BklynMagus wrote:
>Dear List:
>
>Mike writes:
>
>
>
>>S&M is a human product, a product of class
>>
>>
>society.
>
>SM is a human product, born of desires hardwired
>into people.
>
>Your post sounds like an old, 1950's rant against
>homosexuality with sm substituted for queerness.
>I guess sexual reactionaries never die, they just
>change their targets.
>
Who you have sex with (male or female) is different from what you do
during sex. It could be argued that taking a shit on someone as a sexual
act, is actually not a sexual act, but a confusion/a fixation. But then
a person making that judgement would be a sexual reactionnary and not
worth listening to.
>In a general sense it was described by Hegel in
>
>
>the Lordship and Bondsman section of the
>Phenomenology of the Spirit.
>
>As far as looking to Hegel for insight, his ideas
>about Africans tells you what you need to know:
>
>"The peculiarly African character is difficult to
>comprehend, for the very reason that in reference
>to it, we must give up the principle which naturally
>accompanies all our ideas the category of
>Universality."
>
Just because Hegel was wrong about the African character doesn't mean he
was wrong about everything. Most would agree that his master/slave
discussion was insightful, even brilliant.
>Desire resides in people's
>genetic make-up. We are human beings with sexual
>natures. We cannot control the arising of desire (actually
>we can, but that is very advanced Buddhism), but we
>can structure its manifestation. (I guess I am a
>proceduralist after all -- in sexual matters at least. LOL).
>
No one is disputing the reality of desire -- we are suggesting that its
manifestations can be culturally controlled. For example, the desire of
a male to have sex with a woman whose vagina has been sewn shut is
culturally conditioned.The desire of a man for a virgin is culturally
conditioned. Some are arguing that S/M is similarly conditioned.
Joanna