Sex and My Daughter

Since R is female, the question of her future sexual behavior seems to come up fairly regularly. Taxi drivers and other strangers give me unsolicited advice about it and other friends with girls confess they worry about their toddlers' future boyfriends. 

In a way this is totally strange as R isn't even two and has no obvious sexual impulses whatsoever. It will be years (probably ten at the minimum) before I need to think about it seriously. But I suppose it's only to be expected, because human society in general has a huge interest (you might even say obsession) with female sexuality: or more properly, the control of female sexuality. Who she dates (or doesn't date), what she wears, what sexual acts she does (or doesn't do), if she uses protection/birth control, her reproductive decisions...everyone has an opinion and is not only willing to share, but many wish to force their opinions upon her (in terms of making various laws, for example: abortion is the most controversial example but there are dozens of others). 

R will probably have sex well before marriage, with at least a few others than the one she ends up with (potentially many others), because that's what most people do. While I don't want to know the details of her future sexual explorations (whether with others or solo), I assume that she will have them in spades. That doesn't bother either B or me at all (in which we seem to be very different from most other parents). 

I would be terribly bothered by unprotected sex (which is potentially fatal) or unplanned children (which is horribly irresponsible, at least if you are very young and/or single), so I plan to discuss birth control and safe sex early and often. My grandmother took all of her daughters to the doctor at 13 to get them birth control (not because they needed it, but as a preventative), which while rather extreme, is in essence an excellent idea. 

My other major concern is about non-consensual sex (sadly a huge problem, especially for girls). R will have to be armed with a strong awareness about sexual predators, ways to avoid potentially dangerous situations (like no drinking/drug use around men you don't know well), self defense techniques, and more broadly, the ability to identify her own desires, and the strength to refuse to do anything that seems unappealing. 

Based on my own experience, most of these problems (while of course never the victim's fault) are caused largely by ignorance and low self-esteem. For some reason, most parents of girls feel so much anxiety about their children's sexuality, that they neglect to teach them much (or indeed anything) about it. My own parents, while excellent on the birth control/safe sex front, never informed me or my sister about the existence of lecherous/manipulative men, or how to avoid placing ourselves in sketchy situations (or indeed, what they were). I went out into the world not realizing that going back to a man's house after a date is actually a signal that you are sexually willing (if not necessarily for full-on vaginal intercourse, certainly for something). I don't want R to have to learn all about human sexuality (in all its various forms) the hard way, through trial and error, and while I can't teach her everything (some things must be learned through personal experience), I hope to make her far more savvy than I was. 

Knowledge is power, especially when it comes to sex.

Sexual Attitudes in Singapore

Singaporeans are very puritanical. This is strange because prostitution is legal here (and they import large numbers of "entertainers" for that purpose). In fact, there is somewhere referred to as "Four Floors of Whores". They don't have a strong religious prohibition against premarital sex or other "deviant" forms of sexual behavior either (since there isn't a dominant religion here; in fact, 17% have no religion whatsoever).

Nonetheless, standards of sexual morality are pretty high. It is uncommon to see displays of public affection (and a photo of a couple having a passionate kiss garnered a huge number of negative comments when published in the newspaper recently). Nudity is also not acceptable. Abercrombie and Fitch (the clothes company that always uses half naked men to sell their products) had an advertisement on Orchard Road (the main shopping district). It was removed after a citizens' group protested that it was immodest (and think of the children!!!). Having children out of wedlock is very disapproved of, and uncommon. Homosexuality is actually illegal (although this is not really enforced). And of course maids (and other migrant workers) are not supposed to have sex, let alone reproduce.

I think this sign is funny because it refers to sexual harassment as "outrage of modesty", which is a common phrase here (one objection to the kissing couple was that a schoolgirl was in the same train car: what an outrage to modesty!). I have not noticed that groping is a problem here (at least not like Japan!), although since I usually am carrying a baby I am not the proper demographic.

Sexless Marriages

As someone interested in marriage, I find it interesting to read about people's problems in marriage. One common problem that people complain about is sex (or rather the lack of sex). But honestly, barring unusual circumstances, having problems with sex is just a manifestation of problems with the relationship.

I know people frequently say things like their sex drives are mismatched, or they are too busy, but this is just frippery. Sex hardly ever takes longer than half an hour, especially once you've been married a while and know just what to do. Since the average American spends 4 hours a day watching TV, being too busy is hardly the problem. I agree that people can have very different sex drives, but this just means how often you, unprompted, feel like having sex. It has nothing to do with how often you can actually enjoy having sex.

An example: In normal circumstances (no one is very stressed/ill/etc.), B likes to have sex every day or every other day. In an unprompted state (ie B is not here), I want to have sex maybe 2-3 times/month. Otherwise, I don't really think of it at all. Nevertheless, we have sex 3-4 times/week, and I enjoy it very much almost every single time. This is because 1. B is very sexually considerate and 2. I like him so I like to give him pleasure and connect with him in a sexual way. If I really don't feel like I can have penetrative sex for some reason, then I give him a blow job or hand job or something like that. It is enjoyable to please him. Actually, it's a lot like B always cooking for me: he likes cooking for itself; he likes cooking for me because it pleases me; it's a way for him to show his love for me; and then we get to eat a nice meal together.

Interestingly, when B is very angry at me, he doesn't like cooking for me. He would either refuse to cook for me or would cook, but only begrudgingly, in a way that ruined it for me. We have never gone for more than a few days continuously angry at each other, but I can imagine that such a situation could easily persist for longer. He might do this to punish me or extort concessions from me, but more likely would just not feel like it due to deep-seated unhappiness and anger at me, which he may not even be fully aware of. I think that the people (usually men) who complain about sexless marriages are usually in this situation.

By this I don't mean that the one wanting sex did something really bad to the one not wanting sex, or at least not usually. I think it's more that in every relationship, both people have scorecards and give each other points or demerits for various behaviors. These points or demerits are individualized and amoral. For example, B can get points by being affectionate; telling me my behavior is ridiculous; and hanging out with my family. He does not get points for letting me decide things, even though I like this; for picking up after himself; or for financially supporting me. He gets demerits for not listening to me properly; being sad; and accidentally making noise in the morning. He does not get demerits for never buying me gifts unprompted; being cheap; and never doing housework.

So when people give advice to those in sexless marriages like "You need to help around the house more", I think they are fundamentally wrong (in B's case, this would earn no points and so would not affect my feelings towards him). Rather, the sexless one needs to figure out 1. what actions earn points and demerits and 2. make sure that they always have more points than demerits (although I think twice as many is a safer goal for avoiding problems). If you have more demerits than points, your spouse will feel deep-seated resentment towards you. And if you do not act quickly to correct your demerit/point imbalance, the resentment will continue indefinitely (and thus they will no longer want to have sex with you). Having more points than demerits is especially important since most people are irritating. Extra points lubricate everything so that you can happily ignore the more frustrating aspects of your partner: otherwise, everything they do is constantly grating at you.

The men in sexless marriages who say "But I make a good salary/help around the house/am in shape" are therefore demonstrating a fundamental cluelessness about the very important point system (since it is individualized and amoral). They need to figure out what their wives award/deduct points for and act accordingly. (This goes for women too, of course.) If they can do this, they will have as much sex as they want.

Having Sex with Men Doesn't Mean You're Gay

The current book I'm reading, Roman Homosexuality, is hilarious, despite its rather dry and academic style and its author's propensity to say things like

Yet feminist scholars like Amy Richlin have directed our focus to certain fundamental continuities in discourses of gender and sex, reminding us of the unbroken tradition of oppressive patriarchal structures in Western cultures.

Aagh, I'm dying of boredom and overdose on scholarly wankiness! Luckily I can skip over those parts.

But the book is worth reading for its very detailed description of the Romans' concept of proper masculine behavior. Apparently, a real man is willing to have sex with any type of person (as long as he's doing the penetrating), man, boy, woman or girl, who is not his social equal. Thus, having sex with any number of slave boys, adult male prostitutes or non-Roman women is socially approved and what a real macho man does, but sleeping with freeborn Romans (besides your wife) is both reprehensible and makes you an effeminate wimp.

Here's a description of Seneca's on the Roman equivalent of homosexuals:

The revolting pursuits of singing and dancing have taken hold of these effeminates; braiding their hair and thinning their voices to a feminine lilt, competing with women in bodily softness, beautifying themselves with disgusting finery--this is the pattern of our young men.

And who do these dissolutes have sex with? Other citizens (their sex is not specified, since it doesn't matter)!!! Shocking! Meanwhile, the extremely macho Galba, known for his traditional morality, nonetheless preferred sex with adult males while his rival Otho was derided for his effeminacy due partly to his heterosexual relationship with Nero's mistress Poppaea.

According to Roman morality, then while Mark Foley is a terrible person (and murdering him would be justifiable homicide on the part of the pages), Larry Craig and Mark Oaten are upstanding citizens with fine family values; Strom Thurmond did nothing wrong but Bill Clinton is an effeminate pervert, especially given his expensive haircuts, snappy dressing, and saxophone playing. In other words, he's gay but Larry Craig isn't.

It's interesting to see how different morality can be, depending on the society.

Americans liked old prostitutes

I've recently been reading several books about historical prostitution (Dangerous Pleasures by Gail Hershatter, about prostitution in 20th Century Shanghai, mostly focused on pre-Communist Takeover, and Gold Diggers and Silver Miners by Marion Goldman, on 19th Century prostitutes in Virginia City, Nevada, during the silver boom).

Of course there are many similarities between prostitutes from these very different societies: prostitutes are social outcasts, their lives are often miserable and usually end badly, the division between "respectable" women and prostitutes was not always so clear-cut, etc. The fact that has struck me most so far, though, is the age difference between the two societies' prostitutes.

For the Americans, only 6% of prostitutes are under 18 (even though the age of consent in Nevada was 14 and thus a prostitute of 16, say, would be perfectly legal). Even more surprising, 25% of prostitutes are over 35 (which at a time when average life expectancy was 40 is relatively older than it would be today). Many of the high-class prostitutes were in their thirties. In China, all of the relatively high-class prostitutes were under 20 (the average reported age was 16!) and a woman was considered "aging" and washed up if she was between 20-30.

Apparently the Chinese preferred very young girls, while Americans didn't mind aging women: in fact, they often commanded a higher price. I find this strange and unexpected (and have no idea why it is so).

Oliver Stone's Alexander

We went to see the long-anticipated (by me, anyway) movie Alexander. It seems to have gotten terrible reviews, but I was very pleased with it.. It was very historically accurate in certain respects, showing Alexander's crazy parents and his homosexuality. Actually, his homosexuality was presented in a very positive light, condoned or approved of by all the characters in the movie. Aristotle tells the young Alexander that homosexuality, done correctly, is "pure" and "a force for good" (!).

I think that many of the reviewers were just put off by this: certainly the Taiwanese audience was very disturbed during the scene in which Alexander and Hephaiston profess their love for one another. But he really was gay (or bisexual, the Greeks not really having a concept of "gay": they thought it was a little unnatural to only be attracted to one gender, whether male or female), so the movie makers deserve credit. It was also beautifully shot: I thought the battle scenes were especially impressive.