Friday, March 13, 2020

Death, Sex, and the Apocalypse


We are always on the edge of catastrophe.  It is the human condition.”

Nathaniel Philbrick, speaking on the central themes of Moby-Dick, January, 2019, Newberry Library

Coronavirus has ravaged through markets more than the population so far, but it has disrupted our lives and cast a pall of fear upon us.  It is almost certain to sweep through the country and cause misery and death.  We just do not yet know just how bad it will be.  Coronavirus is the 3rd horseman of the apocalypse.  9/11 exposed the fragility of our nation’s defenses.  The Great Recession exposed the fragility of our financial system.  Coronavirus will expose the fragility of our health care and financial systems.  As the great historian William H. McNeill chronicled in Plagues and Peoples, microbes have the power to change the course of history and civilizations.

These disruptions and upheavals, caused in part, by the rapid advancement of technology and globalization are putting forward some fundamental challenges to what it means to be human, and how to think about it.  My generation (tail end of the baby boomers) and later have largely been spared the wrenching and devastating events of WWII and the Great Depression.  The long, relatively tranquil period permitted us to develop a more casual attitude toward two of the most fundamental aspects of our humanity—death and sex, and peel away some of their meaning.  Now, more than ever, we need to think about those parts of our humanity.

In part, because I have gotten older and have begun to lose mentors and friends, I have begun to think about death and its meaning more.  Because we have been spared the great catastrophes of large scale wars and pandemics, lifespans have increased and child mortality has diminished,  it has become infrequent visitor.  But that is no longer guaranteed.  Coronavirus has stoked the fear that we will see death in widespread waves. 

Death is part of our humanity.  Yet we have attempted, somewhat successfully, to expunge all forms of it from our consciousness.   Even our recent wars have been so remote that we do not see the results or the consequences.   The slaughter of farm animals for food has been replaced by a distant, mechanized process.  Caitlin Doughty and Thomas Lynch have been two of the few voices to reacquaint us with death and its rituals. In her book, Smoke Gets in Your Eyes talks of death, rituals, the process and our attempt to remove distance ourselves from it in frank (and sometimes humorous) ways.  She observes, “As late as the beginning of the 20th century, more than 85 percent of Americans died at home. The 1930’s brought what is known as the ‘medicalization’ of death. The rise of the hospital removed from view all of the gruesome sights, smells, and sounds of death.”  We have tried to deny, sanitize, and remove from our humanity.  Last week, psychologist Mary Pipher wrote a stunningly beautiful essay on her acceptance of death as she inevitably creeps toward it. (_https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/06/opinion/mortality-death.html).  With the grim prospect of widespread death to be visited upon us, we will need to face it squarely, as Pipher did.  We can deny it, but it will come looking for us.

We have started to do the same thing with sex, another aspect of our basic humanity, and in odd ways.  In some respects, we have pushed the boundaries of sexuality in sometimes unhealthy ways, often under the guise of “equal rights”  or correcting a social wrong. The LGTBQ movement legitimized gay marriage (through the courts and not through a democratic process) and immediately began pushing to get transgenders into women’s bathrooms and stomping on women’s sports by pushing to allow biological men to compete with them.  The LGBTQ movement also danced at the edge of normalizing pedophilia by pushing Drag Queen Story Hour across the country at local libraries, and glamorizing cross dressing 10 year old Desmond on Good Morning America.  Teen Vogue put out “how to” articles on anal sex.  Pornography became ubiquitous and more and more extreme and abusive.  The internet made it free and readily available for kids and teens.  AI and robotics are combining to make sexbots a reality in the near future, and will present another challenge to our humanness. 

While fringe and heretofore banned sexual practices were legitimized and glamorized, rigid rules were placed around the sexual behavior of those of us that comprise 95 percent of the population.  The MeToo movement began as a correction to stop (mostly) men from sexually exploiting women in the workplace.  Colleges shifted the definition and the burden of proof on matters of  “sexual assault” and made demands on what “consent” meant, wrecking young men’s lives without due process.  Under the new definitions,  Jimmy Stewart committed at least 3 acts of “sexual assault” against Donna Reed in his courtship of her in It’s A Wonderful Life.  The rigid rules (written and adopted by who?) put a chill on all relationships between men and women in the workplace and on campus.  The woke crowd was able to curtail normal pre-marital sexual relationships on campus more successfully than the Evangelical Christians could ever do.  Many, many long and happy marriages had their inception at the office (I know a couple that were bank examiners together—how erotic). Today, you simply don’t dare to make even the slightest comment that suggests that someone appeals to you at work, or you will be hauled up to HR.

Sex is an essential aspect of our humanity.  And we need to think about bringing it back to its essential function in our society.  As many issues as I have with the Catholic Church, it had it partially right.  Catholic doctrine views sex as part procreation and part human connection.  The problem it had is that it way overemphasized the procreation part and had too many rules around the connection aspect.  One woman wrote a beautifully worded letter to the editor (which I wish that I had kept) in which she took umbrage at the Church’s emphasis on procreation, while piling guilt and shame on the connection and pleasure aspect.  Her sexual compatibility with her husband was so acute, the pleasure so fulfilling, the connection so deep that it smoothed out the rough spots in their relationship, and neither could bear the thought of not having that intimacy, it was so sustaining.  And it had nothing to do with procreation.

As we confront this apocalyptic crisis, we would do well to spend some time thinking of the things that are part of our basic humanity, what they mean for us and where we have let them go off track.  We have shunned and denied death, but it threatens to now pay a visit in a large way.  We have normalized and freed up the fringes of sexual expression and at the same time contained and placed rigid rules around normal, heterosexual sexual expression.   It is time that we revisit some parts of the things that make us human.


No comments:

Post a Comment