Is Sex Sacred?

The two opposite views of sex in our culture: precious and intimate, or without intrinsic meaning

Source

Far lack of a better adjective, I use the word “sacred” not with its religious meaning, but as something worth of special consideration. I propose here that modern culture is torn between two opposing views of sex, with opposing answers to the question in the title:

Yes, sex is sacred and deeply meaningful. It is the most intimate act because sexual pleasure and orgasm make us enormously vulnerable. Sex also establishes a deep bonding, producing romantic love. That is why sex is called “making love”. By making love, a couple develops a monogamous bond, an alliance that helps them to stay united to confront life’s vicissitudes and to care for their children. Therefore, sex should not be degraded by doing it outside a committed couple or for banal reasons.

No, sex can be whatever you want it to be. What matters is not sex itself but the meaning we attach to it. Hence, sex can be anything between a banal act for pleasure or a spiritual quest, as in the ancient discipline of Tantra. But there is nothing intrinsically sacred about sex; that is just a relic of sexual repression by religions and puritanical ideologies. Sex leads to bonding only if that is what you want it to do. In fact, masturbation is a sexual act that does not lead to bonding. Romantic love arises not just sex, but from mutual understanding, loyalty and commitment.  

Each of these answers leads to different views on some thorny issues related to sex, like the seven that I discuss below.

1. Casual sex

If sex is sacred, then promiscuity, one-night-stands, and other forms of casual sex should be condemned as a desecration of what should be a special, intimate act. We should only have sex with somebody after dating them for long enough to know that “they are serious about the relationship”. In the most extreme view, sex should only happen after marriage, after the members of the couple have made a strong commitment to each other.

On the other hand, if sex is not sacred then there should be no problem practicing it casually with somebody we just met and are not going to see ever again. Or to have multiple partners, friends-with-benefits or nostalgic sex with an ex. Sex is just one more pleasurable experience in life that we enjoy alone or share with other people.

2. Masturbation

Some people still consider masturbation as something dirty and unethical. A common occurrence is that somebody in a couple feels betrayed because his or her significant other masturbates. At the bottom is this is the idea that sex should be used for bonding only, so if somebody masturbates he could be bonding with another person in his imagination. He is committing adultery in his heart, as the Bible says.

However, alone sex is considered okay by most people today. Moreover, masturbating can serve to explore our bodies and find out what works best for us, leading to better sex with a partner.

3. Pornography

Radical feminists still keep the campaign against pornography that they started in the 70s. They argue that performing sexual acts on camera for the benefit of strangers degrades the body of women. This can only be true if there is something special about sex that makes it different from any other act. If this sexual act is able to degrade the porn actress, that means that there is something sacred in her body that is being corrupted. However, if there is nothing particularly special about sex, then doing it on camera should present no particular problem.

There is also the feeling that watching porn when you are in a monogamous couple is tantamount to cheating. This is similar to the problem with masturbation, with the added problem that there is one specific person that our partner is watching. However, if sex can be de-coupled from bonding, there should be no problem in experiencing pleasure by watching porn.

4. Adultery and non-monogamy

Taking it one step further, why is it such a tragic event when somebody in a couple has sex with somebody else? Hard words are spoken, tears are shed, divorce papers are filed. Adultery is taken as the ultimate betrayal, even though there are worse things that can happen in a couple (psychological abuse, economic exploitation, subjugation). When asked about it, people argue that cheating is lying, the breaking of a promise. But quite often lies are told and promises are broken without such dire consequences. No, the only reason that adultery is so bad is that so much meaning is attached to sex. Sex is considered such a special act, of such profound intimacy, that can only be done with a specially chosen person.

Non-monogamy in its various forms (open relationships, swinging, polyamory) deconstructs this deep value attached to sex. Our cultural conditioning is hard to break but, once we have done that, we can talk with our wife about her last sexual fling with the same joy and complicity as we would discuss the last movie she watched.

5. Kinky sex (BDSM)

Having sex by hitting somebody, inflicting pain, tying them up, or dominating them, seems to be completely the opposite of what we would expect if sex is a sweet, intimate and loving act. That is why a lot of people reject the idea of kinky sex. However, people that practice BDSM know that it is even more intense, intimate and stirring than vanilla sex.

For a lot of kinky people, BDSM fulfills a desire that exists besides sexual desire, overlapping with it only to a certain extent. BDSM brings them a satisfaction and joy much deeper than vanilla sex. The existence of such desires reveals that there is more to sex than couple bonding. Sex has to do with our darkest psychological compulsions. Furthermore, kinky sex can be transformative by producing altered states of consciousness and by bringing to the surface deep subconscious contents. Some people consider it as a spiritual path. Coming around full circle, sex becomes sacred again, but in a positive way instead of a negative, repressive way.

6. Sexual abuse and rape

Now I am going to venture into dangerous territory. If we assume that there is nothing special about sex, that casual sex with strangers is perfectly fine, then why is rape so hurtful? If sex was truly inconsequential, then being raped would be as bad as being beaten, but not worse. And yet women who are raped often develop a profound, hurtful and life-long trauma. (I am aware that men and children can be raped, too; however, women are the majority of the victims of rape.)

There are several possible answers to these questions. But first let me state unequivocally that nothing that I say is an excuse for rape or an argument for leniency towards its perpetrators. The first answer is that sex is, indeed, sacred or special, so when a woman raped something intimate inside her is damaged. The problem with this idea is that it would need to be reconciled with the view that sex is not sacred when we deal with masturbation, casual sex and non-monogamy. The second answer is that rape is hurtful because cultural norms have thought women that they should feel hurt when they are raped. A third answer is that sex is not sacred but that rape hurts women, not because is a sexual act, but because it is a special act of violence able to damage something deep in their psyche.

7. Prostitution

Increasing calls for the decriminalization of prostitution are still met with confrontation, silencing and lies. The main lie is that prostitution is the same as the trafficking of women. This is not true because 1) most prostitutes are voluntary and not trafficked (only 1 in 7 prostitutes is trafficked in Europe, see page 49 of this United Nations report), and 2) most trafficked people are not prostituted but exploited in other forms of labor. Moreover, the most expedient form to end sexual trafficking would be to legalize prostitution so that those that do not do it voluntarily can come forward without fear of being accused of having committed a crime.

Leaving aside the complexities of the issue of trafficking, what is the main argument against voluntary prostitution? It usually takes the form of one of the following statements. “Prostitution degrades women by objectifying their bodies.” “Sex is an act that cannot be bought and sold.” “Monetizing sex degrades both the seller and the buyer because sex is an intimate act that should not be tarnished by money.” These statements are all based on the idea of sacred sex. Massage, for example, is also a physical activity in which a person services another person’s body, but it does not have the stigma of prostitution because sex is not involved. If sex was not sacred, then there would not be anything in the prostitute’s body that could be degraded. Likewise, sex can only be tarnished by money if it is somehow sacred.

 

In summary, we must consider carefully what sex means in our lives. Of course, conservatives of various religious persuasions will always want to impose the idea that sex is sacred. But progressives do not have a consistent view about the meaning of sex, either. They  change it depending on the issue being considered, from casual sex to adultery to prostitution. We should think about this and reach a common understanding.

 

In defense of cheating

Although statistics about the prevalence of infidelity vary wildly (between 25% and 60% over the duration of a marriage), everybody seems to agree that it is on the increase on Western societies. Is this necessarily a bad thing? Or is it just one more symptom of the disintegration of the monogamous norm? Judging from what I read, it seems that many polyamorous people, while critiquing sexual exclusivity, are quite judgmental when it comes to cheating. In agreement with people of a more puritanical persuasion, they tend to view infidelity as the betrayal of a sacred oath. According to them, if a person is sexually unsatisfied in her or his current relationship, there are only three morally acceptable options: 1) continue to live sexually deprived, 2) negotiate an open relationship, 3) leave the relationship. The 4th option, of course, is cheating. I believe that sometimes it is ethically justified for the following reasons…

I believe that the basic issue underlying the ethics of sex is personal autonomy. It means that my body (and my mind) is mine and I should be able to use it as I see fit, as long as it doesn’t impinge in the personal autonomy of somebody else. This has two implications, one negative and one positive. The negative implication is that nobody should use my body (or my mind) against my desires, which makes rape, sexual abuse, psychological abuse and other forms of non-consensual sex, immoral. The positive implication is that I have a right to my own sexual satisfaction (again, as long as it doesn’t violate the personal autonomy of somebody else). This implies that sexual repression also violates personal autonomy and should be considered a form of abuse. Therefore, cheating is not a violation of consent because it does not violate the partner’s personal autonomy. What it does violate is a personal contract in which two people have agreed to mutual sexual exclusivity. However, breaking an agreement is a much less serious offense than violating personal autonomy (as in rape and sexual abuse). It is important to note that the sexual exclusivity agreement does involve relinquishing a large segment of personal autonomy: before I was able to have sex with whoever wanted to have sex with me, now I’m restricted to just one person. Because of that, any form of coercion in establishing this agreement should be considered quite seriously.

We cannot forget that we live in a society that strongly enforces monogamy. In fact, there many places in the world today where non-monogamy is punished with death. Even the more enlighten Western societies exert considerable pressure in favor of monogamy, using different forms of legal, economic, cultural and social sanctions. Very often these are unfairly directed more toward women than toward men.

Because of that, we cannot consider the agreement of sexual exclusivity involved in marriage as one freely made, but one made under the pressure of a coercive environment. In practice, this means that we are given the option between a monogamous relationship or no relationship at all. Almost nobody is given the option between an open relationship or a sexually exclusive one: it is monogamy by default. Let’s remember that an agreement made under duress is not morally binding.

Let’s now consider the three options (other than cheating) offered to a person who is sexually dissatisfied in a relationship. The first one is to just put up with the sexual deprivation. In the old, sexually-repressive culture, this went unquestioned. Sex was considered something superfluous, unnecessary for the happiness of a decent person (especially if it was a woman). The new sex-positive culture has changed that perspective, posing that it is unacceptable for a person to live sexually deprived. This not only applies to having sex in general, but also to enjoy alternative sexualities like BDSM. If I’m kinky and my partner is not, I’m entitled to do something about it. So this is no longer an acceptable option for a lot of people.

The second option is to negotiate an open relationship. This is considerably difficult, often impossible. Let’s not forget that open and polyamorous relationships are vanishingly few. Realistically, proposing an open agreement to a partner entrenched in the monogamous mentality is not only futile, it is foolish. The only thing that it would accomplish is to make us instant suspects of cheating, or wanting to cheat.

The third option is breaking the relationship. I am quite surprise at the alacrity with which so many people propose this option… like breaking-up was easy and entailed no suffering at all! Quite the opposite, most of the time it is the least desirable option, often an impossible one. This is because we live in a society that wraps a lot of power in the institution of marriage, in the form of economic power (share savings, mortgage, etc.) and restrictions of individual freedom (the house where I live, the job that I have, childcare, etc.). Then, breaking-up is not a simple matter of stopping a sexual and emotional relationship, but something that throws our life in a complete turmoil, most likely ending up by lowering significantly our standard of living. Divorce is easy when you are rich, ruinous when you are poor. And then there are the children, who probably wouldn’t suffer much if a parent occasionally cheats, but would be devastated by a divorce.

In conclusion, cheating is not a black-and-white issue, but one of great complexity. If one thing is clear, is that we would all gain a lot by de-dramatizing it. Contrary to what we read in novels and see on television, it’s not worth killing anybody over it. Is not even worth leaving our loved one over it. Sex is just sex, let’s not blow it out of proportion by attaching all sorts of mystical meanings to it. Yes, in some cases cheating is a dastardly thing to do, involving breaking of trust, dishonesty and betrayal. But in other cases it is just the least bad of a set of bad options. Like the case of the woman who has become economically dependent of her husband by leaving her career to have children, and now finds that he no longer wants to have sex with her.

From the point of view of a non-monogamous, sex-positive culture, we should be able to appreciate the element of rebellion against the established order that is implicit in cheating. Yes, the person being cheated suffers, but the monogamous norm is partly to blame for that suffering. It is that culture that has convinced him that being cheated is, oh, such an awful thing to go through! And let’s not forget that that cultural norm of sexual exclusivity creates an unbalance of power, empowering the sexually repressive member of a couple to the disadvantage of the one that yearns for sexual freedom. Ideally, we should all be able to be polyamorous if we wanted, but in reality the ability to do that is reserved to a precious few. We should not be judgmental of people who have to resort to other, more unpalatable options.