From: natashavita@earthlink.net
Date: Wed Jul 17 2002 - 15:54:33 MDT
From: Samantha Atkins
natashavita@earthlink.net wrote:
>> However fuzzy it is becoming, our species is currently distinguished by
>> genders (. Being anti-sex would be against not just both genders, but
any
>> gender.
>Gender always was more "fuzzy" than most people usually assume.<
Televised documentaries have been covering this subject for the past few
years. Finally people are learning more and more about the areas of sex,
sexuality, gender, gender identification, etc. And, it has been very
liberating for people who were reassigned gender at birth or left with both
sex organs, etc. When I gave a talk on the "Future of Sexuality," I learned
a lot and realized that there is still much yet to learn. Even the experts
on the subject disagree in about reconstructive surgery and psychological
engineering. But it is not just the "at birth" sitations. Gender
reassignment, in both sex organ reassignment and also gender identity,
happens at full maturity. While one day we may be able to redirect sexual
energy from our genitals to our brains for later use, refocus, reassignment
or immediate creative juice, it is left to conjecture as to whether the
fuzzinness will be an added advantage for the unknown-arousal of the
directed application for the electrical charge.
>>While I see numerous gender possibilities in the future, the fact
>>that gender does have relevance to who we are is consequential. So, if
you
>>want no gender ("non-gender") this would be fine, but would still be
>>described as a type of gender. If you wanted to be cross-gender or
>>multi-gender, this also would be an individual choice. But I don't see
>>great value in being "anti-sex", unless it is for socio-political stance
>>and that would have to have some relevance to extropian or
>>extreme-longevity values, or at least rebel-rousing.
>Sex and gender are nearly orthogonal.<
This depends on what a person means by "sex". In this context, there is
reference to the sexual act, genitalia and behavioral identification.
Inasmuch, sex is not statistically independent. This is a problem I had
with the thread. Some folks are talking about the act of sex and others
are talking about gender, and yet others are talking about organs.
>Being asexual or sexual
in various ways says little or nothing about what gender[s] (if
any) one sees oneself as. To over-simplify, sex is about who
one goes to bed with (or if one does), gender is about how one
sees oneself - who one goes to bed as.<
Not necessarily. Being asexual or sexual has to do with an interest or
proclivity for sexual activity. Being sexual also has to do with your
gender identification and differentiation. Sex has to do with "behavioral,
cultural, or psychological traits typically associated with one sex."
Further, what sex are you has to do with your genitals; and what sex are
you can have to do with what you want to be - male or female. In today's
redefintion of words, it's best to clarify what one means by sex, sexual,
etc.
>>Even if sex got in the way of a creative process or professional
>>commitment, the sidetrack is not that offensive or overtly distracting.
>>How many hours are in a day? Most people don't have sex every day of the
>>week, but if so - take a 20-minute break or have a quick fix. It's not
>>that messy. This is not to diminish a person's wanting to do away with
sex
>>because of a personal desire not to be bogged down with all the hoopla
>>about sex. Sometimes it is overwhelming and smacks of an "in your face"
>>theater. Sometimes it might seem as if we could accomplish more without
>>having to be bothered by the insistence of sex. But being anti-sex would
>>probably take just as much effort.
>The sex itself is the least complicated part of it. All the
attendant hooks, complications, anxieties, expectations,
seeking, avoiding and so on are much more complex and can color
(and apparently do for most people) much of life. Just letting
go of the entire business now and then can be quite liberating.<
Going on a sex fast can be liberating. Going on a food fast can be
liberating. It's been a healthy experience for me over my life.
>>The only part of "anti-sex" I think I stumble over is the "anti" part.
>>Being non-sexual, asexual, <-sex, or zero-sex is sexier.
>Fair enough.<
You agree? Alright Samantha!
I'd like to hear Mike Perry's views on this.
Natasha
--------------------------------------------------------------------
mail2web - Check your email from the web at
http://mail2web.com/ .
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 09:15:31 MST