Leon Kass, "The End of Courtship" Part 2 of 3
or:
Sex: Still Filthy
Fortunately I'm too busy teaching to give into my natural inclination to Fisk the living excrement out of this thing. It's such a slow-moving target that I'd feel kinda bad if I did, anyway. Can you believe that this guy is at the University of Chicago? Makes me glad I turned them down for grad school despite their preposterously absurdly ridiculously high stipends.
Actually, this whole thing is so weird that I plan to try to go through it and pull out whatever shreds of rational argument lie hidden in it to see whether a sane case can be made for some of the conclusions he's grasping at. Shredding him is just too easy; trying to figure out whether there's anything really worth thinking about lodged in this parade of fallacies is a much more challenging, interesting, and potentially fruitful exercise.
But those of us who don't teach at the University of Chicago or similar institutions actually have to, you know, teach and grade and so forth, so that project will have to stay on the back burner for a little while.
or:
Sex: Still Filthy
Fortunately I'm too busy teaching to give into my natural inclination to Fisk the living excrement out of this thing. It's such a slow-moving target that I'd feel kinda bad if I did, anyway. Can you believe that this guy is at the University of Chicago? Makes me glad I turned them down for grad school despite their preposterously absurdly ridiculously high stipends.
Actually, this whole thing is so weird that I plan to try to go through it and pull out whatever shreds of rational argument lie hidden in it to see whether a sane case can be made for some of the conclusions he's grasping at. Shredding him is just too easy; trying to figure out whether there's anything really worth thinking about lodged in this parade of fallacies is a much more challenging, interesting, and potentially fruitful exercise.
But those of us who don't teach at the University of Chicago or similar institutions actually have to, you know, teach and grade and so forth, so that project will have to stay on the back burner for a little while.
posted by Winston Smith at
9:46 PM
6 Comments:
Sex is too often treated in today's culture as a commodity, disconnected to love and human emotions. No, sex is not filthy but the pendulum has swung from one extreme prior to the 1960's where it was viewed as dirty and only acceptable within marriage and now where it is not valued as a beautiful human experience connected to love but devalued as a physical need which is totally disconnected to human emotions. Sex is easily available to people today (both men and women) but how many can say they have truly made love ? I know some men who say regretfully that while they have had a lot of sex, they have never made love to a woman. How sad.I suspect Leon Kass was bemoaning this paradox that while sex has been 'liberated',it has lost something truly valuable in the process.
I don't see any reason to disagree with any of this unless you are saying that sex is impermissible in the absence of love. As I've noted, I think there are a few reasonable points deeply buried in Kass's essay. One of those points is the one you mention. Anyone who recognizes no link between love and sex is probably as benighted as someone who sees a necessary connection between them.
I was not saying sex is impermissible without love but merely noting Kass's point that sometimes because sex is so freely available it can be misused. People may have loveless sex to satisfy their egos, increase their low self esteem and just to fullfil their physical needs (usually men). And not to forget that nature plays a part in it too. I am generalizing but most women find it difficult to disconnect sex from love whereas men can separate sex from love if need be. And the pressure to have sex because of peer pressure in high schools is in some ways detrimental to those who are too young to handle the emotional impact of sex (usually young girls). It is a complex subject and Kass is trying to bring up the pros and cons of the sexual revolution. Some good came out of it but also some bad. But this does not mean we have to go back to the bad old days when sex was dirty but maybe find a balance.
Again, I find nothing to disagree with here, though I don't think this is Kass's point. Unless I'm misreading his words and tone, he's a sexual reactionary who DOES yearn for a return to the bad old days.
I think we're in agreement that irrational pressure about sex is bad, and that one should be autonomous sexually as well as non-sexually. Social pressure to be a prude is bad, and social pressure to be wanton is bad--in part because being either a prude or a wonton is bad, in part because the kinds of social pressure at issue are bad.
In short: there's no good reason to refrain from freely and rationally engaging in healthy, safe, friendly recreational sex, though it IS bad to be pressured into doing so. If I thought that Kass agreed with the first part of that, we'd be in complete agreement.
From what I gather from Kass, I got the impression that 'recreationl sex' or to use a more appropriate term 'casual sex' is imposed by today's sexual mores. So much so that people who feel uncomfortable about 'casual sex' or 'recreational sex' are pressured to feel there is something wrong if they are not doing it. This is certainly a problem in high schools where kids get the message from the culture at large that casual sex is the norm and those kids who feel uncomfortable with it feel inadequate. In the same way it is bad to send the message that being a prude is right , it is also bad to send the message that being against recreational sex is wrong.
Agreed, with two small comments:
1. Never thought about the difference between 'casual sex' and 'recreational sex' before, but you're right, there's an important one. Being more wary of the former than the latter, would, indeed, make more sense, and I'll re-read Kass w/ that in mind.
2. I agree with the final clause so long as by 'its bad to send the message that being against RS is wrong' means 'it's bad to send the message that it's wrong to choose not to engage in RS' and not 'it's bad to send the message that RS is bad/impermissible.' I agree with the former reading, but not the latter.
Except re: young teenagers, who I think SHOULD be encouraged to try to wait until they reach the age of majority to have sex. I don't think this'll work and I certainly didn't do it that way, but, say, 16-year-olds may just be too irresponsible.
Actually, this is worth a whole post to see what everybody has to say about this.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home