Facebook comments on the future of sex

For Alternet, Emily Empel wrote, "The Future of Sex? 5 Trends That May Completely Transform Our Sex Lives". It's mostly some combination of trite and off base, although one of her central thoughts is probably true: sex will be a growth business. (This is probably an interesting discussion, but not where I'm going.)

Instead I'm going to quote some of the comments on Facebook and respond to them.

JT wrote (7 "likes"):

I'm sure many people will disagree with me - but I believe that prostitution has been demonized in order to disempower women. If women could sell sex at will, then they would become much more financially independent - and laws could be put in place to protect them from abuse and disease.

It seems that the most typical situation around the world is that having prostitution illegal creates a situation where the hand of management (pimps) is strengthened when negotiating with workers (prostitutes).


I like to think of myself as a realist and see that there will be prostitutes who are mistreated even if it's legal. But I found a good quote on Womanist Musings:

While all paid labour in a capitalist economy is defiantly exploitation, working in the porn industry is not more exploitative because what is being produced is sex, or rather the imitation of  reciprocal sex.

Why is sex work necessarily more degrading than working at McDonalds, or a  Dunkin Donuts for that matter? Both involve the sale of ones body, and labour power to a certain degree. Both involve not being adequately compensated vis a vis profits versus wage, yet pornography is deemed horribly degrading.

Back to the Facebook comments...

AL (5 "likes"):

This is disturbing indeed. Presumptuous of the author to use the inclusive "our" as I dont think these developments will transform sex lives as much as further break down relationships with real people and entrap people with weaknesses in this area into their secret virtual worlds of self-indulgence. Not to mention the further exploitation and degradation of women and children in the minds of the purveyors if not in the actual sex trade. No doubt Goldman Sachs will be invested.

KR (5 "likes"):

A world without porn wouldnt be such a bad thing 

FP (4 "likes"):

Spend more time worrying about our world burning to the ground and less time writing articles with a sexy gameboy as your cover.

DD (4 "likes"):

Pro-prostitution feminism: the idea that women should stop being exploited and objectified by men, and should start exploiting and objectifying themselves!

MEC (4 "likes"):

I guess we all have our different ways. I'm still old school and I plan on staying that way. To me theres no better way than sharing your love, heart, soul, mind, body, thoughts, dreams, and life with one man face to face. To share that special bond, to have that trust and respect for each other is far more important to me than watching somebody exploit their body or cybor sexing. 

MY:

Meh. Why not? Nobody seems to care about the emotional aspect of sex anymore. It's all about getting off. That's easy to commodify and sell, so, why not?

MH:

sex is for kids,,, er i mean young souls, to whom the allure of money sex and power are a distraction that delays their awaking and eventual return to a spiritual being with the one, instead of a spiritual being inna skin suit

NB:

Not mentioned, but likely: with relatively few women servicing the needs of most men we'll see an explosion in lesbianism. Most families of the future in first world nations will be lesbian couples with children. Between anti-male family law and the enhanced world of porn and prostitution most men will avoid being fathers.

MRJ:

Age can take so much of the sting of insecurity out of sexual intimacy. And some of us are lucky enough to be naturally 'shameless', but I think this potential trend is more for the younger generations.

Can't remember which sci-fi author said it, but I'll paraphrase: If it can be done, it will be done eventually. The author of this article may be a touch naive and optimistic, but is definitely onto something.   

 AF:

Ha! More irony. Men, who generally don't appreciate women for their minds, per se, are getting robotic, computerized sex toys to replace women. Women have been using vibrators for years as a male-replacement. So men are paying BIG BUCKS for a talking, "smart" (but not challenging) sex toy. I guess they really DO want more out of a relationship than just sex. Whereas women, forego the computer, the expense, the "pretend" partner and get right down to the nitty gritty. Yup, cheap, portable, vibrates, done. Given these facts, if each gender were to make the "live" partners perform like the "mechanical" ones, then men would take a woman, disable the part of her brain that speaks without being spoken to, that says anything that displeases him and prop her legs open always at the ready for a sperm deposit. And women, according to these facts, would detach a man's penis, and throw the rest away.

There's a sociological dissertation in there somewhere.

If you aren't getting the sex you want, the intimacy you need, you probably shouldn't be making rules for how other people should be having sex and being intimate. Just sayin'.

Also, I like the part of High Fidelity where Lisa Bonet says that good sex is a human right.