LISA PYTLIK
Sexual ideology subjective
Let’s, talk about sex.
We certainly think about it
enough. And in a variety of
ways.
For example, about 100 “fans”
visited the Reader’s Choice book
store Wednesday to get their Playboy
magazines signed by featured mod
els. Ironically, last week also marked
the start of UNL’s “Women’s Week
1992,” which began Thursday.
Research varies, but many studies
report that men under age 40 think
about sex an average of six times an
hour, while men over 40 and women
think about it slightly less often.
However, we all think about sex
more than we talk about it. As a
result, all sorts of ideas are left un
questioned and are often mistaken for
indisputable black-and-white facts.
Myths even surround concepts
seemingly as basic as gender. For
example, many people believe that
males and females arc biological
opposites. From this standpoint, it
would seem that Women’s Week is
an exclusive celebration for only half
of the student population instead of
for campus as a whole.
But men and women aren’t as
extreme opposites as many assume.
Although it’s true that an embryo
with XX chromosomes usually de
velops into a female and an embryo
with XY chromosomes usually de
velops into a male, this is not always
the case. A number of things can
happen between conception and sex
ual maturity to change this genetic
predisposition.
ror example, il the proper amount
of testosterone is, for some reason,
not present during the appropriate
critical period of the pregnancy, a
baby with XY chromosomes could be
bom with female instead of male
genitalia.
Furthermore, some people, who
are known as hermaphrodites, are bom
with both types of sexual organs. In
these eases, the parents and doctors
often decide to assign a single gender
to the child and one set of sexual
organs is removed.
There also have been specific cases
where children have been reassigned
their sexual identity after birth. In one
ease, an infant’s penis was acciden
tally removed during circumcision.
As a result, the child successfully was
raised as a female instead of a male.
In other eases, children have been
misidentified sexually at birth be
cause of having an irregularly small
penis or enlarged clitoris. Sometimes
the child’s real gender is not discov
ered until age two or three.
Obviously, even one’s biological
gender is not always as clear an issue
as many people think.
Culturally, issues surrounding
sexuality are even less clear-cut.
A 1935 study by Margaret Mead,
for example, described a society in
New Guinea in which idcasof mascu
linity and femininity were almost
exactly opposite of those tradition
ally illustrated in the United Slates. In
this society, the women were the
“breadwinners” and the men stayed
home, reared the children, dressed up
for their wives and often performed
dances to entertain them.
But enough of this talk about sex
in terms of gender.
Let’s talk about “real” sex. Let’s
talk about the topics that most people
think of first when they hear the word
“sex.”
Sexual intercourse, orientation and
eroticism arc all more examples of
topics that people like to place in
black-and-white categories of “right”
and “wrong” without fully confront
ing the complexity of the issues.
Most students, for example, seem
to automatically reject the ideas that
their parents may have tried to instill
in them concerning sexual abstinence.
I would guess that most students were
taught, as I was, that sex, especially
premarital sex, is a no-no. Yet ac
cording to a 1990 health survey, only
22 percent of UNL students said they
were virgins.
Unfortunately, it seems that many
students reject their parents’ views as
overly conservative before seriously
considering the benefits of sexual
abstinence. For example, virgins don’t
usually get sexually transmitted dis
eases or worry they may be inadver
tently fathering or mothering a baby.
Many people also claim that rela
tionships arc simpler without sex and
that each partner can more easily and
objectively evaluate his or her true
feelings about the relationship with
out intense sexual emotions getting in
the way.
Despite these benefits, knowing
that virgins arc such a minority, I’d be
pretty nervous about revealing my
sexual status — and I’m not saying
whether I’m a virgin. Hypothetically
speaking, I’d feel almost as nervous
about “coming out” as a virgin as a
homosexual would about “coming out”
as a lesbian.
Speaking of homosexuality, here
is another subject that people like to
form rigid opinions around. Many
people, for example, still label homo
sexuality as “immoral” or “sick.” I
understand this because I used to share
these views. However, after getting
to know several people of various
orientations, I’ve found that one’s
orientation does not have anything to
do with his or her morality or mental
health.
I attended several weddings this
fall, but two of them stand out in my
mind.
One was between a male and a
female whose relationship was strewn
with chaotic arguments, physical abuse
and an unwanted pregnancy. The
ceremony was large, formal, deco
rous and somehow fake. I wondered
about the mental health of two people
who would want to continue a rela
tionship like theirs for a lifetime.
The other ceremony I attended
would not have been considered a
legal matrimony. It was between two
women whose relationship was char
acterized by nurturing, devotion and
mutual sacrifice.
The ceremony was small, plain,
held in their home and more “real”
than any marriage ceremony I had
ever attended. They were not getting
married for legal reasons, social pres
sures, money or any motive other
than love. Nothing could be more
moral than that.
Of course, some homosexuals can
be just as mentally ill or immoral as
some heterosexuals can. And virgins
aren’t necessarily more virtuous than
those who choose to have honest and
responsible sexual relationships,
whether inside or outside of mar
riage. Finally, despite our biological
commonalities, not all differences
between men and women can be
blamed on culture.
Judging different forms of sexual
ity may be as elusive and complex as
the task of judging different forms of
art.
Opinions vary over the dil icrenccs
between “art” and “obscenity” just as
much as they vary over differences
between “masculine”and “feminine”
or between “morality” and “immor
ality.” I’ve heard descriptions of Play
boy, for example, which vary from
“art” to “pornography.”
The final analysis in any judg
ment, however, should take into ac
count culture, motivation and effect.
And, especially when one is judging
the morality of various issues, sweep
ing generalizations should not be used.
Practices that harm others or arc
based on personal gratification through
the exploitation of others should be
labeled as “bad.” But practices that
promote self-esteem and arc based on
integrity and love should be recog
nized for their “good.”
There is room for both types of
practices in almost all sexual ideolo
gies, and each case must be examined
separately.
Pytlik is a senior art and psychology
major and a Daily Nebraskan staff artist and
columnist.
Arts should receive no federal funding
It is always a treat to read the Daily
Nebraskan. I invariably learn some
thing new about myself. For example,
just this semester 1 have learned that
because I am white, I am automati
cally “racist” (and worse — 1 am
responsible for crimes I didn’t even
know I committed against people I
have never met, most of whom have
been dead for hundreds of years). I
have also learned that because I am a
married heterosexual, I am “homo
phobic.” Because I am a Christian, I
am “intolerant.” Because I believe
that the principles underlying the
Declaration of Independence and the
Constitution arc based on Judeo-Chris
tian values (which include religious
tolerance and freedom), I am an
“egotist.” I assume from this that
because I am male, I must also be
“sexist.” I’m sure that as I continue to
read the DN, I will discover other “
ist,” “-ic” and “-ant" labels that have
been placed upon me by people who
don’t even know me.
Most recently, I learned that be
cause I believe it is inappropriate for
the federal government to dole out
lax dollars for art, I have “meager
artistic sympathies’’ (not to mention
■ - , _ ✓
lhal I am “self-righteous, homopho
bic, right-wing," whatever that means).
This comes as a surprise to a pianist,
organist, vocalist, composer and
conductor who used to consider him
self a patron of the arts.
Thank you for enlightening me
with the truth, DN! Now that I know
that while, male, heterosexual, Chris
tian conservatives arc the lowest form
of life on the planet, one might won
der how 1 can stand to look in the
mirror.
Actually, I can look in the mirror,
because I know that 1 am neither
racist, sexist, homophobic, intolerant
nor overly egotistical. All these la
bels have been placed upon me by
people who themselves personify the
intolerance they profess to condemn.
I wish to point out lhal apprecia
tion for art docs not equate to advo
cacy of the NEA and its irresponsible
handling of tax dollars. In their im
passioned responses, Mr. Hcjduk, Ms.
Engel and Mr. Chumblcy seemed to
miss Mr. Fahlcson’s main point
(“Federal funding for arts lunacy,”
DN, Feb. 28). He did not say funding
of the arts is lunacy; rather, he as
sorted that FEDERAL funding of arts
(of any kind, regardless of merit or
lack thereof) is lunacy. The key word
is federal.-The NEA was a bad idea
from the start. Those who say the
NEA should not be subject to public
scrutiny and that it should not engage
in censorship arc absolutely correct;
it should be eliminated altogether.
And Jill, the NEA is not a private
“organization;” if it were, it could
spend its money any way it wanted
and I couldn’t care less. Rather, it is a
governmental agency, whose “patheti
cally meager” budget would be loo
high if it were SI a year.
I share Mr. Hcjduk’s vision of a
day when the fine arts will enjoy the
same level of interest, community
pride and funding as sports. How
ever, this never will be acco;npl'shcd
through federal ^vS People
should not be forced v^uy for art that
violates their community values,
whether it is obscene, sacrilegious,
traitorous or even simply inept.
Irv Nelson
graduate student
business
PC-6340 Notebook Computer- $1.695
•386SX-20 MHz Processor
•2Mb RAM, 40 Mb Hard Drive
•VGA Display * 32 Shades
•8 1/2"x 11"; ONLY 4.4 lbs!
PC-6641 Notebook Computer - $1.595
•386 SX-20 MHz Processor
•2 Mb RAM, 40 Mb Hard Drive
•Internal 1.44 Mb Floppy Drive
•8 1/2"x 11"; ONLY 5.7 lbs!
PC-6220 Notebook Computer - $849
•286-12 MHz Processor
•20 Mb Hard Drive, 1Mb RAM
• VGA Display; ONLY 4.4 lbs!
Laser Printers
*Limited availability on some items, so act fast.
Sharp Electronics/Midwest HighTech
Campus Representative: Steve Jorgensen
Call Now 467-2617
Get your "SPRING BREAK" Tan aod suit at
OCEAN CLUB.
Our new WOLFF Tanning Beds are in and
just in time for you to start on that
SPRING BREAK TAN!
Our Tanning Packages sell for
$25 for 1-month of "unlimited usage"
or $50 for 3-months of "unlimited usage"
THESE SPECIAL PRICES ON TANNING
PACKAGES END SUNDAY, MARCH 15TH.
Get yours today!
Sun. 12-5
'ANy‘4 FOR'$2r6o ;
Choose from Taco,
Soft Taco, Tostada,
Bean Burrito, and
Chips 'n Salsa.
Pleaae present coupon when ordering Limn one coupon per
party. Not good with any other otter Otter good at Lincoln
Taco Beii locations Elitres March 3^^ 1^92^5
BUY ONE !
GET ONE FREE!
Buy a Burrito Supreme
and Get The 2nd One FREE!
Pleat* present coupon when ordering. Limit on* coupon per
party. Not good with any other otter Otler good at Lincoln ■
TuMim. Expires March 31,1992
I 1 r
TACO BELL,
^SNjlSth^^JUNFORTH^OgfflllK^^SOOJO^
