Ignorance

I have said before than I'm not thrilled with how the New York magazine roundtable turned out, but I am finding more and more people simply railing against the idea of writing about sex in general. A commenter wrote on this J Daters Anonymous blog:

But I always felt it was kind of sad that for Sohn, and all these women, the only way they could make a name for themselves as writers was to exploit their sexuality. It's such a tempting, and easy trap to fall into for a writer, as our culture values voyeuristic pleasures over literary. And I really think that once you taste success from that kind of self-exploitation (not to mention exploitation of your friends and lovers), it's hard to develop as a writer because writing about sex becomes a crutch. You'll always have readers, no matter how uninteresting your writing is.

What's funny is that last night at the Museum of Sex, those who were there got to see sex writers who actually care. It was great to hear Tristan talk about trying to educate people via porn. In a sense, I agree, people DO want to read about sex, but I think rather than just dismissing the entire genre of people like Susie Bright, Sallie Tisdale, Lisa Palac, Carol Queen, Lily Burana, Tristan Taormino, etc., who I consider "my people" unequivocably, I think it's actually much more challenging to try to say something worthwhile, interesting and honest about sex. To me, that is the challenge, and the reward. It's not so much that I mind bitchy, catty comments like these above, but the implication that I DON'T work hard to develop myself as a writer, that I use sex as a "crutch." I didn't go seeking out most of the opportunities that have come my way, but have tried to make them into something original. I may not always succeed, but I'd venture to guess that these women have not actually read anything beyond the mistitled "Sex Columnists Tell All." That couldn't be farther from the truth - that was not "all" and while obviously if you weren't there you don't know what else was said, we all write and most of us blog and those writings are much more accurate portrayals than what was in the article. I can't speak for anyone else, but I just have to laugh because writing about sex has opened me up in so many ways, has taught me about myself and expanded my writing repertoire in countless ways. I'm sure plenty of other people think it's sad, and that's totally their right, but I'm grateful that at least some people get it-that we are not exploiting ourselves or our sexuality, but exploring them. I have consciously chosen to write about topics in my Voice column that are not "mine" in the sense of stemming from my personal interests - I am not a chastity advocate, a fetishist, and don't have rape fantasies. But I am a voyeur, and through my work I get to be the consummate voyeur, but I also hope that I open up dialogues, that I am open to other viewpoints, that it is not just about me and my actions or non-actions. I think it's sad when people pigeonhole sex writing as being only of one vein, as only belonging to Carrie Bradshaw and her ilk, instead of a lens through which to look at arousal, attraction, gender, power, class and countless other topics, as well as sex itself.