You may be asking these questions if you have just stumbled upon my blog.
I have to admit I certainly did when creating it.
Why the association of sexuality with pink and red, hearts and roses, lips, tongues, chocolate and candles? These were the images I had to choose from for the background layout of this blog.
It took me hours (literally) to decide what "message" I wanted to send out to my readers. It would appear I have settled on "sexuality = love, sensuality, romance" and, ultimately, "femininity". The problem is, this doesn't sit well with me.
So why did I choose them? Is it simply because of the familiarity of these signs and signifiers? Is it because these associations are comfortable, safe even?
Situating sexuality - something we see as powerful, overwhelming, confusing, dangerous, taboo and to be controlled - within the confined parameters of romantic, heteronormative discourse, allows the vast majority of public readers to feel at ease. Associating sexuality with femininity (aka passivity) ensures the reader that messages won't be too challenged. they won't feel uncomfortable, put on the spot, or left to feel unstable or uncertain after reading. Often people seek out sexuality blogs as a source of reassurance or comfort. Associations of love, romance, and intimacy serve this purpose, but furthermore, appear to legitimize the very expression of sexuality in a public forum.
The problem is, in making some feel safe, I am also (unhappily) exuding and isolating other readers. I explored other choices; what message would I have been sending had I chosen fireworks? The idea that sexuality should be explosive, passionate and firey perhaps? What about candles or chocolate? Sexuality must then equal slow, lingering sensuality. What about nature scenes? Would I be endorsing a notion that sexuality is natural? Serene? After all, what IS sexuality exactly? And can I really categorize it or pinpoint it in a way that applies unilaterally AND multi-dimensionally?
What happens to someone's sexual confidence and identity when these common descriptors/associations are NOT a part of their experiences of sexuality? What happens when our experience of sexuality deviates from the societal "safety zones" of intimate expression, reproduction, and opposite gender couplings? Why is it that I am frustratingly limited to these associations when wishing to describe and represent one of the most all encompassing elements of our lives?!
My Google image searches for sexuality featured "feminine" representations including curves, porcelain skin tones, closed eyes, pink lips - parted, waiting, passive. this was contrasted with more "masculine" images of gleaning muscles, women bent over or tied up and gagged, hard, erect, large throbbing members. What is it about feminine that implies "soft", "submissive" and "innocent" while masculinity reveals images of power, control dominance. Can women not dominate, can men not be soft? Are men naturally sexual while women are merely sexualised?
It really made me wonder where these notions came from, why they continue to be packaged, sold and perpetuated, and what purpose do they still serve? Moreover, I began to become hyper-aware of what tone I was sending to my readers regarding sexuality, my beliefs, and even subconsciously if I was creating constructs and parameters around sexuality that may confine or restrict people.
In the end I settled on the pink, the hearts, the roses, the flowy romantic fonts not because I believe that's what sexuality is, nor because I want my blog to stay within the safety zone - indeed, I want the opposite! Of course I want you as a reader to feel safe and respected here, but the blog itself is about busting out of the safety zone, challenging the status quo and destabilizing our reliance on restrictive messages of sexuality. So I guess I just have to own up to the fact that I personally just love the look of hearts, roses, pink and loopy scriptures.
But I'll put out a challenge to you: I'd like you to think about the power of broadening our discourses and knowledge of sexuality. What other images can we use to expand the parameters of sexuality that will create a stimulating, yet still neutral zone, for people to explore. How would new imagery affect our understanding and experience as sexual beings? How would it affect our future socio-sexual climate? And how the hell should I design my blog????
E
No comments:
Post a Comment