Affection and sex
The Me-Too movement, as well as the feminist moment in general, has highlighted the concern about the use of power to satisfy one’s desires or need when there is little or no concern about the needs and desires of others. The most obvious and well publicized use of power has been to satisfy the sexual need of someone in a position of power over or with someone who has less power and is thus in not in a position to refuse without serious adverse consequences. This concern is most often the treatment of males toward females but also includes the treatment of same sex persons and the treatment by some females of males.
As with any movement which attempts to address abusive behavior, it is easy to begin to question any physical affection shown to someone other than one’s spouse, romantic partner, or close relative, i.e., parent. Thus, a kiss may not be seen as just a kiss or a touch as just a touch. All touching other than a handshake or fist or elbow bumping may be suspect as sexual. Males who are engaged in certain college or professional sports may and do show a lot of physical affection for each other. Males in combat situations can also safely share physical affection.
For the most part, females on our culture have been free to exchange physical affection in public with each other without being suspected of being sexual. As women gain or assume their rightful place in the power hierarchy, even this may become suspect.
Perhaps because we males, as a group, tend to sexualize physical affection outside of sports, combat and the arts, affection between males has been highly suspect unless there a clear family connection.
Historically, Jesus and other famous teachers showed affection, including the kiss, towards others. The kiss was a sacred symbol of affection and respect. The kiss of Jesus by Judas was symbolic of the betrayal of Judas.
Sex between an adult and a child who is not considered of legal age is unacceptable in most cultures. The age of consent varies widely around the world and even in different states in the United States. In a few cultures the introduction or teaching of sex to children by adults has been ritualized and, thus, is permissible.
Sexual touch versus non-sexual touch, particularly in the United States is defined by the receiver. If the receiver or the observer experiences a show of affection as sexual then it is considered sexual no matter what the intent of the giver.
In some cultures, especially the United States, there has been a concerted effort to separate manner of dress from sexual signals. Thus, costumes which reveal most of one’s body parts including breasts, nipples, legs, mid-section which may otherwise be considered sexual are now considered as acceptable non-sexual inviting costumes. This became the case, in part, because those working to end sexual assault needed to make it clear that women are sexually abused no matter what the costume they were wearing or not wearing. This remains, however, a fussy line in the minds of some. Certainly no one deserves to be sexually assaulted and deserves the right to say no at any time or any point in the relationship regardless of their costume. Yet, one wonders about the costume which seems designed to advertise one’s sexual availability. Perhaps during any cultural transition/exploratory time this sort of vagueness is going to be present.
We humans are clearly social and sexual beings from the moment of birth. It up to each of us to set boundaries at our level of comfort or discomfort and expect those boundaries to be respected. At the same time, we may need to be more open to honoring the fact of the often thin line between abuse/harassment and the healthy show of affection between all genders without becoming so fearful and offended.
Written August 12, 2021
Jimmy F Pickett
coachpickett.org
The Me-Too movement, as well as the feminist moment in general, has highlighted the concern about the use of power to satisfy one’s desires or need when there is little or no concern about the needs and desires of others. The most obvious and well publicized use of power has been to satisfy the sexual need of someone in a position of power over or with someone who has less power and is thus in not in a position to refuse without serious adverse consequences. This concern is most often the treatment of males toward females but also includes the treatment of same sex persons and the treatment by some females of males.
As with any movement which attempts to address abusive behavior, it is easy to begin to question any physical affection shown to someone other than one’s spouse, romantic partner, or close relative, i.e., parent. Thus, a kiss may not be seen as just a kiss or a touch as just a touch. All touching other than a handshake or fist or elbow bumping may be suspect as sexual. Males who are engaged in certain college or professional sports may and do show a lot of physical affection for each other. Males in combat situations can also safely share physical affection.
For the most part, females on our culture have been free to exchange physical affection in public with each other without being suspected of being sexual. As women gain or assume their rightful place in the power hierarchy, even this may become suspect.
Perhaps because we males, as a group, tend to sexualize physical affection outside of sports, combat and the arts, affection between males has been highly suspect unless there a clear family connection.
Historically, Jesus and other famous teachers showed affection, including the kiss, towards others. The kiss was a sacred symbol of affection and respect. The kiss of Jesus by Judas was symbolic of the betrayal of Judas.
Sex between an adult and a child who is not considered of legal age is unacceptable in most cultures. The age of consent varies widely around the world and even in different states in the United States. In a few cultures the introduction or teaching of sex to children by adults has been ritualized and, thus, is permissible.
Sexual touch versus non-sexual touch, particularly in the United States is defined by the receiver. If the receiver or the observer experiences a show of affection as sexual then it is considered sexual no matter what the intent of the giver.
In some cultures, especially the United States, there has been a concerted effort to separate manner of dress from sexual signals. Thus, costumes which reveal most of one’s body parts including breasts, nipples, legs, mid-section which may otherwise be considered sexual are now considered as acceptable non-sexual inviting costumes. This became the case, in part, because those working to end sexual assault needed to make it clear that women are sexually abused no matter what the costume they were wearing or not wearing. This remains, however, a fussy line in the minds of some. Certainly no one deserves to be sexually assaulted and deserves the right to say no at any time or any point in the relationship regardless of their costume. Yet, one wonders about the costume which seems designed to advertise one’s sexual availability. Perhaps during any cultural transition/exploratory time this sort of vagueness is going to be present.
We humans are clearly social and sexual beings from the moment of birth. It up to each of us to set boundaries at our level of comfort or discomfort and expect those boundaries to be respected. At the same time, we may need to be more open to honoring the fact of the often thin line between abuse/harassment and the healthy show of affection between all genders without becoming so fearful and offended.
Written August 12, 2021
Jimmy F Pickett
coachpickett.org
RSS Feed