What is a Sui Generis? It means of its own kind, a classification of something independent of other classifications, an entity, or a reality that cannot be included in a wider concept. The Sex Sui Generis is thus the completely irrational approach society has towards sexuality. The illogical thinking so completely divorced from the rest of reality that it doesn’t highlight the beauty and power of sex but distort and separates us from it boxing it inside of its own little Sui Generis line of reasoning. I don’t know about you, but my sexuality is an integrated part of my being; it does not require a Sui Generis stranded.
Dear everyone. As someone in a scientific field, I beg you please use some commonsense before you mindlessly quote stuff. Here is an example, I was reading this article and it cites, via a details article, the following assertion. It is ridiculous on its face, yet the authors of both magazines felt it merited repeating anyway (One more example of people citing this nonsense; and another one here)
In a survey of 1,000 British girls between the ages of 15 and 19, roughly 25 percent said they aspired to become professional lap dancers.
This statement has multiple red flags, to anyone who knows what to look for. No mention of the source of this survey or when it was conducted, where and if it was published anywhere, no mention of methodology, etc. Here are some more “results” from that same survey:
63% found being a glamour model most appealing…but just 3% picked the teaching profession
Let analyze this the way I would any other piece of data. First, 25% want to become lap dancers, not even just sex workers (of which there are many types) but specifically lap dancers. These is an incredulous assertion, but add in the glamour model line which again is incredibly specific, just as there are different types of sex work there are different types of modeling, and it is amazing anyone would put that into print. This survey would have me believe 88% of UK girls aged 15-19 either aspire to be lap dancers or glamour models,(1) and only 3% want to enter the teaching profession. Notice the apple and oranges comparison, the narrow specific professions they are interested in this versus the broad category of professions they aren’t? Would the authors of this survey have me believe that teens are sexually aware enough to understand sex work taxonomy(2) yet only be able to have a one-dimensional understanding of how many jobs fall under “teaching”? This survey is simply laughable on its face, but let us continue.
Who did this study? As best as I can tell (from the links above), it was done in 2005 by mobile entertainment providers www.thelab.tv. People who have an interest in selling media do a “survey” that has results which support a shocking view of media. Can you say publicity stunt? I say as best as I can tell because the url yields a parked by godaddy page and google searches are pretty silent about this the lab.tv. Clearly they are defunct, weren’t Titians in their own field and there is no way to see what this survey actually said/did or even if it wasn’t just a hoax. Just think for a second what kind of surveys these sites typically conduct. Yet apparently, it is ok to cite their survey as support for some disturbing trend in teen sexuality, in the year 2009. How ironic that people quote this then worry about their teens being unable to tell the difference between media influence and reality.
This is an example of approaching sex in manner completely divorced from the rules that govern normal reality- the sex sui generis(3) as I call it. If an entertainment group were to do a survey with results so ludicrous with something that didn’t involve sex would we believe it, quote it, and express concern over it four years later?(4) Analyze the above statement the way you would critically analyze another statement, you would conclude it was nonsense and move along. Only because its sex related and people are unable to analysis it rationally can the authors mentioned above get away with using this survey to try to make their respective points. What’s next? Will feminists and men’s magazines(5) go to the onion for their data?
Reason and commonsense they still apply when talking about sex, you know…or do you still believe we need a Sui Generis?
Note: I plan to make “The Sex Sui Generis” a repeating feature on this blog. I was going to start with the experience that gave me the idea for this little phrase of my. However, my muses are finicky and demanded I write this first. Here is a teaser thou the title of that post will be On Altitude and Attitude it involves The Mile High Club. Got your attention? I should have it posted next Sunday.
- Just to be clear nothing wrong with these professions just the idea that close to 90% of any group, anywhere would consider these two, or any two, to be their ideal job [↩]
- Which don’t get me wrong it would be great if they were this sexual aware [↩]
- Yes I know this is stretchs the definition of a sui generis stranded a bit but you get what I mean and…I needed a title for this “column”…don’t ruin this for me [↩]
- Ok, considering the lack of critical analysis ability in the general population, probably. [↩]
- I couldn’t care less about GQ and the lot but it saddens me to see feminists quote this because it speaks to creditability. When you reference this as your evidence of “far reaching” palpable effects, you lose credibility in the eyes of anyone who can see how silly taking this survey seriously is. [↩]