relation to sexual attraction.

What floats one's boat cannot be called* "discriminatory." Whatever types of persons flit across my screen, push the buttons behind my mind and get my involuntary Irish up (so to speak) are not subject to political judgment or claims of injustice. To claim otherwise will result in aggressive chivalry being declared against you, because you sir or madame are quite in the wrong.

*sole exception: of course, I can call my own preferences discriminatory. If it fits the case, but no one else could possibly characterize it that way: because if I am in fact turned on by bigotry, that's a VERY WEIRD SORT of perversion that nobody else could possibly be equipped to pronounce upon! I can say, "yeah, you know what, it's odd but part of what turns me on is the transgression of certain social norms involving bigotry. X type of bigotry turns me on. I have a bigotry fetish that honestly, I didn't ask for, but there it is. I own up to it at least."

In a case like that, I am the one who could say that my sexual attraction does indeed involve elements of bigotry - but even in that case, the bigoted aspect is not the for or against any of the actual groups or types kind. It'd be the toward a particular social perversion kind.

And before you call me on the pejorative, "perversion" is as good a word as any embroidered on any freak flag you'd care to fly. "Perversion" is natural - "perversion" is what society might call the "bad natural" - if society had its head on straight where it sits up its ass, and could be honest about the spades it calls diamonds and the hearts it tries to club you with: "perversion" is not a bad word. "Perversion" is every bit as natural as "subversion" or "antinormativeness." Oh okay, well fuck. That last one IS a bad word. I think we can admit that, at least. Pathetic, weak neologism - ugly! Ungainly, kill it with fire - wait, it's growing on me - no, kill it for the good of us all, for the language.

So that's that. A minor manifesto on sexual attraction, and its insusceptibility to being unjustified.

You can't tell me that what floats a person's boat is discriminatory.

Level with me folks! Is that even at all controversial? Or was it too obvious to have bothered to state? Because I honestly don't know.

It just seemed sort of natural to me.


dogimo said...

"Natural" is too often propped and lighted as a virtue. In the above post, I don't mean to! It's just a way things are. Let's hope we all acknowledge that where liberty abides, nature should be let free, except where all culture and government are able to rise up and demonstrate why not. We must show compelling cause to outlaw. Where such cause IS demonstrable, law overrules the perfectly and merely natural - such as wanton murder. Law is humanity's sweet deal.

Let's further hope that an overwhelming majority of us agree that it powerfully serves every human's best interest that each of us, as a child, gets a breathing space to form and decide who we are without a bunch of old people pawing slobbering all over us.

I think law has a compelling case, there.

Mel said...

In regards to floating someone's boat, there's a dating website people can sign up with to meet sea captains, if they're so inclined.

Sea Captain Date is the only place for Sea Captains to connect with men and women who share a love of the ocean.

My favourite part is that you can choose how close, in nautical miles, your potential match is.

dogimo said...

I would be leery of dating anyone who can solemnize a marriage. 

In regards to floating someone's boat, you put my boat in orbit Mel.

Mel said...

Good point. Also, there's the potential that they'll get a bee in their bonnet about some bordering-on-mythical whale, take off on a vengeance-seeking trip to obsessively track it down, and ultimately die in the futile attempt. Which would kinda put the kibosh on any budding romance.