>I am not talking about public discussions
>about rights of 'sexual minorities' (or whatever you want to call them) to
>practice whatever form of sex they consent to, or not having their rights
>curtailed because of their sexual practices or orientation, or having the
>same civil rights as everyone else, or for that matter the meaning of
>"consent to have sex." I am talking about using sex for its shock value
It's not easy to separate these out. Shock value can be very useful in creating conditions for discussion. It can also be banal, but that's a different issue.