Home is where the heart is.

How is sexuality like a house?

When we are kids, we learn basic ways of relating to the world around us. Any fuzzy animal with four legs is a dog - (regardless of whether it's actually a cat, a goat or a rabbit). We are praised for our keen observation, and then shown ways to expand our perceptions to include the diversity of fuzzy animals with four legs.

When our motor skills are more developed, many kids enjoy dabbling in the fine arts and will create masterpieces of "my family and our house" to be hung on the fridge when they get home from school. A child is usually taught that a house can be depicted with a large square containing two windows on the front, a rectangular door and a triangle roof. Parents and teachers feel no pressure to tell them that in actuality houses come in many different shapes, sizes and constructions because they trust that when they get older they will be exposed to an array of different housing structures and naturally come to understand that "a house" carries many forms and meanings. As an adult such simplistic assumptions of what constitutes the "appropriate" criteria for a house will be eagerly dismissed, making way for modern, even "art-like" avant garde representations of houses to be showcased and sold to the lucky few who can afford them (google images of upside down houses, tree houses, underground houses, glass houses, and even hobbit houses).

While, as kids, we may have been told to draw a house a certain way, as we grew older we were no longer limited to the rigid way we first came to understand what "a house" means. Indeed, as an adult in search of our first home, we recognize that houses come in an infinite number of forms and varieties simply because there exists infinite aesthetic, functional and structural needs and preferences to be met and satisfied.

Why is it then, that we are still so bound in terms of what we think sexuality is? Especially with regards to what is understood and taught as "healthy" sexuality, "appropriate" sexual activity and the "best" relational structure in which to engage in the former. If we can see the need to create a tailored (housing) structure to contain us, why are we so contained by the (societal) structure that houses us? 

Just like houses that may take on numerous forms (highrise condo, beach house, apartment, multi-family dwellings), so to do relationships and sexualities. Houses can come in different sizes and designs, be set in different locations, use different materials, contain different elements and contents, and serve different purposes. And as a society we accept this (and if you love HGTV programming as much as I do, you would argue we even celebrate this). We certainly did not grow up and try to make all of our houses conform to a certain norm or standard with disregard to the multitude of needs that exist in the world (in all my travels, I actually have never found a single home that looks like the stereotypical child's drawing, and trust me I've been keenly searching). Frankly it would be ridiculous to assume everyone in the world would be happy in a two bedroom, split level home in suburban southern Canada. Instead, we made our structures conform to us. What began as a foundational way of conceptualizing a house as a kid, got expanded upon and developed in to a rich understanding of the multiple ways that one thing (a home) can manifest.

So why haven't we let our minds grow and expand to understand the multiple ways one thing (a human being) can manifest as well?

With respect to sexuality and relationships, like houses, one size does not fit all! There exists a spectrum of sexual identities (LGBT is just the beginning and yes, asexuality is an identity), a variety of relationship designs and structures (polyamoury, polyfidelity, monogamy, monogamish, swinging etc.), and an even more diverse utopia of needs and preferences when it comes to sexual activities (I'll let you google those on your own time).

My point is when it comes to the sexual education of our kids and future generations, why are we limiting them to the square house with one door, two windows and a triangular roof when so much diversity exists? Sure, you want to give them a good foundation to base their explorations and self-identity development on - but instead of "heterosexuality, monogamy, and sex after marriage", I think we should be using more eco-friendly materials like "high self-esteem, acceptance and respect for others, healthy body image, and personal, relational and sexual autonomy".

If we can give our kids the tools they need build something safe, then we needn't worry about what design they choose in order to feel fulfilled and live happily.

E