Letters To America - The One With All The Sex
Dear America,
What the hell is it with you and sex? You've got this really weird dichotomy going here where you're madonna and whore all at once. In the US, sex is an obsession. In the rest of the world, it's a fact.
I can still remember the furore caused by Janet Jackson flashing a boob on national TV. It was weird, totally out of proportion to the actual incident. Here in England, we've had topless women in the pages of newspapers for thirty-odd years, newpapers anyone can buy. These days, it's somewhat fallen out of fashion and only one tabloid still has the Page-3 girl (and these days, they have a Page-7 guy too) but over there, a pop star flashes a boob and the world's coming to an end. It's surreal. You have this culture where hardcore porn is legal (we only legalised it a few years ago) but sex itself is somehow still verboten.
Somehow, you've gone from the country that had Deep Throat on general release to the country where sex is frowned upon. You've got schools pushing abstinence only sex-ed. I can even kind-of follow this one. The proponants argue that abstinence preserves sexual health, prevents pregnancy, encourages self-respect and so on and it's true. Abstinence does all of those things. Abstinence-only sex-ed, on the other hand, does none of them. Here's the FYI guys: Teenagers are going to fuck and, short of chaining them to the dinner table, there is absolutely nothing you can do to stop them. Doesn't matter whether you tell them abstinence is cool, God will love them for it or their balls will drop off after their first shag, they're going to have sex and nothing you say or do is going to stop that. True fact: the kids who actually listen to the abstinence ed are the ones who weren't going to have sex anyway. Some people just don't want to fuck until they get older and hey, that's fine. No-one ever said you had to have sex and part of being sexually aware is being able to judge, honestly and without pressure, if you're actually ready for it. But America, what this bullshit about sex ed somehow "encouraging" teens to shag? Dunno if you know this America but it's only in the last few hundred years that teens haven't been fucking. Go back a couple hundred years and it was pretty common for first-time mothers to be still teenagers. Hell, there's still at least one state in the US where you can get married at twelve. Teenagers don't need any encouragement to shag, they've got all the encouragement they could need flooding through them already. Encouraging them would be a little like offering to buy a Catholic priest a drink: What the hell would be the point?
See, to a Brit, the American attitude to sex is baffling. Here, sex is just not a big deal. You can buy a pack of rubbers from the vending machine in most public lavatories and get them free on the NHS. You get birth control pills free on the NHS. Most people lose their virginity at around sixteen (which is the legal limit), are glad to be rid of it and, beyond the odd check that rubbers are being used, no-one really bothers about it but over there, you've got True Love Waits and The Silver Ring Thing and Lord knows how many other equally dumb clubs with equally ridiculous names, all to prevent people doing one of the very few things that really does come entirely naturally. I mean, I know why, it's because you're crazily religious but to someone from a culture where sex isn't viewed as a necessary evil, it's truly surreal. I can walk into a doctor's office, pick up a card by the door, hand it to the receptionist and get handed a bag of about a dozen assorted rubbers, no questions asked. Over there....?
Y'know America, it's saying something when the fanatics want people to die for having sex. A while back, some bunch of scientists (who would be awarded medals in a just world) discovered a vacination for cervical cancer. Cervical cancer is triggered by a virus called HPV and HPV is a sexually transmitted virus. The Family Research Council opposes the development of the vaccine because "they may see it as a licence to engage in premarital sex". The scary thing is that these nutters actually have people who agree with them. It's a lunatic way of looking at things of course because firstly, the human mind simply doesn't work that way. A teenage girl wondering whether to shag her boyfriend does not casually think "I wonder if he's carrying the HPV virus", it just doesn't happen. Secondly, seeing as males can carry and transmit the virus with no effect to themselves at all, what happens if the FRC gets it's way and teh vaccine isn't developed? I'll tell you: Lots of teenagers marry, don't use rubbers and get the HPV virus because facts are facts, you are not going to stop teenagers having it off. Really, you do have to wonder if this bullshit isn't just an excuse to punish sex. I mean, these are the people who impeached Clinton just because he got a blowjob.
I'm not even going to get into the abortion arguement...
And then there's gay people. Over here, being gay is, for the most part, not an issue. OK, you're liable to get beaten up if you're obviously queer and in the wrong neighbourhood at the wrong time and that's bad but bloody hell America, have you looked at yourself lately? A bunch of your states recently enacted legislation purely to prevent gay people from getting married. What the fuck? So let me get this straight: Gay sex is a bad thing but allowing gay people to marry, leading to less promiscuity (and if gay marriage works the same way as hetero marriage, less sex) is also a bad thing? Pre-marital sex is bad but gays shouldn't be allowed to marry and are therefore forced to have pre-marital sex their whole lives? Talk about Southern logic. You've got a good portion of the country that would like homosexuality placed back on the DSM-IV list of mental illnesses, you've got Fred (*spit*) Phelps wandering across the country with his carnival of incitement, you've got ex-gay ministries for fuck's sake. And people actually believe this bullshit, lots of people. Sometimes America, I think that's your big problem: You've got so many people in the country that lunatics who'd just be a background noise here actually have the numbers to make themselves a political force. And then, when Bush was asked about gay people during the presidential debates, the first words out of his mouth were "well, we're all sinners". Evidently, the first thing that comes to Bush's mind when he thinks of gay people is the word "sin". Sometimes I think I should lay off Bush just because it's too easy a target, it's kind of like swatting flies with a Buick but when he comes out with shit like this, you have to wonder if he's drinking that booze or taking it on IV ("No Mr. President, the bag of bourbon isn't empty yet") because this says to me that here is a man who has no interest whatsoever in treating gay people as a normal part of life.
Some time ago, I can remember getting into an arguement with an American because he thought that if gay marriage was legalised, gay people would be allowed to come into schools, kids would get the message that being gay was acceptable. I can remember sitting there scratching my head and thinking "and the problem is...?". Even in the parts of the country where gay people are somewhat better treated, it's still called "tolerance" and that's bullshit. Gay people shouldn't be tolerated. "Tolerance" is what you call it when you think something is bad but choose to put up with it anyway, "tolerance" can kiss my tungas. Anything less than full and total acceptance is still treating gay people as something less than straights, it's still dividing the country into us and them, normal and not normal and how far is it from "not normal" to "not really human" and how far is it from "not really human" to Matthew Shephard crucified on a fence post? In a way, the lack of acceptance is the fault of gay people themselves. No, not for pushing too hard for "tolerance", for not pushing hard enough. I mean, gay people are trying to win their rights through lawsuits and court battles and public opinion and that's very civilised, that's very enlightened but fact is, we're used to thinking of a civil rights struggle as involving huge marches and charismatic speakers. On some level, we still think of a right as something that has to be torn from the bloodied fist of an oppressor, not argued for by people in suits. We're expecting Malcolm X, not A Few Good Men. Forget the lawsuit, let's have some fucking riots! Forget the suit, let's march up Pensylvania Avenue and spraypaint a pink triangle on the wall of the Whitehouse! You want to get antsy about having a gay character on a kid's TV show? Fine, let's put an openly gay character on every show (and they have to be sexually active too, none of this bullshit gay celibacy stuff), let's have RuPaul presenting the news, let's have Ellen DeGeneres doing play-by-play on every football game, let's bring Quintin Crisp back from the fucking dead to teach your kids English Lit. Let's make them sorry they ever mentioned the subject. I mean, what's next? Are we gonna start seeing episodes of Sally Jesse based around "My husband likes to slide his cock up my asshole during sex"? Because that's how it's getting. Voyeurism and condemnation all at the same time, all the little thrill of listening without having to admit you're getting a kick out of it.
In [whoever]'s name America, sex does not have to be this complicated. If you like getting butt-fucked by gangs of burly bikers, just remember to take lube, rubbers and cab fare. It's sex, not a space shuttle launch. For the sake of my sanity America, go out, find a nice girl or guy and just get laid already.
What the hell is it with you and sex? You've got this really weird dichotomy going here where you're madonna and whore all at once. In the US, sex is an obsession. In the rest of the world, it's a fact.
I can still remember the furore caused by Janet Jackson flashing a boob on national TV. It was weird, totally out of proportion to the actual incident. Here in England, we've had topless women in the pages of newspapers for thirty-odd years, newpapers anyone can buy. These days, it's somewhat fallen out of fashion and only one tabloid still has the Page-3 girl (and these days, they have a Page-7 guy too) but over there, a pop star flashes a boob and the world's coming to an end. It's surreal. You have this culture where hardcore porn is legal (we only legalised it a few years ago) but sex itself is somehow still verboten.
Somehow, you've gone from the country that had Deep Throat on general release to the country where sex is frowned upon. You've got schools pushing abstinence only sex-ed. I can even kind-of follow this one. The proponants argue that abstinence preserves sexual health, prevents pregnancy, encourages self-respect and so on and it's true. Abstinence does all of those things. Abstinence-only sex-ed, on the other hand, does none of them. Here's the FYI guys: Teenagers are going to fuck and, short of chaining them to the dinner table, there is absolutely nothing you can do to stop them. Doesn't matter whether you tell them abstinence is cool, God will love them for it or their balls will drop off after their first shag, they're going to have sex and nothing you say or do is going to stop that. True fact: the kids who actually listen to the abstinence ed are the ones who weren't going to have sex anyway. Some people just don't want to fuck until they get older and hey, that's fine. No-one ever said you had to have sex and part of being sexually aware is being able to judge, honestly and without pressure, if you're actually ready for it. But America, what this bullshit about sex ed somehow "encouraging" teens to shag? Dunno if you know this America but it's only in the last few hundred years that teens haven't been fucking. Go back a couple hundred years and it was pretty common for first-time mothers to be still teenagers. Hell, there's still at least one state in the US where you can get married at twelve. Teenagers don't need any encouragement to shag, they've got all the encouragement they could need flooding through them already. Encouraging them would be a little like offering to buy a Catholic priest a drink: What the hell would be the point?
See, to a Brit, the American attitude to sex is baffling. Here, sex is just not a big deal. You can buy a pack of rubbers from the vending machine in most public lavatories and get them free on the NHS. You get birth control pills free on the NHS. Most people lose their virginity at around sixteen (which is the legal limit), are glad to be rid of it and, beyond the odd check that rubbers are being used, no-one really bothers about it but over there, you've got True Love Waits and The Silver Ring Thing and Lord knows how many other equally dumb clubs with equally ridiculous names, all to prevent people doing one of the very few things that really does come entirely naturally. I mean, I know why, it's because you're crazily religious but to someone from a culture where sex isn't viewed as a necessary evil, it's truly surreal. I can walk into a doctor's office, pick up a card by the door, hand it to the receptionist and get handed a bag of about a dozen assorted rubbers, no questions asked. Over there....?
Y'know America, it's saying something when the fanatics want people to die for having sex. A while back, some bunch of scientists (who would be awarded medals in a just world) discovered a vacination for cervical cancer. Cervical cancer is triggered by a virus called HPV and HPV is a sexually transmitted virus. The Family Research Council opposes the development of the vaccine because "they may see it as a licence to engage in premarital sex". The scary thing is that these nutters actually have people who agree with them. It's a lunatic way of looking at things of course because firstly, the human mind simply doesn't work that way. A teenage girl wondering whether to shag her boyfriend does not casually think "I wonder if he's carrying the HPV virus", it just doesn't happen. Secondly, seeing as males can carry and transmit the virus with no effect to themselves at all, what happens if the FRC gets it's way and teh vaccine isn't developed? I'll tell you: Lots of teenagers marry, don't use rubbers and get the HPV virus because facts are facts, you are not going to stop teenagers having it off. Really, you do have to wonder if this bullshit isn't just an excuse to punish sex. I mean, these are the people who impeached Clinton just because he got a blowjob.
I'm not even going to get into the abortion arguement...
And then there's gay people. Over here, being gay is, for the most part, not an issue. OK, you're liable to get beaten up if you're obviously queer and in the wrong neighbourhood at the wrong time and that's bad but bloody hell America, have you looked at yourself lately? A bunch of your states recently enacted legislation purely to prevent gay people from getting married. What the fuck? So let me get this straight: Gay sex is a bad thing but allowing gay people to marry, leading to less promiscuity (and if gay marriage works the same way as hetero marriage, less sex) is also a bad thing? Pre-marital sex is bad but gays shouldn't be allowed to marry and are therefore forced to have pre-marital sex their whole lives? Talk about Southern logic. You've got a good portion of the country that would like homosexuality placed back on the DSM-IV list of mental illnesses, you've got Fred (*spit*) Phelps wandering across the country with his carnival of incitement, you've got ex-gay ministries for fuck's sake. And people actually believe this bullshit, lots of people. Sometimes America, I think that's your big problem: You've got so many people in the country that lunatics who'd just be a background noise here actually have the numbers to make themselves a political force. And then, when Bush was asked about gay people during the presidential debates, the first words out of his mouth were "well, we're all sinners". Evidently, the first thing that comes to Bush's mind when he thinks of gay people is the word "sin". Sometimes I think I should lay off Bush just because it's too easy a target, it's kind of like swatting flies with a Buick but when he comes out with shit like this, you have to wonder if he's drinking that booze or taking it on IV ("No Mr. President, the bag of bourbon isn't empty yet") because this says to me that here is a man who has no interest whatsoever in treating gay people as a normal part of life.
Some time ago, I can remember getting into an arguement with an American because he thought that if gay marriage was legalised, gay people would be allowed to come into schools, kids would get the message that being gay was acceptable. I can remember sitting there scratching my head and thinking "and the problem is...?". Even in the parts of the country where gay people are somewhat better treated, it's still called "tolerance" and that's bullshit. Gay people shouldn't be tolerated. "Tolerance" is what you call it when you think something is bad but choose to put up with it anyway, "tolerance" can kiss my tungas. Anything less than full and total acceptance is still treating gay people as something less than straights, it's still dividing the country into us and them, normal and not normal and how far is it from "not normal" to "not really human" and how far is it from "not really human" to Matthew Shephard crucified on a fence post? In a way, the lack of acceptance is the fault of gay people themselves. No, not for pushing too hard for "tolerance", for not pushing hard enough. I mean, gay people are trying to win their rights through lawsuits and court battles and public opinion and that's very civilised, that's very enlightened but fact is, we're used to thinking of a civil rights struggle as involving huge marches and charismatic speakers. On some level, we still think of a right as something that has to be torn from the bloodied fist of an oppressor, not argued for by people in suits. We're expecting Malcolm X, not A Few Good Men. Forget the lawsuit, let's have some fucking riots! Forget the suit, let's march up Pensylvania Avenue and spraypaint a pink triangle on the wall of the Whitehouse! You want to get antsy about having a gay character on a kid's TV show? Fine, let's put an openly gay character on every show (and they have to be sexually active too, none of this bullshit gay celibacy stuff), let's have RuPaul presenting the news, let's have Ellen DeGeneres doing play-by-play on every football game, let's bring Quintin Crisp back from the fucking dead to teach your kids English Lit. Let's make them sorry they ever mentioned the subject. I mean, what's next? Are we gonna start seeing episodes of Sally Jesse based around "My husband likes to slide his cock up my asshole during sex"? Because that's how it's getting. Voyeurism and condemnation all at the same time, all the little thrill of listening without having to admit you're getting a kick out of it.
In [whoever]'s name America, sex does not have to be this complicated. If you like getting butt-fucked by gangs of burly bikers, just remember to take lube, rubbers and cab fare. It's sex, not a space shuttle launch. For the sake of my sanity America, go out, find a nice girl or guy and just get laid already.
posted by The Lefty Brit | 4:12 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home