Sex is not to be feared
Katie Cleary
senior
I just finished reading Wednesday's article, "Students promote chaste lifestyle." Although I am finding it extremely difficult to sit quietly in this DeBartolo computer lab, painful not to run outside and explode in laughter, I am going to try and do so simply to convey my shear amusement at his argument.
While I don't agree or disagree with his claims on the appropriateness of sexual behavior before marriage (simply too big a topic to address this evening), I am amused by his argument about sexuality here on the Notre Dame campus.
My main objection comes in Yeager's belief that, in terms of sexual activity, "we as a university are doing great compared to big state schools which have co-ed dorms and no parietals." Hmm? Are we though?
Are the co-ed relationships the Notre Dame community is fostering healthy ones? One could argue that locking up the girls and boys at 2 a.m. isn't a mature way to teach students about sex. Furthermore, one could also argue that these tactics are, in fact, counterproductive.
Why turn the opposite sex into an enigmatic and off-limits body? True, students in co-ed dorms have a lot more opportunity to jump in bed with each other, but they also have a greater chance of seeing their neighbor with horrible hair in the morning or toothpaste drool dripping off their chins.
By separating men and women in dorms, we are alienating men and women from becoming friends. It is important to learn how to foster a relationship without sex, how to behave after 2 a.m. without ripping off ones clothes.
Moreover, it is important to learn a certain level of self-control, beyond the rules and safety nets Notre Dame has erected. Who is going to guard us from our own deviance once we have graduated and are in the real world?
Perhaps if men saw women in pajama pants, not simply black pants, they would have a more realistic perception of the average female — she wouldn't be a simple sexual creature.
Now I don't mean to attack parietals (once again, too big a topic to address this evening), however I do wish to address our fear of sex on campus. I feel that sex is a terribly wonderful and sacred thing. I am not condemning anyone's decision to wait for the right person. In fact, I am in full support of saving yourself for the person you love.
But I firmly believe that one's reasons for waiting should be out of respect for themselves and respect for their future partner. One shouldn't fear sex because du Lac condemns it, or hide from it because the National Chastity Taskforce is on the rampage.
One shouldn't fear sex at all. It should be an activity that takes place between two people who deem each other worthy of sharing it.
While Yeager's article does have some interesting points, I don't think "we are too closed-minded to examine our own views of sex while images of the ultimately chaste humans, Jesus and Mary, are all around us."
No, on the contrary, I think it would be closed-minded to take the images of Jesus and Mary and deem sex as a taboo and "impure" subject. It would be closed minded to accept rules and not have opinions on them.
If we were to do so, if we were to follow as sheep without opinions of our own, I think the "hope of the world" Yeager seems so concerned with would be a lot more closed-minded, a lot more doomed and a lot more bleak.
Katie Cleary
senior
off-campus
February 14, 2001
All Viewpoint Stories for Friday, February 16, 2001
