Author Peggy Orenstein's new book, Boys & Sex, is based on extensive interviews with more than 100 college and college-bound boys and young men across the U.S. between the ages of 16 and 22 on intimacy, consent and navigating masculinity. They spanned a broad range of races, religions, classes and sexual orientations. Siza Padovan/Getty Images hide caption
Orenstein spent 25 years chronicling the lives of adolescent and teen girls and never really expected to focus on boys. But then came the #MeToo movement, and Orenstein, whose previous books include Girls & Sex and Cinderella Ate My Daughter, decided it was time to engage young men in conversations about gender and intimacy.
Porno men young boys!
Download File: https://demppomednu.blogspot.com/?iy=2vGHB2
"When I was doing the girl book, the kind of core issue with girls was that they were being cut off from their bodies and not understanding their bodies' response and their needs and their limits and their desires," she says. "With boys, it felt like they were being cut off from their hearts."
Orenstein notes that society doesn't often give boys "permission or space" to discuss their interior lives. Maybe that's why the young men she spoke to were so eager to open up: "When they had the chance [to talk], when somebody really gave it to them and wasn't going to be judgmental about what they had to say, they went for it."
Orenstein says the boys she spoke with felt constrained by traditional notions of masculinity. One interviewee confided that he preferred to partner with girls for school projects because, "It was OK to say you didn't know what you were doing with a girl, and you couldn't do that with a guy."
"That idea of emotional vulnerability was so profound for boys," Orenstein says. "Vulnerability is basically essential to human relationships, so when you cut boys off from the ability to be vulnerable, you're doing them a huge disservice."
And it is basically the fear of being called [that] that shuts down any objection to stepping up and standing out. So it polices boys, basically. And I also was really interested in "#nohomo." C.J. Pascoe, who is a sociologist in Oregon, had done a survey of the way boys use that hashtag on Twitter. And it wasn't just a homophobic slur. It was also a protective shield that allowed them to express just really basic human ideas about affection and joy. So they would say, like, "I miss you, man. #nohomo," or even something as innocuous as, "I like chocolate ice cream. #nohomo." It was just a way that allowed them to be fully human.
One thing that research shows is that [porn] actually reduces their satisfaction in their partnered relationships. So they feel less satisfied with their partners' bodies, with their own bodies, with their own performance. So right there, something to talk to boys about is, "It's not going to be doing any favors once you get into the actual bedroom." But it affects their ideas about what women should look like. It affects their ideas about how women should behave. It affects their ideas of what acts should be performed and the way that those acts should be performed. One of the boys [told] me that his girlfriend was a curvy African American girl, and he said that having spent hours and hours and hours looking at and reacting to what he called "all those skinny white women," that he had a hard time being aroused by her body. And that was really disturbing him.
"Hookup" is an intentionally ambiguous term. It can mean anything. It might mean kissing. It might mean oral sex. It might mean intercourse. And, in truth, when you look into the research, about a third of college hookups fall into each of those categories. But that ambiguity allows young people to vastly overestimate what their peers are doing. And then that can actually trigger a kind of anxiety and fear of missing out, or expectation of what you are supposed to be doing, that can make you engage in sex that maybe you don't want to have, or push harder than you might otherwise push.
Among the group, the average age of first exposure was 13.37 years of age with the youngest exposure as early as 5 and the latest older than 26. More men indicated their first exposure was accidental (43.5 percent) than intentional (33.4 percent) or forced (17.2 percent). Six percent did not indicate the nature of the exposure.
Pederasty in ancient Greece was a socially acknowledged romantic relationship between an older male (the erastes) and a younger male (the eromenos) usually in his teens.[2] It was characteristic of the Archaic and Classical periods.[3] The influence of pederasty on Greek culture of these periods was so prevalent that it has been called "the principal cultural model for free relationships between citizens."[4]
The word erômenos, or "beloved" (ἐρώμενος, plural eromenoi), is the masculine form of the present passive participle from erô, viewed by Dover as the passive or subordinate sexual participant. An erômenos can also be called pais, "child".[20] The pais was regarded as a future citizen, not an "inferior object of sexual gratification", and was portrayed with respect in art.[21] The word can be understood as an endearment such as a parent might use, found also in the poetry of Sappho[22] and a designation of only relative age. Both art and other literary references show that the erômenos was at least a teen, with modern age estimates ranging from 13 to 20, or in some cases up to 30. Most evidence indicates that to be an eligible erômenos, a youth would be of an age when an aristocrat began his formal military training,[23] that is, from fifteen to seventeen.[24] As an indication of physical maturity, the erômenos was sometimes as tall as or taller than the older erastês, and may have his first facial hair.[25] Another word used by the Greeks for the younger sexual participant was paidika, a neuter plural adjective ("things having to do with children") treated syntactically as masculine singular.[20]
The erastês-erômenos relationship played a role in the Classical Greek social and educational system, had its own complex social-sexual etiquette and was an important social institution among the upper classes.[32] Pederasty has been understood as educative,[33] and Greek authors from Aristophanes to Pindar felt it naturally present in the context of aristocratic education (paideia).[34] In general, pederasty as described in the Greek literary sources is an institution reserved for free citizens, perhaps to be regarded as a dyadic mentorship. According to historian Sarah Iles Johnston, "pederasty was widely accepted in Greece as part of a male's coming-of-age, even if its function is still widely debated".[35] The scene of Xenophon's Symposium, and also that of Plato's Protagoras, is set at Callias III's house during a banquet hosted by him for his beloved Autolykos in honour of a victory gained by the handsome young man in the pentathlon at the Panathenaic Games.[36]
The age-range when boys entered into such relationships was consonant with that of Greek girls given in marriage, often to adult husbands many years their senior. Boys, however, usually had to be courted and were free to choose their mate, while marriages for girls were arranged for economic and political advantage at the discretion of father and suitor.[40] These connections were also an advantage for a youth and his family, as the relationship with an influential older man resulted in an expanded social network.[citation needed] Thus, some considered it desirable to have had many admirers or mentors, if not necessarily lovers per se, in one's younger years.[citation needed] Typically, after their sexual relationship had ended and the young man had married, the older man and his protégé would remain on close terms throughout their life.
In parts of Greece, pederasty was an acceptable form of homoeroticism that had other, less socially accepted manifestations, such as the sexual use of slaves or being a pornos (prostitute) or hetairos (the male equivalent of a hetaira).[41] Male prostitution was treated as a perfectly routine matter and visiting prostitutes of either sex were considered completely acceptable for a male citizen.[42] However, adolescent citizens of free status who prostituted themselves were sometimes ridiculed, and were permanently prohibited by Attic law from performing some seven official functions[nb 1][44][45] because it was believed that since they had sold their own body "for the pleasure of others" (ἐφ' ὕβρει, eph' hybrei), they would not hesitate to sell the interests of the community as a whole.[45] If they, or an adult citizen of free status who had prostituted himself, performed any of the official functions prohibited to them by law (in later life), they were liable to prosecution and punishment. However, if they did not perform those specific functions, did not present themselves for the allocation of those functions and declared themselves ineligible if they were somehow mistakenly elected to perform those specific functions, they were safe from prosecution and punishment. As non-citizens visiting or residing in a city-state could not perform official functions in any case whatsoever, they could prostitute themselves as much as they wanted.[46]
Transgressions of the customs pertaining to the proper expression of homosexuality within the bounds of pederaistia could be used to damage the reputation of a public figure. In his speech "Against Timarchus" in 346 BC, the Athenian politician Aeschines argues against further allowing Timarchus, an experienced middle-aged politician, certain political rights, as Attic law prohibited anyone who had prostituted himself from exercising those rights[47] and Timarchus was known to have spent his adolescence as the sexual partner of a series of wealthy men in order to obtain money.[48] Such a law existed because it was believed that anyone who had sold their own body would not hesitate to sell the interests of the city-state.[45] Aeschines won his case, and Timarchus was sentenced to atimia (disenfranchisement and civic disempowerment). Aeschines acknowledges his own dalliances with beautiful boys, the erotic poems he dedicated to these youths, and the scrapes he has gotten into as a result of his affairs, but he emphasizes that none of these were mediated by money. A financial motive thus was viewed as threatening a man's status as free.[citation needed] 2ff7e9595c
Comentários