Week 3
Media talk reminds one of urging the serpent to slither into the barrel of a gun.
Date: 21 Jan 2021
Motion: THW slap a caveat-emptor warning on sex talk by the media for being lopsided and misleading
Role: Whip (gov.)
Whenever I hear or read talk about carnal affairs in general in public, I cannot ever be satisfied. There is a lot in common with the way the media talk about alcohol, as was mentioned earlier. The downsides and statistics of alcohol use are without exception brought up and the general tone is that “there is no safe maximum amount”, so the conclusion is always that people should use alcohol only when they pass a milestone in their lives, if even then (first communion, engagement, wedding, baptism, funeral etc.) And the same goes for sex. It is only necessary when trying to conceive babies, if even then. For, there are in vitro clinics. We’ve come a long way from Henry Miller. He passed away as late as 1980, and it’s roughly then that things began to slide downhill.
The norm for a healthy life in between the sheets was drawn in the 1970’s when couples declared that they did “it” on average twice a week (in Finland, according to the FinSex series of follow-up studies). That means a lay every three or four days or nights, and that would not sound too bad in a layman’s or a laywoman’s ears, is my educated guess. However, this was not attained anymore during the 80’s, when different factors began to factor into the equation. One that comes to mind readily is the onslaught of HIV, in its late stage AIDS, from 1983 onward. The days of casual sex were over once the news spread about the deadly ‘souvenir’, should one err to travel without a ‘raincoat’.
Our side acquainted itself with a spread-sized article in the nation’s biggest daily that sums up the situation. Like all articles, an averse attitude runs through it, even though it’s tempered frequently with all kinds of concessions. But that’s only because even its writer can acknowledge the reality: People go at it like rabbits, if and when they feel like. That’s part of human nature, and one would begin to sound like part of the clergy, if one would start denying that categorically. So, the idea is: “give them a little finger, but not the whole hand.” Even though the hand is what the side that opposes us in the conversation is often concerned with. Their own hand, not anyone else’s.
Intercourse Is the Norm – Not Because It’s Always Good But Because It Is Good for You
As our Chair pointed out, discussion often revolves around how all forms of foreplay should allegedly be equal to actual intercourse. This ware has been touted for a long time, even in schools. The problem with blowjobs and handjobs is that they are just another name for self-abuse, and when that is being performed by someone else, a better name for it might be abuse-by-another. They are not about the special communion that the sex act is about. They have come to the area of sex from the world of repressed subcultures: the general population under repressive theologically controlled religious societies; inmates, prisoners; teenagers who are supposed to retain their physical virginity; and the LGBTI community. What unites them is that they cannot always opt freely, so they settle for less. Free adults in free societies should not be concerned with that as a sound substitute.
Long Wait Precedes the Age of Consent But Should Not Follow It
It was also brought up that people can’t get their hands on each other that soon. Now, if we think about it, like our MP mentioned, it’s not that consummating to hop in to and out of a twice-a-week era of carnal activity in one’s life, meaning that first the person has waited a whole teenage to be licenced to thrill, then there is a brief period of activity and thereafter a lull sets in again, as if that was some kind of a “desirable” outcome. It is as if being schooled for work for the duration of one’s whole early life, then having a worklife for 2 – 7 years, after which retirement beckoned. Pension funds cannot afford that, and I suspect that that extends to the human race as well, at least on a national level, as birthrates are plummeting.
Norms May Be Modelled on Minorities But Fitted onto the Majority
This twice-a-week norm was attained by the white straight majority in the 1970’s, and soon it transpired that a lot of people cannot keep up with it. There should be about a hundred acts a year to meet that quota satisfactorily. Our side’s suspicion is, voiced by our 2nd speaker Secretary that first there was the HIV scare, which spread among the LGBTI community (mainly gay men), took a leap outward and led to the dwindling of casual encounters and flings among groups of any orientation. Then, surprise, poll results began to be gathered among groups that according to common sense out of necessity have less sex than gen pop. For LGBTIs, a partner is harder to find due to the scarcity of candidates. Everyone knows inner city is a jungle when it comes to casual encounters. If polls are conducted among those who most commonly live in the urban core, it turns out that they have less sex because they live in the triangle of nightlife <> tenement <> workplace, and there’s precious little carnal life to be derived from that scene, at least less than for the older straight white suburbanite.
The conclusion of my speech is that, like in so many other matters, those who have a problem with something, the zero-to-ten-percenters, are targeted by journalists and politicians alike. Policies are devised inspired by them and articles are written about them. The story mentioned that both polled men and women brought up that they would want to “do it” far more often but that they fall short due to no partner or unwilling partner. The logical conclusion should be that society should help these people catch up with their self-set goal for themselves instead of trying to reduce the carnal lives of the rest of population onto the same level as what it is for the firstmentioned. Free trade and the corporate world should not intervene with their authentic love dolls and other kind of industrial decoy ducks. Expressed in more leftist terms, the whole scene would need to be like “to everyone according to one’s needs”, rather than “let’s share in the misery”.
Perustelu(t)/puolustelu(t): Nyt on kova. Olen yrittänyt välttää sukupuoliaiheiden käsittelyä, mutta kun siihen lopulta on suuri paine eikä aihetta voi ikuisuuksiin vältellä vaikuttamatta tomppelilta tai teknikolta, koko juttu purkautuu kovalla paineella suoraan silmille. Kun kirjoitin, jokainen lause tuntui kuin hermopeliltä, jossa kävelin kuin veitsenterällä. Mietin, eikö tämä koskaan pääty. Tiedän jo nyt, että kirjoitin pidemmän puheen kuin useat aiemmista, mutta toivon, että hermoilu myös näkyy tekstissä sen keskimääräistä parempana osuvuutena. Puhe on tekstissä mainitun artikkelin inspiroima. Siinä on myös aika paljon kaksimielisyyksiä, jotka voi tulkita ohimennen lauotuiksi vitseiksi tai vain sivuuttaa.
Polar Ice Standpoints Society 