Sex, Sexuality and Ted Haggard

“I’m a heterosexual with issues,” he says on Oprah.  Ted Haggard speaks rather candidly about his sexuality and does make some good sense about the US’ (and other places too) dichotomous thinking about sexuality.  My question is what the hell does “with issues” mean?  Ted, are you saying that your affinities for same sex relationships are “issues” to be dealt with?  Another major criticism I have of him is that he is continually saying that he is and was satisfied with his relationship with his wife and THIS is where he has hit the proverbial wall.  Let me ask you this, if you’re happy and satisfied with your relationship, do you seek out to have an affair or affairs?  Not a chance! 

Also, Haggard and his wife seem to cite the fact that the continually had sex as a reason why he isn’t gay (they’re not even waving the flag of bisexuality either!)  which further proves the point that who you have sex with can’t be the only factor in determining ones sexual identity.  With “our” current conceptualization of sexuality, Ted would be bisexual simply because he has sex with men and women but then I ask you is Angelina Jolie any less ”bisexual” because she only has sex with Brad Pitt now?  N-O-P-E.  We sometimes forget that Jolie has also given up sex with other men simply constituting a monogamous relationship.  Let me ALSO note that I have never seen a quote of Jolie referring to herself as bisexual.  Rather, all I’ve read are statements by her that she also adores and loves being in relationships with women. 

Me, oh my, the reason why we are still having this discussion on sexuality is because we want to hold on to those labels so strongly.  Why?  Because if I know who or what you are, then I can be safe in distinguishing myself as different from you.  It truly is sad, that in the development of our lives our identies are commonly developed and defined in opposition to those around us.  Even Haggard’s current identity of “heterosexual  wit issues” is defined by his therapist (I personally think he needs a new one).  Also, does anyone else find it bothersome that the church is now coming in defense of Haggard since he’s gone on to deal with his “compulsions.” In Haggard’s case, let’s just call it for what it is…he has disgraced his church, his religion, his family and himself because he lives in a world which he feels doesn’t accept him.  We are all part of that world. 

Meanwhile, there are some very provocative comments on Anderson Cooper’s blog here.

My Pretty Should be Your Pretty Too

   

Over the past couple of days, I have had conversations with friends about this interconnectedness in which we live our lives and I hope that we all recognize that even though we are born and die alone, we are always with others.  Everything I do has some reflection on others around me.

This being said, there can be no belief or action we hold that doesn’t affect someone else.  I think about this a lot in the context of what it means to be considered attractive.  No matter your sexuality, preference, or orientation we all have standards which we impose on each other and each gender most certainly has a considerable stake in how the other views their physical appearance.  In a world where we see Hollywood’s female actors so made up, with “perfect” breasts and “perfect” bodies, to blame women’s standard of beauty on women only is what I would consider ignorant and unrealistic.  The same goes for men’s standard of attractiveness as well.  Granted it’s not really ”macho” to admit, but men are just as intimidated by Brad Pitt and Justin Timberlake as women are intimidated by Halle Berry and Angelina Jolie.  Granted, the number of images of men aren’t as prevalent as those of women.

The point is, with this interconnectedness that links us to each other, it is incredibly difficult to completely deny that our standards of attractiveness have no implications for others and above all that, it simply just doesn’t make very much sense.

Having children…selfish or selfless?

 

Expectant mom Angelina Jolie

Recently I came across an article (don’t ask me how) that centered around the debate of, is having children SELFish or SELFless?  This debate has spawned from the incredible celebrity baby “boom” that has taken place in most recent history, from Madonna’s adoption to Halle Berry’s first child and of course Angelina Jolie’s expanding family. 

Is having children SELFish of SELFless?  Well, I think it would be ignorant of anyone to fail to acknowledge the self-centered principles involved.  I personally have witnessed many girls and women over the years state they wanted to have children because the wanted to feel “loved” and “needed” or simply wanted to take care of and nurture another being. Mind you, some will argue that this is natural and innate for women, but I am not so convinced.

From the time little girls are able to recognize difference between their fingers and toes, we are already making sure they understand that what they should do when they grow up is get married and raise children. For many women (and just people in general) this is not the case.  Some are not able to conceive children, carry them full term and others simply don’t seek to get married or maybe aren’t even able to do so. 

With the recent Gloucester school pregnancy “boom,” which by the way, high school girls have been getting pregnant since the beginning of time, going on and the recent influx of Hollywood “A-Listers” having more and more children, this does bring up the very important and thought provoking issue of why we parent.  Read the article I’m referencing here.