after all......it is
midnight at the
prairie, and quite the enchanting hour.
Fascinating debate between two of us at work (who are at opposite ends of political spectrum, me being progressive left and him being....well, you know) about what you could say to a young girl nowadays to actually make her stop and think about having sex at such a young age. I gave a flowery speech about teaching little girls to respect themselves first, etc. etc. but began to think about what it was that made
me not have "actual" sex until I was 21. Okay, I was brought up in a different era, but it
was 1971 and the sanctioned freedom to have sex
was a reality.
I had desired sex from a very young age (more on that in my other blog), but never acted upon it save the heavy "making out" that we did in junior and senior high school---I often believed I ended up much more frustrated than the boys. It wasn't that I wished to be a "good girl" because even as a youngster, sexuality was such a huge part of the inner me, I never saw these desires as making you "bad."
What I realized was that I had been
privy to enough male-male conversations about girls to be taken aback by the ugliness of their content. It was rarely flattering, even when the girls in question were smart, beautiful, loving and seemingly everything they desired. I developed a huge fear of being disrespected or humiliated or fooled like that---I knew that sex was so integral to me, and the thought of it and me being the butt of a joke was enough to stop me every time.
(
btw...when I did have sex for the first time, it was with the abandon of galloping horses----I happily chose it, and it was exactly what I wanted. The key word being "I." At least it happened, and continued to happen in
scenarios of
my choice, design, and control. Therefore it ultimately did not matter what any man thought or said. (yes, yes, this goes in the other blog as well.)
So my conservative friend says, "well, that's exactly what morality is made up of.....fear and consequences." I chewed on this for a minute. Actually, lots of minutes. I knew I didn't agree, but for the life of me couldn't be clear as to why I thought so. Certainly biblical teaching, certainly parental teaching, but it seemed such a shallow interpretation of morality. He obviously believed that morality is dictated to you by a higher power......my sister believes that morality is simply the choices a collection of like-minded humans make that provide them with the most comfort and safety, and thus surrounds them with more like-minded humans, and not believing in that particular kind of higher power, I like her idea much better. But voila, that, too, is rooted in fear and consequences.
I always thought it was simple equation, and the closest I could come to description was a version of the Golden Rule. How hard could it be to tell when you were hurting others, when you yourself knew what hurt was? And then I watched decent people do bad things, and I was back at the
drawing board, as each one had made the definition of hurt so subjective. And why? Fill in the blanks: ____ & ____________.
Rats.
Okay, then...scare the crap out of 'em, put the birth control pills in their orange juice and condoms in their Hello Kitty purses. Maybe we can pretend that self-centered is the same thing as self-respect. Or maybe self-preservation is amoral?