The next time we got together as a group was the last time. I walked away from Dom, and although we stayed in touch for a while through IM, he continued to mock me and confuse me with his vacillations about his sexual orientation. Not that his choice would make any difference to me personally, but because he had always made such a big deal out of it I just wanted to know where I stood with him.
Things fizzled out until there was no contact, and then Google reunited us when he searched for my name. We exchanged the icebreaker e-mails and I asked, in that socially phatic way, how the love life was treating him. Not missing a beat, he told me he was still with the Girlfriend. And from that point, I decided to stop caring and stop trying to understand Dom or his sexual orientation, which seemed as unpredictable as the current financial markets.
I tell this story of Dom because this first part of the essay has served as an exercise in reverse engineering, as I write to figure out why I got thinking about the self sexual. Dom may be my first observable specimen or case of the self sexual.
The title must seem strange. I guess it conjures up the image of a dedicated masturbator. But in my mind, self-sexuality is not a synonym for autosexuality, that is, pursuing sex with oneself exclusively or preferring it above any other type of sexual congress. Those I would see as self sexuals still want to seek satiating coital interaction with other individuals. It seems to me that self-sexuality should be conceptually considered as homosexuality and heterosexuality. My intention here is to expound on the term self sexual without destructive or pejorative connotations. So, this won't be a coining of another catchphrase for a new 'type' of person or phenomenon, but rather an emerging all-encompassing ideology and world-view, as valid and as pervasive as heterosexuality or homosexuality.
What if a self sexual is a form or type of metrosexual? I don't think so. Metrosexuals, as I understand it, are highly groomed, highly fashionable, almost androgynous incarnations of modern men. Women love them because they're so polished and striking, but infuriate them because they spend more time in front of the mirror than they do. And while the subject of women's conceptions or expectations of men is outside the scope of this essay, it's important to note that women themselves are ambivalent about metrosexuals.
Article comments
1 - Andrew Horton
Midiane. You write with purpose and pithiness on a subject many think about, but few articulate. Thanks. Andrew.
2 - Elvira Black
Midiane:
Very nice piece. Here's my "two" cents:
Many don't know that the history of Western sexuality has morphed over the centuries. When it comes to theories of women's sexuality, in earlier centuries it was thought that women's sex drive was insatiable. Then in Victorian times, (and with the advent of a post industrial middle class) women were viewed as more delicate creatures and their sex drive or lack of such was not addressed. Many (including Freud) aspired to figure out "what women want." At this point IMO we still struggle with outdated mores and "roles," with women often stuck in the "virgin/whore" dichotomy over and over again.
As for Eastern religions, many were very sexually aware; some even considered sexuality as another way of communing with a higher power. Think Indians and the Kama Sutra, Japan and their pornographic imagery, even Judaism (which traditionally is much less "uptight" about sexuality.
In organized religion, the sexual is political: Catholics must be "fruitful and multiply" and not abort their children so they can, well, produce more obedient Catholics. Promiscuity also muddied up blood lines and inheritances.
But the biological imperative to "be fruitful and multiply" still stumps any amount of analysis. How else to explain the ever rising divorce rate, out of wedlock births, and so on? It astounds me that so few seem to see birth control as a viable option, or that they so often "marry in haste" and "repent at leisure"---leading to an endless cycle of marriage, kids, divorce, more marriage, more kids, divorce...
As for your theory, well, some believe that we are inherently bisexual to some degree. Some other species exhibit this behavior as well. It certainly helps to stymie the already exploding population.
Sexuality is a powerful force that can, as I say, be manipulated for political gain. "Be fruitful and multiply" is an imperative that comes from our limbic brain (which we share with other species) and as with all pleasurable "rewards," whether it be drugs, alcohol, food, sex, etc, it is very hard for the rational brain to argue with this (pre-verbal) force within us, since it is a survival issue; in this case, survival of the species.
In any case, great and though provoking article.
3 - Midiane
Hey Elvira, thanks very much for your comments. You actually mention points I wanted to make in my essay, but left them out as they were either unsubstantiated or bordered on blanket statements. I will develop some ideas, similar to yours, in future essays on BC. So you'll be updated.
Andrew, thanks a lot - your encouragement means a lot.
Midiane.
4 - Elvira Black
That's one of the things I love about BC: the article can be a jumping off point which everyone (writer and reader) can discuss and elaborate on (sometimes almost endlessly).
I look forward to seeing more of your writing here.
5 - Sarai
Definitely gave me a few stabs in the chest here and there reading this because it is such a controversial issue for society in general.
And what pisses me off about society in general is that we *do* need to embrace the fact that change is a constant - we fluctuate in decisions and behaviour, never mind sexual tastes and preferences. BUT. In order to view ourselves as sexual beings in relation to other sexual beings, each individual needs to be able to find a way to make their intentions known upfront.
I believe what underlies the confusion regarding the self-sexual from an "outsiders" perspective is that a person with a willingness to regard their sexual preference with such fluidity comes across as either an easy target or incredibly disrespectful towards sexuality on the whole.
We are all allowed to experiment and we're definitely allowed to change our minds, but it is completely unfair to mislead people - whether intentionally or unintentionally. The irrationality of connection should at the very least be preceded by some sort of discourse regarding the interaction between the two parties of whatever gender.
Furthmore, my views have been formed not by religion, but by an instinct of self-preservation. Being completely free with sexuality is not a form of release, it is a form of abandon or escape. A certain level of respect really needs to be maintained - and coital partners should definitely have enough respect for each other to be open and honest (and knowledgeable) about their own sexuality. There should be little room for confusion when expressed by the person themselves.
I dunno - this topic touches a nerve :) So maybe I went into a bit of a non-coherent rant there but with enough re-reads, it should make sense.
6 - Midiane
@Sarai: thanks for your detailed reply, didn't feel it was incoherent at all :)
My main contention is the damage self sexuals are inflicting on themselves. Yeah. Tis possible though that they get into monogamous relationships and cause damage, too. But the fact that society is open to it, almost supporting it, scares me too.
Good discussion starter...
7 - Sarai
I think it goes even deeper than that - it's more pervasive. They are already, by definition, pushing love away from themselves - and I mean the deep, romantic connection between two people that results not simply from attraction.
It takes courage to open up and let yourself be seen, never mind having to open your mouth and speak what is in your heart - praying that the other person will receive it well. It sucks sometimes to put yourself out there, but there are no shortcuts to love!
I honestly think they have crossed the boundary to where sex and love are completely unlinked. There is no way that you can behave that way otherwise. They have lost the magic and the beauty of an innocent first kiss - the joy of a loving caress even when you're not looking your best.
Society has become jaded by images in the media of how men and women should behave. It takes immense strength to be able to view this objectively and say "I don't want that." Besides that, anyone who behaves differently is subjected to ridicule - the new form of peer pressure. Believe me, I've had to go through this for the past two months... everyone in my team makes fun of me about being celibate for years by choice, and how I've only ever had one boyfriend, and how guys will never be attracted to me if I am so damn uptight.
Screw them. I believe that you shouldn't separate sex and love to begin with. They are not separate, they are so incredibly complementary, and people who can't see that have lost a chance for something really special.
8 - Midiane
You make an important point, Sarai, that to self sexuals, sex is sport and function, separated from their values, beliefs, or emotions. That is scary and pervasive.
9 - Christopher Rose
Not persuaded by Midane's argument and wondering if it is actually motivated by his odd faithist beliefs?
10 - Dr Dreadful
Not sure we need to coin a whole new term. From the information given, "Dom" sounds like either a sociopath or a sex addict, possibly both. However, since we are told nothing of how his various sexual partners feel about their encounters with him (I note that when the author reconnected with "Dom", he was "still with 'The Girlfriend'", so she at least got enough out of the rerlationship to stick with him for some considerable time), it is possibly and even probably neither.
In fact, "Dom" seems to me like a perfectly normal bisexual man, struggling to come to terms with the fact. Sex is confusing enough if you're only attracted to one sex, let alone both.
11 - Midiane
@Christopher Rose: no. None of this is spurred on by my personal religious beliefs. Just from observation and analysis.
@Dr Dreadful: Interesting point... I wouldn't say he's a sociopath. Not so much sex addict either. Maybe it could be a distorted bisexuality.
12 - Christopher Rose
Midiane, please explain what your process of "observation and analysis" is and how you manage to interpret your findings without that interpretation being influenced by your personal beliefs?
I don't think you can...
13 - roger nowosielski
So Christopher, does it make you happy that you and Dreadful are the only ones who have a free reign on BC threads because you both have the inordinate power to delete all other comments at will?
14 - Dr Dreadful
Bit of a non sequitur, Roger, but if it makes you any happier, Chris and I have been known to delete one another's comments when necessary.
And, as has been stated on more than several occasions, the comments space is not the appropriate forum for any concerns you may have about the comments editing.
15 - Shannon Tucker
I am trying to remember the word that is used to refer to people who have sex with themselves. I only can remember part of it: auto, but the other part I can't remember. Can anyone help me out here? Thank you.
[personal contact info deleted by comments editor]
16 - Dr Dreadful
Shannon, I believe the term you are looking for is autoeroticism.