Merely as opposed to necessary for social engineering.
And far from supid, but thanks.
Thatās awesome.
Yeah, my apologies. ā¦for what itās worth. But donāt think for a minute things are going to change.
I have never understood āinnocenceā as used in this sort of context. To me it sounds completely prejudiced because I think of it as a pole in a continuum with āguiltā. With the implication being a person would be considered innocent of an act or idea because it was agreed that there was something obviously wrong about it. In reference to sexuality, I think this promotes ideas of unhealthy sex. It suggests that sexuality is mostly a thing of harm and shame, with maybe a few incidental merits. This also makes defining of what family and sex are supposed to be a form of social control and coercion - and I think that is the real reason why people are conditioned to not be open about it. Why these aspects of life are rife with judgements and edicts coming from governments and religions who supposedly have nothing to do with my sex life in the first place. If my incentive for internalizing your notions of āchastityā is not being shamed, well, thatās a rather weak argument and justification for how you think I should live!
In my world, the only āsinā is ignorance. And, unfortunately, much of what people refer to euphemistically as the āinnocenceā of children sounds rather close to ignorance, as I understand it. Nobody makes people become sexual! Peopleās own bodies and minds do it themselves, even with no media or people present. Perhaps this is what makes it unsettling to some.
To throw a bone (va-va-voom) to the prudes, I agree that people benefit from exercising self-discipline. But the problem is that people deciding what a personās or groupās discipline should be is a function of ideology. A person can live with rigorous discipline but still not share your values, and it is disingenuous to claim otherwise. The implications often seem to be āIf you donāt share my values on sexuality, you are obviously unethical and uncivilizedā, which is bogus on several levels.
2 Likes
I understand your duality and the inference regarding guilt as the alternative to innocence.
Mcluhan stated many times, that as communication media sped up, we would lose the idea of family and return to the tribal village, where concepts such as privacy and shame would evaporate.
Such is the shock of the new to those of us old enough to remember privacy.
It is interesting how the new battle is for digital privacy.
This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.
