A few thoughts on promoting Sexual Literacy so that messages promoting “Sexual Ignorance” are more soundly undermined.

I drive to campus daily. On my commute, I have noticed a growing number of “sex can wait” messages on billboards carried by the communications company Clear Channel. In each of the ads, we see young brown people prominently featured. These “sex [act] can wait” billboard messages support messages that are clearly promoting what Dr. Gil Herdt calls “sexual ignorance” in our society. We know there is a powerfully aggressive resistance in American culture towards any real attempts put forth to demystify sexuality, especially when considering the youth of the nation. This resistance to endowing the young with sexual literacy stems from multiple locations of power (education system, political system, religion, the institution of family) and permeates the social structure on every conceivable level. This being such, the billboards eventually lead me to wonder what a counter-message would say.

Would it speak about the beauty and power of human sexuality? Or would it invite commuters to find out about how satisfying sex can be when you have a sound background in sexual education regardless of ones, age, sexual orientation or level of income? Simply thinking about a billboard sponsored by the National Sexuality Resource Center for example, made me wonder, how do sexuality scholars respond to the various traditional and pop cultural sites where much effort is dedicated to making open, honest and deeply complex conversations about sexuality virtually impossible? And, in a culture where the political climate has long supported the idea that a need for comprehensive sexuality education is simply, well, unneeded, could sex positive and progressive billboard ads ever be a site for a scholarly community to respond? If so, the response would need to be offered in the spirit of hope. Hope that a progressive sexual knowledge would lessen the impact the production of bad sexual knowledge has had upon society by promoting lives shaped by sexual literacy not sexual ignorance.

Because these images on the billboards bear very particular race, class, gender, and sexual orientation markers, I think it important to take an intersectional approach when theoretically exploring what may or may not be going on in these messages. This prompts us to think about the underlying messages within these messages and the various intended and unintended audiences; and this may raise implications about where we can draw meaningful conclusion by considering who is and is not pictured. Such inclusion/exclusion of images depicting members of some groups and not others seemingly suggests that some and not other need to wait to have sex. This idea lead me to think about the powerful underlying message communicating that “sex” is nothing more than an “act” that can and presumably will ruin your life if had whilst not in the safe bounds of state recognized heterosexual marriage. Clearly, given the dismal state of sexual knowledge and sexual literacy in American culture, the state of affairs will not change until there is a visible and sustained resistance from those who care greatly about and understand the importance of truly understanding the multiple complexities of human sexuality. I have a suggestion that aims to move our cultural thinking about sex from the so-called “sex act” to a more supple and nuanced concept of “sexual conversation”.

First of all, sex framed as a heterosexual marriage act is limiting to all to include the sacredly married. Sexuality scholars must get about the heuristic task of presenting a breakdown of sexual literacy for the public. The terms introduced as the definition of sexual literacy expands, should be user friendly and indicative of a non-intimidating framework. Next, terms must help illuminate how standard ideas treating sex as an act that is conditionally problematic, are bad. Such language should also be able to soundly illustrate why thinking about human sexuality as something best summed up as the “sex act” may be aptly described as dangerous and useless but at least it is also meaningless. I propose that there be a reinterpretation of “sex act” fitting for a sexual literacy frame. I propose that “sex act” be reinterpreted as “sexual conversation”. But before expounding upon what a term like sexual conversations would or could do heuristically differently from sex act; and before going on with this rather audacious proposal to stretch the lexicon of the analytical strategy of sexual literacy; and before insisting that we each make time to put our pens down and go out to spread the good news of sexual literacy to the world with the dedicated fervor of a Born Again, let me get back to what the billboards I pass everyday on my commute to campus got me to thinking about today.

The messages in the billboards are targeted for specific age groups. This indicates a commitment to hammering in a message that encourages people to ignore a fundamental component of their humanness, their sexual selves, and for their entire lives. Children depicted in one billboard have stylistic scribbles meant to replicate the improvisational strokes of crayon drawn over their smiling faces. Some have their eye cast upward, suggesting that they are imagining their future as a doctor, lawyer, astronaut, others look boldly and directly into the camera. In massive letters beneath their wistful cherub faces is a simple statement: “Your future is important. Sex can wait.” Wait for what, and when it is “time”, whatever that means, how will they know and most importantly, what will they do? They were only told to wait. In the meantime, they wait and none of these questions are asked. For most, these and other related questions about human sexuality will remain forever unanswered.

The messages are for girls and young women of color. Two billboards feature two individual teenaged women, one Black, one Latina and beneath their sternly posed, no nonsense faces are the following message, “I don’t give it up and I’m not giving in.” Such a message indicates a number of troubling covert messages. First, the message indicates that these young women more than others need help with knowing how to say “no” to the sex act. Next, it assumes that saying “no” is easy and always works. Many young women say “no” to no avail and for various reasons; for example, some say “no” because they are lesbians. Finally, the message suggests that saying “yes” to the “[hetero]sex act” stands to potentially mark young brown women as sexually irresponsible and if infected with an sexually transmitted infection (STI) or faced with an unwanted pregnancy, unforgivably culpable.

The messages in the billboards target minorities. As mentioned earlier, each billboard passed on my drive to campus prominently features racial minorities. During a quick search on the internet, I could only find one image of one of the billboards I see daily and the other is one that I have not seen, but it is a part of the same campaign and achieves the same problematic end.

The one depicting a newly married Black couple is not explicitly about waiting to have sex. Rather, this message is explicitly about the virtues of heterosexual marriage and draws a shameless link to economic power enjoyed by (some) married people. All of the ads are class specific, but this one is a bit more flagrant. The young Black man in the picture is rocking a fresh set of cornrows. I move to suggest that there is no accident that this be the image chosen to portray this Black masculinity rather than another type. Cornrows, I am certain, would have likely undermined Barack Obama’s bid for the presidency. It seems reasonable to conclude that amongst other things, this ad is insensitive to the multiple reasons minority women and men may elect to side-step marriage (for example, I have heard that people could loose income such as disability or alimony/palimony if they elect to remarry).

I read a recent blog on Dialogues which addressed the high percent of Black women who remain unmarried. I enjoyed the authors point; however, even this blog entry failed to take into account what portion of the historically high percentage of unmarried Black women are lesbian, for example. Would it not be interesting to begin building the scholarly inroads necessary to discover what percentage of married people are each open homosexuals? We could ask if heterosexually married gay men and lesbians manage to somehow render the core of marriage to little more than a sacred hetero-cultural pantomime not only for them but for heterosexuals as well. Sexuality scholars will have to remain committed to taking on many uncharted research perspectives and employ multiple methodologies if we are to establish rich, vibrant, and positive energy to sexual discourse and not only within academic and professional spaces but also within greater society.

By the time I get to campus I am not convinced that children believe that they should not think about sex, or that minority teenage women are more or less aware of some of the unexpected and potentially unwanted outcomes should their commitment to “no” not be taken seriously. Nor do I believe poor Black people who marry one another make more money (some will, some won’t), despite the ad ending with, “Marriage Works.” Some do, some don’t. After all, how sacred can the institution of marriage be when a message promoting economic benefits of marriage manages to rise above the rhetorical din defending the sanctity of marriage? However, I am convinced that “sex act” is an empty term that needs a makeover and “sexual conversation” potentially offers that.

My next blog will etch out some of the preliminary ideas I am currently thinking about regarding the heuristic expansion of sexual literacy beginning with “sexual conversation”. I will define sexual conversation and locate it within the social justice project of sexual literacy. I will illustrate that “sexual conversation” is superior to the current phrase “sex act” and I will offer projections of how sexuality scholars, each uniquely positioned, are collectively able to raise awareness about the dire need for enhanced sexual literacy in our lives and over the life course despite race, class, gender, gender identity, sexual orientation or religiosity.