ABoT Vote Nowurbatulsaclassifiedsbutton
  TULSA METRO'S ONLY INDEPENDENT NEWSWEEKLY
UTW Reader Comments  |  Has Something Made You Mad? Tell Us!    
Home » Columns » Rant 'N' Rall
  RSS XML

Sexual Freedom: the Next Frontier

No one should be judged because of how they have sex


BY TED RALL

If slavery was America's original sin, Puritanism was its original curse.

In recent years the United States has made significant strides towards greater equality and freedom. Racism, sexism and other forms of bigotry have been significantly curtailed by new laws and cultural education. But we still have work to do. Four centuries after people so uptight they couldn't get along with the British invaded the New World, however, the United States remains one of the most sexually repressed Western countries.

It is not good for us.

"If expression of sexuality is thwarted, Christopher Ryan wrote in Psychology Today last year, "the human psyche tends to grow twisted into grotesque, enraged perversions of desire. Unfortunately, the distorted rage resulting from sexual repression rarely takes the form of rebellion against the people and institutions behind the repression."

In other words, mean parents, churches and right-wing politicians.

"Instead," Ryan observed, "the rage is generally directed at helpless victims who are sacrificed to the sick gods of guilt, shame, and ignorant pride."

Like, for example, gays. Fourteen states still had sodomy laws on the books by the time the Supreme Court invalidated them in 2003.

And the occasional politician.

Former New York Congressman Anthony Weiner is the most recent in a long line of elected representatives to step down because of a "sex scandal."

I use scare quotes here for a simple reason: Sexual expression should never result in a scandal.

It's been more than a week since Weiner resigned after getting caught sexting naughty pictures of himself to women via Twitter. Weiner was a liberal, so ideology wasn't at issue.

Most of the Democrats I talked to had the same weird take on Weiner. They weren't offended. Not personally. They themselves didn't think he had done anything immoral, or illegal, or that he had betrayed his constituents. They didn't care.

They questioned Rep. Weiner's judgment. Didn't he know he might get caught, and what would happen if he did?

What Weiner did wasn't bad, at least not bad enough to warrant resignation or impeachment.

To most Democrats, including the House leadership, Weiner's mistake was tactical -- his failure to anticipate the outrage of other people that reflected lousy judgment -- a personality flaw that required him to fall on his (much photographed) sword.

They didn't care what he did. They didn't like Weiner's failure to be discreet.

It is time -- well past time -- that we Americans grew up.

No one, not even a politician, should be pressured to resign because of sex.

Even when they're a hypocrite.

Perhaps like you, I snorted when Larry Craig, the anti-gay Idaho senator was arrested (and plead guilty to) cruising a men's room with his "wide stance." Here was a right-wing Republican who opposed gay marriage, allowing gays to get domestic-partner benefits, or even banning employment discrimination against gays, cruising for hunky tail at the Minneapolis airport.

"Let me be clear: I am not gay. I never have been gay," he told a press conference.

Fun stuff. And hardly the first time a gaybasher got caught with his, um, you know, in a, well, um, nevermind.

Miraculously, Craig got to finish his term. But his political career is over.

Looking back on Senator Craig now, however, I think we progressives missed a teachable moment.

Rather than ridicule the man, we ought to have defended him as a victim of an unjust law. In the 21st century, why should anyone go to jail for soliciting consensual sex?

Also, we should have exploited Craig's predicament as an opportunity to create a dialogue with him, to ask that, given his own status as a gay or bisexual (he was married) American, he reconsider his antigay politics.

One day, I hope, we will live in a nation where another person's sexual expression is no one's business but theirs and their sexual partners. We will be allowed to do whatever we want with whomever we want, as long as what we do is with a consenting adult.

Even if we take pictures and post them online.

-(Ted Rall is the author of "The Anti-American Manifesto." His website is tedrall.com.)


Share this article:
 
Google Bookmarks  digg  Del.icio.us  reddit  Yahoo My Web  Newsvine  MySpace 

COMMENTS
4 comments posted for this article
ProfMike
 7/ 1/2011 - 11:19am
   I completely agree in entirely equal rights for LGBT persons.
   
   However, asserting that "Sexual expression should never result in a scandal" reveals just how vacuous the Left has become on cultural issues, how deconstruction continues to take its toll on society. If it can never be scandalous for, say, an elected official or company executive to engage in group sex with six cheerleaders who are not his wife -- then why would one also advocate for gay marriage? Marriage then has no meaning because any sense of ethical or moral association with marriage has been stripped away and it becomes entirely a matter of paperwork to ensure maximum benefits. Of course, maximum "benefits" pretty much characterizes the self indulgent realism of modern progressivism anyway I suppose.
   
   I know this is anathema to the Left, but being a person of good character is not a weakness. Likewise the scary fact that none of Ted's wacky lefty friends think there was "anything" remotely questionable about sending dick pics to strange teenage girls across the country is more revealing about the nihilist nature of the diseased cells eating away at Western Civilization and helping summon the coming new monarchy of the elites.
   
   Equal rights is a moral issue. Sneering at the entire concept of "morality" is self-defeating. When more and more Christians do welcome gay rights, it will be because the essence of their faith commands tolerance and brotherly love. It's a shame that committed reactionary deconstructionists like Ted and his ilk, are only interested in advancing the cause as a way to express their hatred and condescension toward any and all people who believe in a power higher than politics.
Report this comment
toddkreigh
 6/30/2011 - 12:27pm
   You read a lot today about same-sex marriage and the fight to legislate its approval via Rule of Law. What I don’t understand, is what does Rule of Law have to do with it anyway? Couples of all stripes, same sex or otherwise, are going to cohabitate regardless of what the law says. Sure, there are laws still on the books that prohibit cohabitation of unmarried couples, but they haven’t been enforced in, oh, about a hundred years, and only spottily so even then. Yet still, the gay marriage proponents - who ordinarily laugh at hoary old Rule of Law - continue to lust after a rubber-stamp approval from it on this particular issue, as if it matters. It doesn’t.
   
   Wouldn’t it make more sense to – as Ron Paul suggests - divorce (chuckle) marriage from state sanction, and leave it solely up to the religious bodies? Those like-minded individuals who seek affirmation for their union could still be sanctioned by the religious institution of their choice, i.e., a church, synagogue, or temple, etc.
   
   It would take the political pathos out of the equation. The only real problem I see is the state is cheated out of its licensing fees. I guess they could make up for it by arbitrarily raising some other fine or fee. They excel at that.
   
    Bada-bing. Everyone wins.
Report this comment
hullZ
 6/29/2011 - 6:20pm
   Found it. It's in the Blogs titled "Sex at Dawn Exploring the Evolutionary Origins of Modern Sexuality"
Report this comment
hullZ
 6/29/2011 - 6:16pm
   I would like to comment on this article but would first like to read the Christopher Ryan article you refer to. Can you provide the month it appeared in PT?
   
   HullZ
Report this comment

Post a comment




MORE BY TED RALL
Investigating the Investigations
IRS targeting: scandal. CIA targeting: business as usual [May 22, 2013]
War and Wordplay
Not-so-secret "secret bombings" [May 15, 2013]
Why Closing Guantánamo is Easy
Obama doesn't need Congress, he needs Travelocity [May 8, 2013]
My Profile | My Settings

Subscriptions Available at $124/yr.

Please allow 4-6 weeks for processing. No refunds are issued. Back issues are available for $10/copy.

We accept Visa, M/C, checks and money orders. Call to charge by phone 918-592-5550. Enter your contact information in the form below and we will contact you.

If ordering by mail, make checks and money orders payable to Urban Tulsa Weekly. Send your payment along with your complete postal delivery address to Urban Tulsa Weekly, Attn: Samantha, PO Box 50499, Tulsa, OK 74150

Name:
Address:
Address2:
City:
State:
Zip Code:
Email:
Phone:
Comments:

 

Urban Tulsa Weekly
1924 E. 6th St.
Tulsa OK 74104
Phone: (918) 592-5550
Fax: (918) 592-5970
e-mail: Subscriptions

Powered by Gyrosite © Copyright 2013, Urban Tulsa Weekly   RSS