»
S
I
D
E
B
A
R
«
SEXLESS IN SEATTLE?
June 27th, 2010 by Clark Humphrey

In yet another example of far-reaching overgeneralizing about contemporary US society (damn there are so many of those), Camille Paglia asserts there’s an epidemic of sex frustration among the white bourgeois—a caste to which a wide swath of Seattle either belongs or aspires.

The essay appears in the NY Times on the day of the Seattle gay pride parade. This does not in any way disprove her thesis, at least as far as it might be applied here.

The Seattle establishment (heart)s gays not because of their sexuality, but in spite of said establishment’s fear of sexuality in general.

Gays are the Seattle powers-that-be’s favorite minority group because they’re so much less “minority-y.” You can be gay and still be an upscale white person. Supporting the gays allows a local company, agency, or institution to proclaim its inclusiveness, without having to examine caste or race inequality.

What’s more, lovin’ the gays allows straight Seattleites to assert their moral superiority over Those People Out There In Evil Mainstream America. We’ve got no bigots here, no siree. We welcome clean-cut people with money no matter what they do in the privacy of their well-appointed homes.

But the great disruptive thing about the pride parade is there’s always someone to crash the party. Someone who takes outness a little more seriously than it’s supposed to be taken. While the official parade attractions were mostly trite (down to the official theme, “Over the Rainbow”), the attendees felt no need to be safely “different.”

There were fully nude men, with paint or see-thru thongs.

There was a young (straight) couple, the female of whom was shirtless, making out on the sidewalk in pure hormonal bliss.

Various clothed boy-boy and girl-girl combos also hugged and kissed a lot. They weren’t settling for public tolerance. They were practicing their love in full view. No pleas or false modesties or passive-aggressive apologies. Just passion, compassion, and shameless lust.

That’s worth more than a hundred guys dressed up as Dorothy standing on bar-sponsored floats.


One Response  
  • Angiportus writes:
    June 29th, 20108:02 amat

    I think you just nailed it on why the gays have won some victories with some people. If the couple down the hall is white, white-collar, and follows the unspoken sumptuary laws about the niceness of their home and stuff, it’s easy to take your mind off what they do in bed. But if they are a different color, or don’t dress as nice as you, that’s scary to some folks.
    I use the term “sumptuary laws” advisedly, for these originally restricted how well certain classes of people could live and dress. Now those laws are off the books, and in their place there’s unspoken ones about what sort of car you should have and how new, and so on, to be accepted by some groups.
    As one who has long resisted the dictates of fashion and materialism I am glad to see you start lifting the lid on that aspect of the situation.


Leave a Reply

XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

»  Substance:WordPress   »  Style:Ahren Ahimsa
© Copyright 1986-2025 Clark Humphrey (clark (at) miscmedia (dotcom)).