Post a response:
|
Interesting, thank you. You say, I would suggest that the aim of sexual liberationists is more modest than addressing the complexities of boylove and other stigmatized sexual behaviors. It is merely to carve out a space within which these complexities can be addressed free from the modern state's increasingly intrusive powers of coercion. You describe the aim as possessed of an admiral modesty of ambition, but it doesn't seem to have worked that way. Sexual liberation has not so much carved out spaces as it has torn down vast structures, and it has engaged the state, intrusively, in tearing them down and in regulating the new order. If it were just about keeping out of people's private affairs, the project might have ended long ago. Certainly BL had far more space "carved out" for it even in the relative puritanism of the US fifty years ago than it does now. But that's not all it's about; it's about a complete re-thinking of sex, sexuality, and gender in the wake of industrial and post-industrial plenitude; it's about the nature of what constitutes a legal subject in our homo economicus age of contracts and consent... Sexual liberation lost its innocence long ago. |