Let’s face it. I’m a mostly-normal, newly-turned 21 year old. And, as such, I do think about things like sexual jargon. Not a day goes by where my friends and I don’t crack at least one sex-related joke (the “I need to do _____” ones are quite popular). Even in reading literature, like Heart of Darkness by Joseph Conrad, and pretty much half of the poetry in existence, it is really hard to avoid sexual jargon, sexual humor and sex in general. Yes, I know our culture is quite seeped in sex, and I do not feel like spending the time analyzing that. However, it does pose the question of sex in politics and whether or not it has a place.
Last night I spent a good 30-45 minutes reading internet blogs and news sites about information having to do with sex ed in schools. Though I am no longer a high schooler, and though I did get lucky and attend a liberal school where we avoided the condoms on bananas but did talk protection rates and how they apply to correct usage in laboratories, etc, the issue is still one that I follow. For me, there is just something important about getting the knowledge of what sex is, about being able to have some control over what I choose to do with my body that I think needs to be known.
This entry could be entirely about sex ed in schools, with statistics about abstinence versus sex ed and the pregnancies that result from each method of teaching. However, as I believe Maureen Johnson did a terrific post on this subject, I will just direct you to her. Instead, forgetting about sex ed and abortion for this entry, I shall concentrate more on sex in politics– the scandals, the genders, and, most importantly, the place that sex has in the life of the United States government.
Or something like that…
With this election having two prominent females in either the front runner nominee or the Vice President seat, the sexual dehumanization of women in general has been apparent. We all have heard the talk about Hillary Clinton, and by now, most people have seen the supposed pictures of VP nominee Sarah Palin. Asides from attempting to discredit both members on sex alone, the talk and photos are insulting to women in general and, as such, have no place in the political sphere of our country even though we all know these photos/comments (albeit, with different women) will unfortunately continue for years to come.
So if sex does not belong in discrediting people from campaigns, where in politics does it belong? We all know of the scandals, of Edwards, Craig, Clinton, etc. However, I firmly believe that, despite all the gossip and outrage potential that each of these numerous scandals creates, this type of sex does not belong in the political realm of voting and public knowledge. The only reason these events are in the political sphere is because the people involved are in the political sphere. As such, unless the sexual events somehow manage to cause worry for the country’s future, what happens (sexually) should remain private.
With all of these statements about the sex that does not belong in politics, it’s hard to believe that there is sex that does belong in politics. But let’s face it: we, as humans, are generally sexual beings. As sexual beings, there is a good chance that we favor people who we find ourselves attracted to and, most of the time, there is a sexual attraction, no matter how small, behind that initial attraction. Think about movie stars: the ones you flock to see the most are, if you’re anything like some of my friends, the ones you would LOVE to screw if given the chance. Same with people you know. There has to be at least some friends you have that, while you wouldn’t necessarily sleep with, you would hug and kiss more than once in a blue moon if it was okay and there wasn’t so much of a societal stigma against it. I do think it’s generally the same way with candidates. There are some candidates who we generally like more because of the sex appeal that they– however accidental– present.
For some people, charisma and (sexual) attraction can be key in picking candidates, no matter how foolish that may seem. With the culture we live in so saturated in sex, as long as we don’t overdo it, it’s not a bad thing to incorporate some sex appeal into politics. Granted, they shouldn’t go around in minis/short shorts and tight tops, but holding some appeal would not necessarily hurt them. Eventually, things may change and sex could become more or less ingrained in our loves and in politics, and we won’t be constantly debating sex ed, abortion, contraception, and so-called-sexual-vulgarity on television. But until that day, there will always be a need for slight sexual undertones in things, including politics. We are human, after all.
