For a return to those ancient stereotypes about the ideal of gender polarity, have a look-see at the editorial by Camille Paglia in the New York Times.
Little do all those sex-crazed homosexuals (whose libido we’re supposed to be afraid of) know that actually it is only gender difference that creates sexual desire. When men and women have similarities, in their work lives or clothes or musical tastes, there is no way for them to be attracted to each other. Even though women have been attracted to women and men to men for eons. Because of course people are not attracted to each others’ personalities or actual bodies, but only to their (complementary) gender performance.
Or so says Paglia. Through the rambling generalizations about class, race, and gender that she somehow manages to get all squished in to one little article, ranging far from the alleged point of the piece (discussion of a female libido-enhancing drug), Paglia fails to make a case for anything really. We must infer a problem, because she sure isn’t stating one.
The main crisis she seems to identify is her wistful longing to see more of Mick Jagger’s genitals. Which seems like something she might want to keep to herself from now on. Please, Paglia?
