Life, Love, and Liberty

Love offers the model of perfect communication: the orgasm, the total fusion of two separate beings. It is a glimpse of a transformed universe. Its intensity, its here-and-now-ness, its physical exaltation, its emotional fluidity, its grateful acceptance of the value of change - everything indicates that love will prove the key factor in recreating the world. Our emotionally-dead survival cries out for multidimensional passions. Lovemaking sums up and distils both the desire for, and the reality of, such a way of life. The universe lovers build of dreams and one another’s bodies is a transparent universe: lovers want to be at home everywhere.

~ Raoul Vaneigem

Note: In reading over this before I released it on the blog, I realized that I wanted to write an additional post to explain my conception of romantic love and sexuality. I’d also like to touch on the general nature of feminist philosophy since self-described feminists have a tendency to disagree on its meaning in the same manner that self-identified anarchists debate the nature of anarchy. I’d just like to make sure that individuals understand what conception of feminism I subscribe to since there are positions taken by self-proclaimed feminists that I disagree with. More on that to come in the future and here’s my piece:

Disney’s classic Beauty and the Beast has some positive ideas to impart about gender. Examples of a feminist — whether intentional or not — consciousness is on display with the character of Belle.

Our first taste of this is given to us in the beginning of the movie with Belle’s introduction as an incredibly beautiful — leaving aside debates about what constitutes beauty in the first place — young woman whose “peculiarity” lies in her accompanying appreciation for books. Her character is also an independent being resistant to the advances of the domineering male suitor Gaston. He simply cannot come to terms with the idea that Belle has aspirations she considers more important than a marriage to him.

What can be gleaned from all this is the utter ridiculousness of traditional assumptions about gender. Belle’s combination of intelligence with beauty is a rebuke to the common cultural idea that splits the two. Think of all the images in our culture of the beautiful blonde who is simultaneously represented as a complete dunce.

Who is frequently held up as the ideal woman to seek out? The shallow but stereotypically drop dead gorgeous girl rather than the “nerdy” or “strange” but far more interesting stereotypically ugly lady.

Gaston is interested in the dorky or weird protagonist but only for her physical beauty. His alleged romantic attraction doesn’t seem to have any room for a care in the world about her own passions or the entirety of her character.

The contrast between the persona of Gaston and the beast is very revealing. In the former, we see the archetypal buff attractive guy who doesn’t appear to have much going on in the head, while the physically unappealing beast gradually becomes a rather gentle soul over time. His eventual sensitivity to Belle’s needs and desires is not accompanied by an inability to physically defend himself or others when needed. Something that runs counter to the popular identification of empathy or sensitivity with an unwillingness to physically defend yourself.

This combination of two usually opposed traits is shown in two scenes where the beast is forced on the defensive. When Belle makes an escape attempt after agreeing to perpetually stay in the castle in exchange for her father’s release, she is attacked by a pack of wolves. The beast comes to the rescue after having regretted his rough treatment of Belle. This situation is repeated near the end of the film when a struggle ensues between Gaston and the Beast because of the formers attempt to do away with him.

In the end, Beauty and the Beast offers us a vision of an androgynous individual that transcends the limitations of narrow gender roles. This is all for the better since the ability of people to comfortably create their own souls is an essential ingredient of a world worth living in. American culture has a very very long way to go in this department; and I am not always optimistic about the potential for change. I still end up choosing to believe it’s possible most of the time but such a spirit isn’t always easy to maintain. Perhaps, it will be easier someday and one can only hope this comes sooner rather than later.

I am not making this up. A company called Jimmyjane, based right here in S.F., makes a thin, cigar-shaped platinum vibrator that clocks in at a whopping $470 (also comes in gold and steel), custom engraved and silent and waterproof to 15 feet down because oh my God if there’s one thing this world needs, it’s more vibe-wielding women who dive into the deep end of the pool and emerge 10 minutes later with a huge grin and a soft glow and a craving for chocolate ice cream and a shot of dark rum.

I simply adore Mark Morford!

Via the SWOP-USA mailing list.

Less than a week after Largo City Manager Steve Stanton announced he was transgendered, the small Florida community’s city commission fired him*. This is workplace discrimination, plain and simple. I just signed the ‘Stand with Stanton’ petition, and I hope you will too: http://nsrc.sfsu.edu/Petition.cfm

When the Commission fired Stanton, they ignored his excellent record as an energetic and effective leader. Stanton has received consistently positive performance reviews from the City Council and the Mayor while managing over 1,200 employees and the city’s $130 million budget.

The promise of America is that if you are a good employee, you should be rewarded for it regardless of your race, creed, disability, gender or sexual orientation. Stanton’s firing was an un-American display of workplace discrimination and this injustice should be reversed. Sign our ‘Stand with Stanton’ petition that we’ll deliver to the City Commission in Largo, FL.

Just thought individuals may be interested in signing it.

Kudos to the Sex Workers Outreach Project for the slogan of Whores Not Wars!

It gave me a real smile when I read it in the following email message sent out on the SWOP-USA mailing list.

Half of the proceeds for this event will benefit Food Not Bombs and The International Day to End Violence Against Sex Workers as well as other SWOP-AZ programs!

111 West Congress Avenue
Across from The Grill
Tucson, Arizona
Saturday, November 18, 2006
8:00 p.m.

The Sex Workers Outreach Project (SWOP-AZ) will host a WHORES NOT WARS PARTY featuring provocative live performance art, whore stories, lap dances, sexy soldiers, and anti-war, pro-whore activities on SATURDAY, NOVEMBER 18, 2006.

Prepare to be titillated, disturbed, outraged, pleasured, stimulated, and shocked!

Bastardized military gear, pro-peace costumes encouraged!
$5/door.
Cocktail Bar/Donations
8:00pm - until the war ends!
COMMIT WHORE CRIMES NOT WAR CRIMES!

Free table opportunities available for non-profit anti-war organizations, women’s rights organizations, LBGTQ organizations adult entertainment estabishments and
other organizations that see a need for more pleasure and less war in our world. (For-profit corporations just $50!)

Set up 6pm. Break down Midnight, unless you wish to leave earlier. Please bring your own table and chairs if you want them.

The event is located at 111 E Congress St.

For more information, email: swopaz@gmail.com
Or Call: 520-661-5884

I regretted not being able to attend but I am thinking about whether I could make the Sex Workers Art Show or San Francisco Sex Worker Festival in the future. I imagine you could meet some very interesting and eccentric individuals at events like this. A writer needs such life experiences to draw from in coming up with original material. I’ve got an interest in writing some pieces detailing colorful experiences in my life. Writing about a good time I had at a sex worker event would certainly be intriguing.

I wrote in an earlier post that liberty was a cultural phenomenon so it’s time to look at gay marriage from that vantage point. The majority view of what constitutes genuine family and marriage has a reciporal effect on the legal dimension. It doesn’t do enough to destatize the institution without a philosophical transformation on the nature of family and marriage. This means the promotion of an expansive conception of marriage that fully incorporates gay couples. Why is this important? Because a society ruled by less inclusive ideas wouldn’t be as pleasant for gays and lesbians to live in. They could face the prospect of being denied eligibility for family related privileges by numerous organizations. A good example would be hospitals denying gay and lesbian individuals familial visits to their sick partners.

The kind of cultural foundation that should underlay libertarianism is one conducive to people peacefully being their authentic selves. This is best served by an open ended perspective on the makeup of marriage that gives equal legitimacy to martial contracts/love between gays and lesbians.

A controversial issue of recent times has been whether the state should grant legal recognition to same sex couples by allowing them access to martial licenses with the accompanying benefits. This access should be allowed as long as the state is in the business of regulating martial relations in the first place. The opposition voiced on religious grounds isn’t applicable in the context of a secular government that shouldn’t make policy on the basis of religious beliefs in the manner of a theocracy. It’s important to keep in mind the crucial distinction between your personal beliefs and what the law’s stance on a particular question should be. The central issues at stake are equality before the law and access to benefits/tax breaks that gay/lesbian individuals are forced to provide the basis of via taxation. A resolution of these concerns should trump whatever a particular religious tradition may say on the proper definition of marriage even if it is very influential.

I am struck by the irony of an allegedly conserative president being the originator of an amendment to federalize marriage when conseratives proclaim their devotion to the ideal of limited government. This doesn’t seem to apply when it comes to using the power of the state to advance a religious agenda. I should add the disclaimer that people have the right to hold whatever view on the proper nature of marriage they want but that is different from infusing it with the power of government.

The solution I’d like to see would be a separation of state and marriage but I’d like to demolish an argument I find particularly faulty before diving into that. I’d sometimes hear people use slippery slope reasoning in their opposition to gay marriage that consisted of saying that it would lead to people marrying cars, animals, and so forth. It’s not hard to see the flaw in this argument which is that inanimate objects or organisms without the ability to perform conceptual thinking can have no idea of marriage. It’s also a pretty irrelevant point because human politico-economic systems are formed by and for humans.

A separation of marriage and state would make it a private contractual affair between individuals of any sexual orientation. There wouldn’t be benefits/tax breaks for anyone on the basis of martial status so the issue of equality before the law would be resolved. This is a live and let live approach that would allow those who wanted to adhere to a traditionalist conception of marriage to do so but without any ability to stop others from viewing it in a different light.

This isn’t likely to happen anytime soon though and gay/lesbian individuals should be allowed access to martial licenses. It’s especially important for this to occur when they are forced by taxation to help provide the basis for martial benefits/breaks in the first place.

Further reading:

http://www.indegayforum.org/authors/boaz/boaz2.html