Sex, I’m told, makes the world go round. Certainly without it the human race would be non-existent. So, sex does have its uses, not to mention its pleasures. Unfortunately it’s the pleasure bit which causes the problems and the taboos some would build around it.
Sex can be the absolute union of love, the pinnacle on which two people unite as one and create new life. It can also bring the depth of human degradation, sunk in lust, brutality and selfish gratification.
Things start off innocently enough. Male and female babies pop into the world, each as innocent as the other, until one is dressed in pink, the other in blue.
From there on the division deepens. One assumed to be pretty but lacking essential mental and physical strength, the other to be stronger, both mentally and physically, or so a bigoted and biased history would make us believe.
But what if at birth both genders were dressed the same, then treated the same all the way through childhood until the onset of puberty?
Who would be calling who to come hither? Who would be flashing their eyes and twitching their hips? Boys, girls or both? Who would lie seductively on their backs?
When allowed leadership and intellectual expression, females prove themselves equal to the male at all levels. They can be as fit, as strong and as physically able as the male. When I served in the Paras it was not brute muscle which a mission required but the endurance to keep going against all odds. If you stop, you fail.
So, is it conditioning during childhood which creates the social inequality of the genders?
For me as I sit smugly on my bar stool, drinking another pint, I am happy with my conditioning. But what about the barmaid in her mini skirt being leched over by male customers? Well, that’s her place, some say. She’s sex and men are predators. Soon she’ll be pregnant, giving birth, breast feeding, helpless, dependent on the man and in the place allocated by society.
OK, so what when the child is free of the breast? There is no reason why the father should not take over caring responsibility, the cooking, cleaning, washing. Some, I am sure, already do this. Most don’t.
Is it because such domestic binding and menial tasks have historically been carried out by women in societies which wish them in a submissive role?
If when children they had been fairly treated as equals, would women now have different roles? Or better, would the genders consider themselves as sharing equal partners, in work and home, both of them in skirts and trousers, both leading, both giving, both receiving.
Hang on, women are already in trousers, but they’re not buying their rounds.
Go to my website at http://www.crimefiction-jamesmckenna.co.uk