“NO SEX PLEASE, we’re middle class…”: that’s the headline to a worthwhile Camille Paglia OP-ED piece in today’s New York Times. (I recommend it –that and a excellent Frank Rich piece on The McChrystal Fiasco– make it worth the price of admission….

I am not a great fan of Camille Paglia –not her style, not her persona. And not that signature cartoon drawing of her that she uses –it reveals a self-view that is oddly disquieting for some reason.

But she has a sharp mind and is a constant culture-watcher.

And today’s column is …provocative. I recommend it.

I reproduce the first paragraphs here…..and will enter my own comments on it as soon as that guy comes over to pickup his tomato plants. (He has been promising for weeks –looks like todays the day…)

SO, FIRST, CAMILLE’s first few paragraphs:

“No Sex Please, We’re Middle Class
Published: June 25, 2010
WILL women soon have a Viagra of their own? Although a Food and Drug Administration advisory panel recently rejected an application to market the drug flibanserin in the United States for women with low libido, it endorsed the potential benefits and urged further research. Several pharmaceutical companies are reported to be well along in the search for such a drug.

The implication is that a new pill, despite its unforeseen side effects, is necessary to cure the sexual malaise that appears to have sunk over the country. But to what extent do these complaints about sexual apathy reflect a medical reality, and how much do they actually emanate from the anxious, overachieving, white upper middle class?

In the 1950s, female “frigidity” was attributed to social conformism and religious puritanism. But since the sexual revolution of the 1960s, American society has become increasingly secular, with a media environment drenched in sex.

The real culprit, originating in the 19th century, is bourgeois propriety. As respectability became the central middle-class value, censorship and repression became the norm. Victorian prudery ended the humorous sexual candor of both men and women during the agrarian era, a ribaldry chronicled from Shakespeare’s plays to the 18th-century novel. The priggish 1950s, which erased the liberated flappers of the Jazz Age from cultural memory, were simply a return to the norm.

Only the diffuse New Age movement, inspired by nature-keyed Asian practices, has preserved the radical vision of the modern sexual revolution. But concrete power resides in America’s careerist technocracy, for which the elite schools, with their ideological view of gender as a social construct, are feeder cells.

In the discreet white-collar realm, men and women are interchangeable, doing the same, mind-based work. Physicality is suppressed; voices are lowered and gestures curtailed in sanitized office space. Men must neuter themselves, while ambitious women postpone procreation. Androgyny is bewitching in art, but in real life it can lead to stagnation and boredom, which no pill can cure.

Meanwhile, family life has put middle-class men in a bind; they are simply cogs in a domestic machine commanded by women. Contemporary moms have become virtuoso super-managers of a complex operation focused on the care and transport of children. But it’s not so easy to snap over from Apollonian control to Dionysian delirium.

[SEE the rest at the NYT site. Please, make your own comments here, or on Facebook. And look for my own comments later…..]

Both comments and pings are currently closed. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. 

Comments are closed.