Inequality: Sex, love, and racism
Is sexual attraction a mark of racial equality? In a word, no
Last week, I watched the French movie “Les Textiles” on television. The film, about a couple that accidentally purchases a vacation home in the middle of a nudist colony, reminded me of the Australian movie “Wild Country”, about two anthropologists that study a tribe in New Guinea.
What’s the connection? The French film is restricted to adults over 18 years old, but the Australian movie is only limited to viewers over the age of 14. I think this may say something about the relationship between erotica and inequality.
Why was the Australian film deemed appropriate for younger viewers? It contained many detailed and multi-focused scenes of topless women as well as frank discussions of weird, and possibly even perverted, sexual acts. The French movie seemed innocent in contrast.
Black nude, white nude
So, I think that the issue here is inequality. The nude women in the Australian movie are black and live in the jungle. Apparently, these women are not considered to be erotic, at least not according to television movie raters.
Let’s talk about erotica and racism. Does sexual attraction represent racial equality? If a white man, for example, is sexually attracted to a black woman, does that mean that he’s treating her with equality? In a word, no. History backs me up.
Bestiality is an extreme example of a sexual attraction which obviously has nothing to do with equality. During Biblical times, shepherds had relations with their flocks; we learn this from the Bible’s prohibition against bestiality. Similarly, in Europe, during the Middle Ages and the Renaissance, men were tried for having sexual intercourse with animals.
Incidentally, during one of these court cases, a farmer and his donkey were accused of having sex. The farmer was sentenced to death, but the court had mercy on the donkey. She only received lashes, because it was her first offense.
Slaves, who were considered to be inferior, were always victims of their masters’ sexual desires. For instance, former American president Thomas Jefferson allegedly fathered children with Sally Hemings, one of his black house slaves. The slaves’ lowly, almost sub-human, status did not detract from their sexual appeal; in fact, it is likely that their subservient rankings only enhanced their desirability.
Closer to home, although the Crusaders despised and scorned the Arabs, the Europeans raped the local women. Moreover, most of the rapes were committed by members of the monastic orders. These monks didn’t feel that they were breaking their vows of chastity by sleeping with Arab women or prostitutes.
Romantic love
At this point, I’d like to address romantic love. In contrast to sexual attraction, romantic love is firmly based on equality. When a white man falls in love with a black woman, he’s thereby erasing hundreds of years of black repression. Love, the ultimate expression of recognizing another’s humanity, is the opposite of oppression and subjugation.
Thus, an abusive husband, who beats, silences or demeans his wife, doesn’t love her. He may lust after her, because the sexual impulse can certainly hit, stifle or degrade. However, he definitely doesn’t love her.
And that’s the difference between love and sex. Love is a deep-seated yearning to grant rights to the object of one’s affection, but sex can occasionally mean violating another person’s human rights.
Illustration
Photo: Visual/Photos
מומלצים
