My greatest fear in doing the posts on sex and morality (here and here) is that some people will assume I have become judgmental, faulting those who do not live up to an idealistic vision of sexual expression. Were I to be that person, I would have to be critical of the behavior of most of my friends (at one point of another in their lives) and even myself. For not only have we all (well, most of us, including yours truly) failed to live up to our ideals, but we have also had to learn by trial and error what works best for us.
My point in doing the posts was to stimulate discussion. As anyone has learned who has tried to understand his sexuality, it is a very complicated issue, one for which the morality of right and wrong only has limited usefulness. There are clearly things which are wrong (i.e., sleeping with a man in a committed relationship), but on most issues, we have to stumble around in the dark before we find what is right for us.
On both threads, there has been some serious conversation and, alas, some who would rather fault this blog for its political leanings than address this non-political topic which, I believe, all gay men (indeed, all men and all women) should consider. And should consider in a thoughtful manner. For just as there are many Republicans, including some of our readers, who do have (and live) a moral vision of their sexuality, there are numerous Democrats (and others on the left) also committed to such a lifestyle.
This is not a political issue. And let me repeat, the morality I propose is not judgmental, but rather transformational — or perhaps inspirational — reminding us to see our sexuality in a context that transcends its carnal aspects.
At the same time, I draw readers’ attention to a comment a reader made to my first post on the topic:
horniness can be analogous to pain we feel the need to do something (i.e., masturbate or have sex) just to cease the “pain” in our brain. (Is this why we call an orgasm a “release”?) Of course, that doesn’t excuse us from behaving irresponsibly to others and ourselves.
We all need to understand that many of us see (or have seen) sex as a means to feel less alone, to connect, if just for a moment, with another human being.
The basic reason I have been writing these posts is not because I have the answers, but because I believe the questions are important ones, ones which all of us, gay and straight alike, should address so that we might better understand ourselves and live more meaningful lives.
Dan said:
Why? I mean, why be afraid of that? Those people will assume you’ve become “judgmental” anyway – just because you’ve dared to speak the M-word. (morality) – Not much you can do.
And not much one should want to do, in my book. If people can’t listen or contribute intelligently in a discussion that uses the M-word, let them remove themselves, or shriek like children.
Again, what’s the real problem? There’s critical in the sense of condemnatory and hostile, and there’s critical in the sense of simply recognizing “what is so”. (That the food isn’t really that grand; that someone has fallen short; etc.) The people who would freak out over the latter type of criticism are, again, probably beyond your help (or not your problem).
As you said in another post: The purpose of morality is to increase happiness. Permit me to explore that a bit.
By referring to and applying moral principles, we spare ourselves and others some terrible mistakes – or at least having to re-invent the moral wheel in every situation. And what is morally RIGHT means: what serves justice on all involved (both oneself and others).
I guess I can’t see what kind of morality there could be except “the morality of right and wrong”; or (again) what is wrong with applying it in every life situation. Sex would, if anything, be one of the areas where it is needed the most.
I think you’re objecting to people who “do” morality (1) based on rules rather than principles, and (2) with a spirit of condemnation. Such people mis-apply or mis-use morality. Their so-called “morality” has limited usefulness indeed – because it’s so bad; such a pale copy of true morality.
Dan quoted another commentor:
Or so gay men claim, an awful lot. Permit me to tell the truth here: It’s rubbish. We – and I mean everybody; human beings universally – have sex because it FEELS GOOD. (Alternate words: for the rush… the fun… the pleasure.) The rest of our “reasons” are basically rationalizations.
“I had to do it because I’m SO HORNY” is a top one for men. Both in my own past usage and in every instance I’ve ever encountered of another person saying it, just an excuse. Usually, an excuse for going ahead and doing what we know we shouldn’t; something we know we probably won’t be feeling good about, after the sexual high has passed (and if we don’t immediately turn to another high).
While I don’t agree with all of Calarato’s points, I do think he makes a good pint when he faults those who “do” a morality based on rules rather than principles and with a spirit of condemnation. Yes, that is a pale copy of the true morality.
“the morality I propose is not judgmental, but rather transformational — or perhaps inspirational — reminding us to see our sexuality in a context that transcends its carnal aspects.”
I’ve been unable to reach this level of spirituality with sexuality thus far, but maybe I just haven’t tried hard enough. I hope it happens for me someday (finding a compatible bf to transcend with would be a good start 😉
Excellent posts, GPW. All 3 of em.
I’m probably one of the most conservative voices in your peanut gallery… when it comes to sex, i’m pretty much slutty.
I think Calarato makes a number of good points. In fact, one of the things that has always bothered me about the activist gay left is it whines about the stereotypes that religious conservatives and likeminded folk use in their critiques and condemnations of gay life, but those same gay activists refuse to judge or condemn extreme or dangerous behavior–the sort of behavior which usually informs the cultural conservative critiques. To the casual observer, the gay world is filled with drug addicts and alcoholics and rampant promiscuity. And the sad truth is that a lot of those things are true. But rather than denounce those choices as irresponsible or unwise, they refuse to judge, and instead excuse or enable them. I once had a guy tell me that he was promiscuous (the whore of babylon, he called himself) because gay people can’t be legally married in our state. And I thought (but didn’t say): what sort of crappy excuse is that? Part of what it means to have self-respect is, in the words of Joan Didion, “knowing the cost of things.” That is to say, if you choose to engage in risky sex or to be promiscuous, you don’t excuse it or say it is unfair when someone judges you for that behavior. So do you need to shy away from sounding judgemental? I hardly think so.
Vince P – with respect, you might want to clean that up at some point. Depending on what you’re talking about, it might be bad karma – cause different health risks, not just HIV – affect your self-respect in ways you don’t realize – etc.
I put some thought about what moral principles are important to me, in my love life.
(1) I don’t cheat.
(2) I don’t help others cheat.
(3) I don’t give myself away to the hoipolloi.
Trust me, knowing one’s principles (or having defined / stated them in advance) makes them easier to keep. 😉
In applying my principles, I did come up with a behavioral rule: I don’t have sex with strangers. “Friends first.”
Fortunately, that still leaves room to have a love life with true friends – or better yet, a boyfriend. There may be times when I still “get more” than the average heterosexual is used to. And, there are other definite times when I go without. The latter is called “self restraint”, and I find it’s worth it because it leads to authentic moral pride (something the Gay Left ideology denigrates) and self-respect.
I think what troubles many gay men is that they know that it is sex that initially brings us together and some reach a point when they are forced to confront whether sex is all there is to being a gay man. While some may be content with that possibility, others often struggle for something more.
This is where the suspension of judgement comes in. Who am I to dictate to someone else how to live their life? I basically had my fun and managed to get through my horny formative years relatively unscathed. Even more importantly, I learned important lessons about myself, my fellow gay men, and morality, and developed a network of true friends that sustains me to this day. Therefore, I truly resent the reductionist definition of morality and the single-minded focus on gay marriage.
Casual sex definitely suited me and also happened to teach me a lot about myself and my community, so I don’t feel I have to apologize or explain myself to some overriding idea that some marriage and monogamy alone equal morality. That may not satisfy those who have some burning need to have some one-size-fits-all morality imposed upon all mankind, but it’s not my responsibilty to appease their kind.
Right on, Kurt.
If there’s one thing the example of innumerable heterosexual couples should show us, it’s that the value of marriage is significantly overrated in terms of “calming down” those people who couldn’t stop playing mattress bingo BEFORE they were married.
As I cited, the scientists have pointed out to us that HIV doesn’t spread well in cultures and societies that value monogamy and sexual restraint; it goes like wildfire in cultures that emphasize promiscuity, multiple partners, and lack of restraint.
What does that tell us about gay men?
It tell us that gay men are missing in their relationships that Heteros have… women.
Well, not quite, Vince; as I mentioned previously, the scientists tell us that it’s less the gender than it is the practice. True, women do bring a different dynamic to the situation, but in African countries in which both genders have multiple sex partners on a regular basis, HIV spreads just as easily and quickly there as it does among gays.
Sexual restraint and smarts aren’t gender-specific.
This blog has one of a few leading the charge on behalf of Matt Sanchez. You’ve done it solely for politican reasons, and that had led you to censor those who see right through your act. In any case, the Marine Corps is now reviewing his enlistment contract, and I predict that your hero isn’t going to last very long under that scrutiny.
[Um, Willy, you’re the one who brought up Matt Sanchez on this thread. I didn’t even mention him in the post. Why is it that you’re so obsessed with the guy? –Dan]
Find yourselves a few boy.
Correction: “… political reasons.”
Oh geez, another correction: “Find yourselves a new boy.”
Willy, i think most of us have moved on. you’re the one obssessed about it.
You know, it’s amazing to me how judgmental people are about gay men – still – after almost three decades of HIV. There is this perception that we are all running around having sex with each other – when the reality is – most gay men are not attracted to each other. In fact, we probably have sex less than anyone else, simply because of numbers. There just aren’t enough of us to go around for a good matchup. And because males have to have some sort of physical chemistry with each other for sex to ‘work’ – you can’t fake that. It’s either there or it’s not. So while there is the desire to have sex, for many gay men, it happens much less frequently than people would like to believe.
[Edited] I mean, at least gay people don’t create out-of-wedlock babies [edited], yet gays are still open targets who need to be kept on a leash – and hey, we deserve to be treated like dirt because we are white, we are perceived to have money and we are envied because most of us don’t have kids – making it okay to attack us.
Amazing how screwed up this society is.
Is your first paragraph a form of very well hidden satire?
Dan, another good post on this topic. And you gone out of the way to be nonjudgmental here.
Calarato, I agree with most of your points. One of my rules (or principles) has always been to not have sex with anyone I have just met. At the very least, I waited until a future meeting to do so. So yes, they would still be strangers the second time around. But I figure is someone is willing to put an effort to make a date or something, then some of the risks are much lower. But I don’t think I could have sex with friends. I have no problem in having a friendship to a relationship if it’s in the cards. I would be afraid of things turning icky with a friend if we have sex, and then just remain friends afterwards.
That is a joke, right? (A satire, as Vince pointed out.)
I could be having sex within 75 minutes from right now, if I wanted. (Up from 45 minutes when I was in my thirties.) I won’t. But many, many do.
Gay sex columnist Dan Savage has basically said: let’s be honest… you can always find monks or sluts in any gender or sexual orientation… but, on average, gay men really do have more sex. ON AVERAGE. And, put more time into getting skilled at it. And are better at it.
Well Jonathan… as long as we’re lying or engaging in satire, why not throw some limiting / false racial stereotypes in there as well? (Ugh.)
Thanks Pat 😉 And likewise, I’m on the same page with what you said.
I do want to correct something I said. I said there’s 1 basic reason we want sex (or have it), which is, to feel good. On reflection, I want to note a second reason: people have it to avoid loneliness. OK, 2 basic reasons. The rest after that, is rationalization. By the way, I DON’T mean that as criticism… only trying to “bottom-line” things. Healthy people do seek pleasure (and to not be alone). Nothing wrong in it. The question of “right and wrong” only enters in how one chooses to go about it.