![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
talktoolooseThe news this morning featured stories about the trial of a former boarding school teacher in Toronto who allegedly abused his 10 year old boy charges and also about the cracking of a huge child porn ring in Australia. I always freak slightly when I hear these stories. I have inherited a knee-jerk reaction that says, "When people talk about sex crimes, their disgust will somehow spill sideways onto me as a gay man."
This is not a terribly healthy reaction, but it prompted me to spill out the words behind the cut.
One of the basic rhetorical platitudes of the gay rights movement has always been to distance the visibility and acceptance of the sexually divergent from societally harmful practices like child pornography. The links between the first (basic equal rights for identifiable groups) and the second (non-consensual sexuality) have always been made by the enemies of queer rights, most recently by those saying, "First we give marriage to gays then next it's paedophiles and bestialiists."
But I would posit that it's wrong to completely separate the positive and negative manifestations of sexual freedom. Sexual repression has been a negative force for those who would love members of their own gender, for those who would change their gender, for those who would separate bodily pleasure from reproduction and from legally sanctified unions. The slow lifting of this veil has made the lives of millions bearable and survivable. At the same time, the cover has been lifted on the stewing pot of non-consensual and potentially harmful sexualities that are perhaps themselves the products of repression.
So, yes, I'm free to write about same-sex love before an Internet audience of people of vastly differing sexualities. But at the same time, I could find child porn on the same 'Net with a minimum use of my search skills. The revelation that more of our neighbours are queer than we would have thought 20 years ago can be shocking or liberating to us; but it is also clear that all but the most bull-headed will ultimately come to at least grudgingly accept it. The parade of revelations of children who are being abused by teachers in boarding schools or by other trusted adults is shocking and upsetting. It is tempting to link these discoveries, but that is poor analysis. When victims of child sexual abuse came forward 20 years ago, the cloud of repression -- the overwhelming desire to pretend their is no deviation from the norm -- halted any investigation or action. Now, these former children and ones who are currently experiencing abuse have a chance of being heard.
...Precisely because we are talking about sexuality and looking at it square in the eye.
(Note: I accidentally typed "Sexualites" instead of "Sexualities" at one point. I like this new word. It sounds like those who attend thrilling parties featuring canapés, fine cocktails and strategically placed lube dispensers.)
This is not a terribly healthy reaction, but it prompted me to spill out the words behind the cut.
One of the basic rhetorical platitudes of the gay rights movement has always been to distance the visibility and acceptance of the sexually divergent from societally harmful practices like child pornography. The links between the first (basic equal rights for identifiable groups) and the second (non-consensual sexuality) have always been made by the enemies of queer rights, most recently by those saying, "First we give marriage to gays then next it's paedophiles and bestialiists."
But I would posit that it's wrong to completely separate the positive and negative manifestations of sexual freedom. Sexual repression has been a negative force for those who would love members of their own gender, for those who would change their gender, for those who would separate bodily pleasure from reproduction and from legally sanctified unions. The slow lifting of this veil has made the lives of millions bearable and survivable. At the same time, the cover has been lifted on the stewing pot of non-consensual and potentially harmful sexualities that are perhaps themselves the products of repression.
So, yes, I'm free to write about same-sex love before an Internet audience of people of vastly differing sexualities. But at the same time, I could find child porn on the same 'Net with a minimum use of my search skills. The revelation that more of our neighbours are queer than we would have thought 20 years ago can be shocking or liberating to us; but it is also clear that all but the most bull-headed will ultimately come to at least grudgingly accept it. The parade of revelations of children who are being abused by teachers in boarding schools or by other trusted adults is shocking and upsetting. It is tempting to link these discoveries, but that is poor analysis. When victims of child sexual abuse came forward 20 years ago, the cloud of repression -- the overwhelming desire to pretend their is no deviation from the norm -- halted any investigation or action. Now, these former children and ones who are currently experiencing abuse have a chance of being heard.
...Precisely because we are talking about sexuality and looking at it square in the eye.
(Note: I accidentally typed "Sexualites" instead of "Sexualities" at one point. I like this new word. It sounds like those who attend thrilling parties featuring canapés, fine cocktails and strategically placed lube dispensers.)
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2004-10-09 02:23 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-10-10 07:40 am (UTC)It is much the same way for me when I see the phrases "black", "african-american", etc. Even though I would prefer to live in ignorant bliss, I recognise that I need to aware of - not victimised by - the fact that when I walk into a room, people's impression of my race, sexuality, religious beliefs, etc walk in their with me. So I really see it as my continual aspiration that where the assumptions are incorrect (whether they are positive or negative) that I correct them in words if necessary, but always in actions.
Sorry I got a bit off topic, but your post really hit home...
no subject
Date: 2004-10-13 08:37 am (UTC)I am writing a black character in a story now who handles racism by ignoring it and rising over it on a cloud mental helium. He refuses to see. That couldn't be me and I don't think it serves him in the long run; but I sort of envy him.