During this week’s scandal du jour, the repeated refrain from some quarters was that “It is just sex. No big deal.” This group wants the rest of us to believe that sex is merely a physical process, like breathing. But is it? And what do part of our humanity do we lose if we buy this lie?
First, is sex just a physical thing? It cannot be just a physical process. If it was, why attempt to hide infidelity from a partner? If it is just a physical process like digestion, then everyone does it. But not everyone has sex in their lifetime. And the reality is that not everyone breaks their promise of fidelity to a partner.
Because you’ve added a commitment factor does that take it out of a physical process characterization? So sex + commitment makes it more than a physical process? This does not fit the facts either.
Bodily functions are involuntary. We do not have to stop to think to accomplish them. Sex requires thought. It requires us to either like the person we are with or want the short term satisfaction sex will give us.
Secondly, if sex is merely a physical process, then why do rape victims feel so violated? Why is there so much shame in being a victim to a physical process? And why will psychologists tell you that rape isn’t about sex but power. Does that sound like a mere physical process?
There is an undeniable emotional component to sex. Women, as well as many men, equate sex with love. That is why most women feel there is some sort of intangible commitment made when they sleep with someone. It is implicit with the sex – let someone be as intimate as they can be with you, and there have to be feelings of trust and attraction.
If we buy the “physical process” lie, what do we as a society lose? First, we remove love from the equation. You don’t have to love someone else or even like them to breathe. If sex is just physical actions, than it can’t have an emotional component.
Next, should there be any limitation put on sex? If it is a physical process, then the younger a person has sex to master the process, the better, right? Why limit sex to only those who are “of age” and criminalize sex with those who are under a certain arbitrary age? And why would forcing anyone to conduct a physical process be wrong – it is something they have to do sooner or later, right? Why would force make it scary or unpleasant?
No, it is clear that sex is more than a physical process. And any attempt to divorce it from the mental and/or emotional parts will lead us places we do not want to go.
I appreciate this blog because it points to a very prevalent concern among young adults. Though I understand your point here, I must say that your argument is flawed and I want to share my thoughts with you so that you may understand this issue in a different way.
First of all, you mention the “just a physical process” argument without shedding light on the essence of the claim being made. What people are truly getting at when the say “sex is just a physical thing” is that you can engage in sex with another person and be entirely focused on the physical goal of sex which is usually orgasm. That is to say, there is no need for an emotional connection or feelings that are intangible. Sex is simply a means to a particular end. Infidelity is not acceptable because it is typically a breach of a spoken or unspoken, but certainly legitimate, expectation that when you are in a relationship with someone you will not share your body with anyone else. When we look at relationships that have been tarnished by infidelity, we often see examples of sex being nothing more than a physical thing to the individual in the relationship who has breached that understanding of fidelity. In other words, some people cheat on those they love and sincerely adore because they crave a physical and sexual desire that is not being fulfilled. Not that this justifies it but people cheat and have no emotional connection to anyone but the person they’ve cheated on.
Second I point to the rape question. Here again the argument doesn’t hold water. Rape victims feel violated because their right to dictate who they have sex with has been violated. Most people would agree that your backyard is your physical property and perhaps in the summer time when you’re in the mood for company you invite friends and family over for a cookout. But let’s suppose you come home one afternoon and find a strange man standing in your backyard without your permission. Wouldn’t you be a little concerned? Perhaps you would feel as though this man was violating your property by trespassing. The moral in this example is similar to rape victims feeling violated. Yes, rape is in many cases about power and not sex and what is at the heart of the violation the victim feels is that loss of power, that loss of freedom to choose who they engage in sexual activity with.
When we say that sex is more than a physical process, what we are implying is that it means so much more than just reaching orgasm or focusing on the pleasure of sex. Sex for couples or people who are committed to one another is certainly a means to reinforcing that love and desire that two people have for one another. But in some cases, where that love or emotional connection does not exist sex is just a physical thing.
Now, what is so flawed in the argument that sex is just a physical thing is the fact that though it might be perceived as just physical, there is often an emotional portion of it that is overlooked. For instance a young college student may offer his body by engaging in sexual activity to boost his confidence, or a young woman may do it as a way to fill an emotional void that has been acquired through numerous failed relationships or an absent father. So perhaps we should really be searching for answers in regards to why people have casual sex and what they are trying to accomplish?
I agree that sex is so much more than just physical. It can be physical, emotional and spiritual. But we can’t look at the surface of things and pass judgment on those who have sex just to have sex, but inform those who use sex for a particular purpose such as filling voids, boosting confidence or feeling wanted, that casual sex has its dangers and there are other ways to achieve their goals and desires other than taking off their clothes.
I hope this has opened your mind a little more to the issue at hand.
Peace,
truexpression,
Thank you for commenting, and I think you do have some valid points.
I”m not sure that someone who is unfaithful in a relationship is merely having sex for the physical process. They are usually looking for the things you mention later: body acceptance, filling a void, trying to feel wanted, or for a change in the power structure in a sexual context. And with those ideals in mind, the sex isn’t physical, it again has a mental or emotional context.
This is really interesting! And there’s so much to comment on here! I am not going to do either of you justice, in everything that you’ve both brought up!
A couple of quick comments right now though… I totally don’t agree with the statement that “some people cheat on those they love and sincerely adore because they crave a physical and sexual desire that is not being fulfilled”.
A craving isn’t the reason someone cheats. Everyone has cravings for this or that. People who don’t wish to limit their sexual behavior don’t have to make fidelity commitments to others. They can choose to stay single and uncommited to any one person. Versus willingly making a commitment and then choosing to break it. “Cravings” don’t cause the break of a commitment. It’s character that causes that.
And if the person cheating has no emotional connection to the person with whom they’re “cheating”… well… I don’t know if that makes it better or worse. Or neither, maybe.
I do agree with both of you that people sometimes use sex when really they are looking to fulfill other needs. Sex in our culture is so hyped up, and is also tied to conceptions of power, attractiveness, worthiness, status, etc. I think that’s part of what you were both saying? If I’m understanding… and if so, then yes, those things ARE emotional components.
So I don’t know. You have both given me a lot to think about! A part of me is wondering… is it possible for human beings to have sex without some kind of emotional component to it? I mean, aside from sociopaths, or people who see others only as objects. Even with sociopaths though, even if they see others as objects, I think they still have emotions themselves, regarding themselves, that could possibly motivate their sexual behavior?
I don’t know. Oh and I guess this reply wasn’t as “brief” and quick as I’d initially thought it would be! Thanks for reading!
Clarabelle –
I don’t know that you can ever fully divorce emotions from sex. Unlike breathing or digesting, sex always requires some sort of thought. And when you think, some sort of emotional response is involved – whether it is feeling attractive, love, pride, anger or whatever.
Thanks for commenting.
I see your point on that mg! I think I just suddently “got” what you were saying in your initial post. It’s NOT like breathing and digesting!
Trueexpression writes:What people are truly getting at when the say “sex is just a physical thing” is that you can engage in sex with another person and be entirely focused on the physical goal of sex which is usually orgasm.
That alone being said, if it were the mere act of orgasm, certainly sex isn’t needed for that. I don’t know that I have yet to meet someone who would have sex solely for that purpose. When he goes on to write:
In other words, some people cheat on those they love and sincerely adore because they crave a physical and sexual desire that is not being fulfilled. Not that this justifies it but people cheat and have no emotional connection to anyone but the person they’ve cheated on.
That seems to well contradict the notion that it isn’t more than just physical. This is not to say that one or both parties aren’t or can’t be divorced from a sense of affection from each other. Easily they can be.
When that is the case, the question then becomes “So what are they going for here?” And for men it is as often as not a feeling of affirmation and sense of conquest. For women it can easily be a desire to achieve a sense of comfort that occurs during and after sex – the endorphins released by the brain leave are identical to the endorphins released when breastfeeding – a sense of bonding does occur and mild levels of euphoria and affirmation are attached.
I returned to the Catholic Church after a decade long absense and a big part of the reason was at the end of the day, however difficult, the teaching it offered on sex and sexuality was the only one left that made sense – it had pride of place in marriages exclusively for life and has a role in bonding couples and acting as co-creators of new immortals souls when working with God Himself in their marriage.
I just wrote about this this week:
http://blog.ancient-future.net/2008/03/21/contraception-why-not-mp3s-by-dr-janet-smith/
Listening to the links provided can be life changing – it certainly was for me.
Happy Easter.
asimplesinner – I agree with you (as you probably read) that sex is unlikely to be a merely physical act. Modern singles proclaim it as their ideal, but I think the reality is that most women I know are looking for more than the physical act. If honesty were required, women would tell you that sex is used as a bargaining chip to draw the man into a relationship that continues. I think the sexual revolution has sold the false idea that giving sex early lengthens the relationship, while in practice it does not. Women had and have more power in a romantic relationship when they stay out of the bedroom until the commitment is made.