Why Is Sex Dirty?

[neonlyte]

...
It's emotional and mental, not physical. The physical stuff is just the instigator. The seriously sexy and dirty stuff happens in the mind.

Agreed. and when it moves out of the mental to the physical, that is when the problems can arise - unless the parties are in full agreement.

 

[Roxanne Appleby]

It's an amalgam. Very complex, mysterious even. A big, tangled ball of string. Every time we pull out a single thread and hold it up here, we look at it in isolation and scratch our heads. It only contributes to the phenomenon when combined with other elements in the amalgam.

That's all - just throwing out a possibly useful conceptual tool.

 

[sincerely_helene]

By that rather tenuous logic, extreme sports are dirty.

I think that in order to understand the question posed by the thread title, it's important to first tackle the prior question is about why dirt is dirty.

Care to ejaculate on that further?

 

[SEVERUSMAX]

Okay, I haven't read everyone's posts yet, but I have my own take on it. There is probably some truth to everything that all of you have said, to one extent or another. If I repeat what someone has said, I apologize for the redundancy.

Here's my take on it: people think of it as dirty , for the same reason that many have a hard time accepting the probability of evolution or trusting our "6th sense". We don't want to admit that we are still very much animals. I don't mean to offend anyone here, but that to me is the truth.

We dare not trust our instincts, because we fear to admit that we have them in the first place. Our instincts tell us to fuck whom we please, and for the most part, there is no reason that we shouldn't trust those instincts (save for pedophiles and rapists). We don't want to admit that we are animals, animals who can reason, yes, but animals nonetheless. As a species, we are still insecure enough about our dominance over other animals that we feel the need to pretend that we are not animals at all. That is why we consider zoology a separate science from anthropology, even though we know the latter is really a sub-section of the former. So, therefore, there is something "taboo" and "dirty" about behaving in any way like animals, whom we feel like we should dismiss as "dirty, so as to feel
superior to them.

So, in the end, it's our frail egos that make sex "dirty", our desire to pretend that we are some higher beings, instead of merely thinking primates. That's my 2 cents on that issue.

 

[NoJo]

Care to ejaculate on that further?

oo, she lives, she posts

 

[sincerely_helene]

oo, she lives, she posts

Shall we disgust this over dinner?

 

[NoJo]

Shall we disgust this over dinner?

i need to see the goods first.

 

[sincerely_helene]

i need to see the goods first.

Sounds dirty.

 

[NoJo]

Sounds dirty.

I'd eat dinner with you for a 1000 bucks.

 

[sincerely_helene]

I'd eat dinner with you for a 1000 bucks.

Are you flirting with me?

No, seriously. I can't quite tell, you vague prick.

 

[NoJo]

Are you flirting with me?

No, seriously. I can't quite tell, you vague prick.

I, I'm not sure....

 

[neonlyte]

I'd eat dinner with you for a 1000 bucks.

I think we can raise that by selling tickets

 

[Guest]

I think we can raise that by selling tickets

Put me down for two.

 

[Guest]

 

[lucky-E-leven]

I've been wondering about this for a long time-- What makes sex "dirty"?

But what makes a story "dirty"? There are plenty of stories on Lit of open, loving sex, and they always seem flat and pretty unintersting to me. I always look for the dirtiness, the sense of transgression. It's not just breaking social taboos--there's as many dull, undirty incest storries here as any other kind--it's something else.

I'd be interested in any ideas or opinions. What makes sex dirty and exciting?

--Zoot

Sex is dirty because the original motivation is animal desire. Humans are so proud of topping the chart of animal refinement. Sex busts us right back down to our basest nature. Our desire to function solely on instinct and physical connection is all animal. At that point, we're no better than wild monkeys. Abandoning most critical thinking and reasoning skills is freeing, to me anyway. Also present is the power struggle. Who will reign as king/queen of the jungle at the end of the night? And once you've landed yourself as leader of the pride, can you defend it?

What makes a story dirty for me is witnessing a character's internal/mental struggle to achieve the things that make them tick. Are they fighting to establish territory or dominance? Are they desperate for protection/shelter? Stories that turn me on the most, allow the reader inside the participants' baser nature. The good, the bad, and the ugly. The voyeuristic nature of reading sex stories is dirty, but a story is even that much better if the participants can be seen moving through varying degrees of want, weakness, guilt, pride, shame, power, need, etc...

The one story I wrote with the intention of sketching a character's most basic sexual nature made me feel so exposed. I guess that's when I knew I was getting somewhere with what I found dirty and exciting.

Edited to add: It appears as though this take on things has been mentioned.

 

[frozen_north]

My take on this is that sex is considered dirty primarily because of religion. Most (note:most) religions have attempted to subjugate women. In the past this has always been accomplished by "regulating" if you will, sexuality and the basic urge to mate.

 

[sincerely_helene]

(Apologetic bump for Zoot and SubJoe.)

 

[Roxanne Appleby]

Sex is dirty because the original motivation is animal desire. Humans are so proud of topping the chart of animal refinement. Sex busts us right back down to our basest nature. Our desire to function solely on instinct and physical connection is all animal. At that point, we're no better than wild monkeys. Abandoning most critical thinking and reasoning skills is freeing, to me anyway. Also present is the power struggle. Who will reign as king/queen of the jungle at the end of the night? And once you've landed yourself as leader of the pride, can you defend it?

What makes a story dirty for me is witnessing a character's internal/mental struggle to achieve the things that make them tick. Are they fighting to establish territory or dominance? Are they desperate for protection/shelter? Stories that turn me on the most, allow the reader inside the participants' baser nature. The good, the bad, and the ugly. The voyeuristic nature of reading sex stories is dirty, but a story is even that much better if the participants can be seen moving through varying degrees of want, weakness, guilt, pride, shame, power, need, etc...

The one story I wrote with the intention of sketching a character's most basic sexual nature made me feel so exposed. I guess that's when I knew I was getting somewhere with what I found dirty and exciting.

Edited to add: It appears as though this take on things has been mentioned.

Oh that's good! That's very good.

You said monkeys; it gets even worse: "Hey baby - I'm a lizard, you're a lizard, let's make beuatiful lizard music together . . . croak."

 

[shereads]

Is sex dirty?

"Only if it's done right" - Woody Allen

He married his wife's daughter/his son's sister.

Is that dirty? Or just creepy?

 

[elsol]

*GULP*

and I think El Sol was really onto something... with that "loss of innocence" thing...

Betrayal, war, and sex... so is innocence lost in art.

Certainly far more interesting than just finding out that your parents are fuck-ups too... though I guess that's 'betrayal' in a way

Sincerely,
ElSol

 

[Pure]

iirc, woody married his separated wife's *foster* daughter. dirty, not creepy. wasn't she over 18 when they married?



sher: He married his wife's daughter/his son's sister.

Is that dirty? Or just creepy?

 

[AchtungNight]

Sex is dirty because the original motivation is animal desire. Humans are so proud of topping the chart of animal refinement. Sex busts us right back down to our basest nature. Our desire to function solely on instinct and physical connection is all animal. At that point, we're no better than wild monkeys. Abandoning most critical thinking and reasoning skills is freeing, to me anyway. Also present is the power struggle. Who will reign as king/queen of the jungle at the end of the night? And once you've landed yourself as leader of the pride, can you defend it?

What makes a story dirty for me is witnessing a character's internal/mental struggle to achieve the things that make them tick. Are they fighting to establish territory or dominance? Are they desperate for protection/shelter? Stories that turn me on the most, allow the reader inside the participants' baser nature. The good, the bad, and the ugly. The voyeuristic nature of reading sex stories is dirty, but a story is even that much better if the participants can be seen moving through varying degrees of want, weakness, guilt, pride, shame, power, need, etc...

The one story I wrote with the intention of sketching a character's most basic sexual nature made me feel so exposed. I guess that's when I knew I was getting somewhere with what I found dirty and exciting.

Edited to add: It appears as though this take on things has been mentioned.

I agree with this take 100%. Of course, for me, what makes stories like this dirty is also what makes them really good.

 

[Huckleman2000]

Hi, this is sort of a thread jack, but it seemed to me to be apropos. Also, I worked with Peter in a previous life, when I was a starving actor. He's a totally decent guy, and I have no doubt that his intentions weren't to try to legitimize rape within existing relationships, but to portray things that happen between people who have difficulties expressing themselves on an intimate level. I'm not familiar with the show, nor do I think that's the prime idea here. It's true, Peter went over a boundry. Was it a valid one?

http://www.latimes.com/entertainmen...n26,1,5591579.story?coll=la-headlines-entnews
From the Los Angeles Times
CHANNEL ISLAND
`Rescue Me' writer fans the inflamed
After FX's firefighter antihero crosses a line, one of its co-creators gets an earful online.
By Scott Collins
Times Staff Writer

June 26, 2006

Here are a couple of things Peter Tolan, the co-creator of FX's "Rescue Me," learned the hard way last week:

1. If you have your lead character beat and rape his estranged wife, don't expect viewers everywhere to welcome the scene as the culmination of a complicated dramatic arc.

2. Trying to explain yourself on an Internet message board can be like attempting to lecture on Shakespeare in the middle of a rugby scrum.

Taking risks comes naturally to the creators of "Rescue Me"; the series, after all, is a delicately balanced comedy-drama that explores the screwed-up lives of a group of fictional New York firefighters, the same fraternity who were dubbed "America's Heroes" after the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11. But last week's episode, co-written by Tolan and star Denis Leary, went way too far for many fans and critics.

In the closing scene, after Tommy Gavin (Leary) and soon-to-be-ex-wife Janet (Andrea Roth) argued over custody of a chaise longue, he knocked her onto a sofa, ripped off her clothes and forced himself on her sexually. Then he apologized — not for the rape, but for tearing her shirt. ("It wasn't one of my favorites," Janet replied dazedly, a line that, in suggesting her lack of anger over the violation, did as much to incense some viewers as the act itself.)

Accept Tommy as a boozy, faithless, neurotic lout? Sure. He redeems himself by risking his hide to save people trapped in burning buildings.

But accept him as a rapist? No way, said many viewers. Not goin' there.

The Chicago Tribune's Maureen Ryan blogged that the rape scene "hit a sickening new low." Newark Star-Ledger critic Alan Sepinwall attacked "Rescue Me" for "a pattern of misogyny and pathetic characterizations of women" and said the scene "made me uncomfortable and unhappy in a way even the most extreme TV and film almost never does." Fans began heatedly deconstructing the scene on Web forums.

Enter Tolan, a veteran screenwriter ("Analyze This") who says he innocently believed he could expand the discussion by posting his thoughts on a popular website, Television Without Pity.

Perhaps it was the site's name that gave him pause. Before posting his first comment, "I sat there and thought, 'Should I do this? My gut is saying no,' " he said in a phone interview Friday. "I thought maybe I could explain some things.

"But all you do," he has since concluded, "is paint a target on your back."

Two media trends are fueling the fire over "Rescue Me." One has to do with the evolution of the series drama, the other with the growing role of the Internet in shaping and amplifying debate over TV programming.

Since HBO's "The Sopranos" premiered in 1999, over-the-top antiheroes have become a staple of "edgy" TV fare. Vic Mackey, the leader of the anti-gang unit on FX's "The Shield," killed one of his team members and routinely tortures suspects. On Fox's "24," heroin addiction was a bugbear for counter-terrorism agent Jack Bauer.

Leary's Tommy Gavin fits into this antihero trend. Women and vodka bring him misery, but he can't leave either alone. Some fans, though, clearly don't want to contemplate Tommy as something darker than an essentially good-natured screw-up. Tolan agreed that that squeamishness may have much to do with Tommy's chosen profession.

"You're certainly not used to seeing an antihero who has been traditionally portrayed in media as a hero," Tolan said. "Especially in the days after 9/11, 'America's Heroes' and all that. We've always been turning that image on its head."

The Internet, meanwhile, continues to grow as an outlet for impassioned TV fans — and series creators like Tolan are, one way or another, learning to adjust. As the message boards burned with debate over "Rescue Me" last week, Gemstar-TV Guide announced that it would buy the popular TV site Jump the Shark, which the company hopes will give it improved access to die-hard viewers. In the forums at Television Without Pity — TWOP, to initiates — users analyze plot points and story arcs with a zealotry that would not be out of place in a debate over Mideast politics or abortion law.

TWOP started in 2001, but Tolan learned of it only last month, from an article in Entertainment Weekly. Surprised by the strong reaction viewers had to the rape scene, he thought he would use the TWOP arena to remind them of its context within the series.

He wrote: "I'll admit this is extremely dicey stuff. The idea of any woman 'enjoying' being raped is repellent, and caused all of us (and the network) a great deal of concern. But again, these are seriously damaged people who are unable to express their emotions — and so expression through brutality has become expected."

Many TWOP denizens were pleased that the executive producer of a series had bothered to join a discussion. But others were hardly star-struck, including one who suggested that Tolan was merely making fancy excuses for a poorly written script.

Tolan followed up with a protest that some of the discussion was "combative."

"The scene was not written to be provocative," he told me Friday. Asked if he believed what Tommy did to Janet constituted rape, he paused and replied: "Yeah, I guess I'd have to say that. That's the technical [term]. But we never called it that, because we were trying to hook more into the relationship."

Will the rumpus from fans affect the rest of this season's stories? Probably not. Tuesday's episode was the fourth of 13 episodes. Nos. 9 and 10 are being shot now; Tolan is currently rewriting the 11th. But Tolan made a point of noting that Tommy will get his "karmic payback" for the rape in a future episode: "There is a consequence, and it's an unexpected one."

Meanwhile, Tolan has gotten a bit of karmic payback himself. He clearly feels a little burned by his online adventure. But his experience may prove useful for future producers who find themselves squaring off against an empowered fan base. He also can't say he wasn't warned.

"I've actually talked to some friends, some of whom are actors who are very well known and other writers, and I've said, 'How do you find it to be dealing with your fans of your shows?' To a person, they said, 'You know, it's probably not a good idea to get involved.' "

So does that mean farewell to the message boards?

"I think I'll go back to say I won't be back," he said.

 

[TaffyJ]

It's all in the brain.

Animal isn't good enough. No, no, we're humans. We have to be 'better.' We don't want to wear what will protect us from the elements. We want to use our clothes to express ourselves and make a fashion statement. We don't want healthy food that is in season, fresh from our surroundings. We want caviar, veal,champagne, hamburgers and pizza. We don't want to live in a cave. We want whatever the Jonses have, but better. We don't want to walk on our own 2 feet, we want a hummer or a porshe. Animals have sex mainly when the female is fertile, and chances are good the offspring will be born when it will survive the elements and food will be plentiful. Notice higher animals masturbate. They're bored just like we are. Plain, procreative sex is too boring for us because we have a big, bored brain that needs to be entertained. So, human cultures have thought up various taboos through time so we'd have some way of making sex exciting again. Just like eating pizza is so much better than eating white bread. Drinking coca-cola is so much better than drinking water. It wasn't good enough, so we had to make it more complicated.

Did you ever see one of those documentaries about African or South American tribes who run around mostly naked? They don't seem to get excited about much. They're much more excited about blow-darting a monkey for the stew pot than they are about seeing the teenage girls naked. Those people spend so much time worrying about surviving, their brain isn't as free to think up convoluted nastiness.

Someone mentioned that we can acclimate to a taboo, until it no longer feels taboo anymore. We have to keep finding new depravities to interest us, because we wear all the excitement off the old ones.

Of course, I know I'm making generalizations and its not all quite that simple. Basically, I think we made it dirty on purpose because it wasn't interesting enough the regular way. Kinda sucks the fun right out of it, huh?

 

[sweetnpetite]

Well, an interesting extension of the Doc's original query, "what makes sex dirty?" is "how can we profit from it?"

Anyone who publishes in the mainstream press has often run up against this. Step over the line, and your erotic masterpiece becomes mere porn. But, then again, I've read romance novels where the heroine was gang-raped by pirates. And liked it. Dirty? Without a doubt. Marketable? Depends on the story.

It's very powerful, that essence of the forbidden (Lolita, anyone?), and when we can sprinkle it into our tales effectively, it makes for a compelling read. Just like any other conflict, it needs to be presented appropriately, in context, and if the reader buys it, you've hit a home run.

Could you tell me the name of that romance novel? I'd like to read it.