 |
| (image credit) |
'So… wait," I asked my friend Hayley, over some overpriced wine in my local one evening, "you don't use any contraception, at all?" "None," she said matter-of-factly. "I've had unprotected sex so many times with no results that I think I might be infertile." I doubt that she needed my judgment face at that particular moment, but she got it. She's no teenager, and I have to admit I'd thought she would know better.Reference: Unsafe sex: why everyone's at it.
There is a lot to appreciate about this lengthy article, as Rhiannon Lucy Cosslett covers her bases well. She admits to being befuddled about why mature, responsible adults engage in unsafe sex. Yet, she doesn't let her judgment face dominate her subject. Instead, she investigates. She cites studies, and she talks to women, managing to get them to share what they do, how they think, and what they experience. Her approach to understanding her subject is not scientific, not in the strict sense of the term, but it is balanced and systematic enough as to illuminate her subject, arguably more effectively than would an obtusely-written, abstractly-conceived experiment. In brief, she captures some epidemiology, but focuses on phenomenology.
In this little series, I look at so-called bad things we do, and work at lending new perspectives and better understanding of them: smoking, unsafe sex, and sugar. What more about the second? The notion of "unsafe" is a curiosity, really, when we think about one of the most natural, even sacred of human activity. It isn't just a human activity, even, but sex, in one form or another, is an absolute imperative for the survival of any life on earth. Having sex may not seem so vital to everyone. After all, one must eat and drink, and breathe oxygen to survive, but one most definitely can live an entire life without any sex. So "unsafe" sounds like a gross misnomer, in the survival sense.
But in modern-day parlance, we know what it means. Somewhere in the progression of civilization, humankind shifted from procreation to recreation, when it came to sex. Propagation of the species is probably the very last thing in our mind, when we're angling for sex and when we're plunged-deep into it. It is an act of nature-derived impulse, it is an inviolable act of pleasure, it is an act of romance and love. All this said, and risk of procreation (i.e., pregnancy) is part of what makes modern-day sex unsafe. The risk of disease is part of that, too. If you might buy into the notion, even just a bit, that disease is a form of intelligent life, then it knows perfectly well how to propagate its own sort: that is, by weaving itself into the most compelling, frequent human activity.
We can level a critique at Cosslett and her editor. She has dispensed with the stories (phenomenology) of those who, in contrast to people she interviewed, do practice safe sex, such as using condoms regularly and staying on birth control pills consistently. The title, too, is unfortunate, as clearly not "everyone" is at it. But it's an effective ploy, I imagine, at drawing readership. So we don't quite get a complete picture of the subject.
But by focusing on phenomenology, Cosslett shows us that people who practice unsafe sex have very real, understandable, if not entirely agreeable, reasons behind it. Not just reasons, but also wants and reactions that underpin unsafe sex. If we are to help them practice sex more safely, then we are in a better position, I argue, for doing so, because we have a better understanding of their phenomenology. I don't mean this in the abstract or generalized sense, however. The algorithm, more specifically, is looking into, talking about, and understanding what a particular woman and-or a man think, want and do. So if they're unhappy with their sex practice and its consequences, then we can work out solutions that make the most sense to them.
For those of us who don't understand, or are perhaps unwilling to accept, the reality and phenomenology of unwanted, bad behavior, there is bound to be failure in changing that behavior. Whether we like it or not, whether or not we think it even exists, people have an inviolable freedom to choose what they do or not do. Some of these women, whom Cosslett spoke to, are fully aware of the risks of unsafe sex. But getting pregnant is indeed not always a terrible thing to happen, and coming down with a sexually-transmitted disease isn't so awful either when they can go to a clinic for treatment.
Finally, at the risk of ending on a morbid note, I want to acknowledge that cigarettes will hasten death for smokers and that unsafe sex will kill partners, if they come down with virulent, incurable diseases. Again if people who engage in these activities want to change, and if we have a complete enough grasp of why they do what they do, then we have all sorts of remedies at our disposal. But those who may not want to change deserve our empathy and understanding, more than our censure, aggravation or dismissal. They will die, and they will die earlier than they would have otherwise. But that is their choice, and that is their stake in some meaningful, pleasurable life.
In this little series, I look at so-called bad things we do, and work at lending new perspectives and better understanding of them: smoking, unsafe sex, and sugar. What more about the second? The notion of "unsafe" is a curiosity, really, when we think about one of the most natural, even sacred of human activity. It isn't just a human activity, even, but sex, in one form or another, is an absolute imperative for the survival of any life on earth. Having sex may not seem so vital to everyone. After all, one must eat and drink, and breathe oxygen to survive, but one most definitely can live an entire life without any sex. So "unsafe" sounds like a gross misnomer, in the survival sense.
But in modern-day parlance, we know what it means. Somewhere in the progression of civilization, humankind shifted from procreation to recreation, when it came to sex. Propagation of the species is probably the very last thing in our mind, when we're angling for sex and when we're plunged-deep into it. It is an act of nature-derived impulse, it is an inviolable act of pleasure, it is an act of romance and love. All this said, and risk of procreation (i.e., pregnancy) is part of what makes modern-day sex unsafe. The risk of disease is part of that, too. If you might buy into the notion, even just a bit, that disease is a form of intelligent life, then it knows perfectly well how to propagate its own sort: that is, by weaving itself into the most compelling, frequent human activity.
We can level a critique at Cosslett and her editor. She has dispensed with the stories (phenomenology) of those who, in contrast to people she interviewed, do practice safe sex, such as using condoms regularly and staying on birth control pills consistently. The title, too, is unfortunate, as clearly not "everyone" is at it. But it's an effective ploy, I imagine, at drawing readership. So we don't quite get a complete picture of the subject.
But by focusing on phenomenology, Cosslett shows us that people who practice unsafe sex have very real, understandable, if not entirely agreeable, reasons behind it. Not just reasons, but also wants and reactions that underpin unsafe sex. If we are to help them practice sex more safely, then we are in a better position, I argue, for doing so, because we have a better understanding of their phenomenology. I don't mean this in the abstract or generalized sense, however. The algorithm, more specifically, is looking into, talking about, and understanding what a particular woman and-or a man think, want and do. So if they're unhappy with their sex practice and its consequences, then we can work out solutions that make the most sense to them.
For those of us who don't understand, or are perhaps unwilling to accept, the reality and phenomenology of unwanted, bad behavior, there is bound to be failure in changing that behavior. Whether we like it or not, whether or not we think it even exists, people have an inviolable freedom to choose what they do or not do. Some of these women, whom Cosslett spoke to, are fully aware of the risks of unsafe sex. But getting pregnant is indeed not always a terrible thing to happen, and coming down with a sexually-transmitted disease isn't so awful either when they can go to a clinic for treatment.
Finally, at the risk of ending on a morbid note, I want to acknowledge that cigarettes will hasten death for smokers and that unsafe sex will kill partners, if they come down with virulent, incurable diseases. Again if people who engage in these activities want to change, and if we have a complete enough grasp of why they do what they do, then we have all sorts of remedies at our disposal. But those who may not want to change deserve our empathy and understanding, more than our censure, aggravation or dismissal. They will die, and they will die earlier than they would have otherwise. But that is their choice, and that is their stake in some meaningful, pleasurable life.
No comments:
Post a Comment