Redefining "normal" sexuality

[MistressValerie1]

This article is definitely of interest to us:

What's 'normal' sex? Shrinks seek definition
Controversy erupts over creation of psychiatric rule book's new edition
By Brian Alexander

Excerpt:

Carol Queen, a sexologist, sexual rights activist and co-founder of San Francisco’s Center for Sex and Culture, believes the new DSM should stress that sexual variances are only a problem “if they are problems in the life of the person showing up” in a psychiatrist’s office “so that when somebody is eroticizing something, or doing something in a consensual way, that’s not a problem” even if it may seem odd to most of us.

I highly recommend the full article at http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24664654/

 

[FeatherDaemon1]

I agree with that sentiment. Then again it brings one to the question, how far is too far? I think that no matter how open the DSM leaves the definition there will always be something being done by someone which will cause us all to do a double-take.

 

[Relent<]

This might not sound as refined and cultured as the words of a sexologist, but my personal belief has always been, "who the hell is normal, anyway?"
I think that Luckycat expressed it best in one oh his literary works. To paraphrase:
"No one is normal. 'Normal' is just an average between extremes. Without us 'weirdos,' 'normal' would not exist."

 

[Bashiku]

There is no definition for normal person... why should there be a definition for a normal sexual activity?

 

[BigNorm]

the only normal sex is in the times of the show "Leave it to Beaver" when folks did it missionary style and that was that. and who wants that boring sh*t? lol

 

[Meka1]

the only normal sex is in the times of the show "Leave it to Beaver" when folks did it missionary style and that was that. and who wants that boring sh*t? lol

lmao, well said my friend

 

[MistressValerie1]

There is no definition for normal person... why should there be a definition for a normal sexual activity?

In the USA, DSM defines "abnormal" behaviour, including sexual variations, and unfortunately it carries great weight in the legal and medical system. Nearly all forms of non-genital sex are currently stigmatised, but the DSM revision committee is considering removing the "abnormal" label from many harmless sexual variations.

 

[Bashiku]

In the USA, DSM defines "abnormal" behaviour, including sexual variations, and unfortunately it carries great weight in the legal and medical system. Nearly all forms of non-genital sex are currently stigmatised, but the DSM revision committee is considering removing the "abnormal" label from many harmless sexual variations.

Damn... I am lucky to be here then... It is strange for our people too, but it is not uncommon and nobody raises such a turmoil about it. Here Sexual activities are sexual activities no matter what kind...
Poor you...

 

[Duke Diablo]

In the USA, DSM defines "abnormal" behaviour, including sexual variations, and unfortunately it carries great weight in the legal and medical system. Nearly all forms of non-genital sex are currently stigmatised, but the DSM revision committee is considering removing the "abnormal" label from many harmless sexual variations.

So, in other words, the government decides what you should do in the privacy of your bedroom?
Damn. And then they say you got freedom.

As for 'normal'... never actually cared about it, and I'm not about to start caring.

 

[MistressValerie1]

So, in other words, the government decides what you should do in the privacy of your bedroom?
Damn. And then they say you got freedom.

As for 'normal'... never actually cared about it, and I'm not about to start caring.

Yes, the government has imposed many laws against so-called "unnatural" sexual activity, which is often vaguely defined, although the landmark 2003 Lawrence vs. Texas ruling has cast doubt on their constitutionality. Still, being labelled a "sexual deviate" can affect such legal matters as divorce proceedings, psychiatric hearings, eligbility for certain jobs, etc. Removal of victimless, non-dangerous sexual variations from DSM would go a long way toward removing the stigma frequently attached to BDSM and similar activities.

 

[Duke Diablo]

Yes, the government has imposed many laws against so-called "unnatural" sexual activity, which is often vaguely defined, although the landmark 2003 Lawrence vs. Texas ruling has cast doubt on their constitutionality. Still, being labelled a "sexual deviate" can affect such legal matters as divorce proceedings, psychiatric hearings, eligbility for certain jobs, etc. Removal of victimless, non-dangerous sexual variations from DSM would go a long way toward removing the stigma frequently attached to BDSM and similar activities.

Well, in that case, I'm all against laws, and all for their redefinition. Good luck with that, my friends from across the ocean. After all, discrimination of any kind is what I hate, and this is sexual discrimination. Also, it's a damn negation of personal freedoms.