> joanna wrote:
>
>>
>> But this is willful misunderstanding; I was replying to something
>> Brian was saying, which I can't find now. My point was that we have
>> sex when we are romantically in love or horny and that this is
>> sufficient motive energy -- no script needed. And I drew an analogy
>> to eating when we're hungry.
>
>
> But what you're treating as "unscripted"--romantic sex--is a social
> norm! Being "in love" and having sex to express that love is a
> complex product of social and historical forces; it is not just your
> own individual, "unscripted" experience. Just as with eating, sexual
> impulses are always channelled and shaped by social and historical
> factors; there can be no "spontaneous sex" unsullied by social "scripts".
>
> Miles
First of all I did not argue only for romantic sex; I gave lust its proper due. Second, if you want to argue that we cannot escape our conditioning, you'd have to explain how it is that women are able to experience sexual pleasure despite the fact that it is sluttish to do so or how homosexuals will, under certain social/historical circumstances, risk their lives to have sex. There is conditioning and then there are also other forces, one of which is the realization that one has been conditioned.
Joanna