By Princess Pat Akpabio (Guest writer Julius Nseobot)
It is a known fact that societies differ remarkably in what they consider socially desirable and undesirable in terms of sexual activity and consequently differ in what they attempt to prevent or promote.
Almost all the scholars in the sex-related discipline have agreed that sex is a crucial part of human evolution. From antiquity, man has found himself inseparable from the lure for sex.
To some extent, the need for man to satisfy his sexual urge is as strong as the quest to cool his dry throat with water: both require special attention. Very commonly, moreover, sex behavior is specifically enjoined by obligatory regulations where it appears directly to subserve the interests of society.
In western societies, a same-sex relationship is legal. Since June 26, 2003, sexual activity between consenting adults and adolescents of a close age of the same sex has been legal nationwide, pursuant to the U.S. Supreme Court ruling in Lawrence v. Texas.
As of June 26, 2015, all states license and recognize marriage between same-sex couples as a result of the Supreme Court decision in Obergefell v. Hodges.
However, in African and Asian societies, same-sex relationship is criminalized! LGBT people face discrimination and stigmatization! In China, for instance, homosexuality is declassified as a mental illness. Same-sex couples are unable to marry or adopt, and households headed by such couples are ineligible for the same legal protections available to opposite-sex couples. In Nigeria, same-sex relationship attracts 14 years prison sentence.
The more totalitarian a government, the more likely it is to restrict or direct sexual activity. In some instances, this comes about simply as the consequence of a powerful individual (or individuals) being in a position to impose ideas upon the public. In other instances, one cannot escape the impression that sex, being a highly personal and individualistic matter, is recognized as antithetical to the whole idea of strict governmental control and supervision of the individual.
This may help explain the rigid censorship exerted by most totalitarian regimes over sexual expression. It is as though such a government, being obsessed with power, cannot tolerate the power the sexual impulse exerts on the population.
All societies have faced the problem of reconciling the need of controlling sex with that of giving it adequate expression, and all have solved it by some combination of cultural taboos, permissions, and injunctions. . It is quite interesting how society can interfered in what is supposed to be one's private business, one may wonder.
Yet this is but a reminder to us of man's possessive nature on beneficial and pleasurable activities, and also about his undying passion to set rules on everything. In conclusion, the cardinal lesson of anthropology is that no type of sexual activity or attitude has a universal, inherent social or psychological value for good or evil—the whole meaning and value of any expression of sexuality is determined by the social context within which it occurs.
My question to you on this is, should society affect or interfere with how we relate with each other sexually? I want to know your views and thoughts.
I am Princess Pat Akpabio and this is Changing minds changing attitudes