orienteering
Sexuality week magazine 2014
November 2014 Layout and design by Anna Margr茅t Sverrisd贸ttir Made in Flekke, Norway Published by Gender and sexuality group at RCNUWC
Contents Let the 2nd annual sexuality week begin
Julia Damphouse
Some thoughts about pride parades
Ylva Kjellberg
From conversation with friend
Helen Khachatryan
Poem Anonymous
Long live the cultural police
Maria Teresa Julianello
You should not judge a person by their rainbow
Anna Margrét Sverrisdóttir
About labels Anonymous
Not ‘straght’ doesn’t mean bent
Daniel Rey Rosas
A simple guide to safe sex
Clara Edwards & Ylva Kjellberg
Purity?
Ester Laiho
Why do you always have to bring it up?
Mariano Giampietri
Poem
Amanda Björkman
Pansexuality 101 Tao Gadd
Let the 2nd annual sexuality week begin
Welcome to the 2nd annual RCN Sexuality Week! One week in the RCN calendar devoted to discussions of human sexuality. This is the second year of sexuality week, before Sexuality Week came Rainbow Week, and while these two have their similarities they also have their differences. Rainbow week was dedicated to acknowledging and celebrating the sexual orientations of RCN students. (A noble feat - no doubt.) But a change was made last year. A shift of focus from what makes us different to what we all have in common. The focus is now on human sexuality. An infinitely complex and often misunderstood topic. Surely if we all have some relationship to sexuality we should all be able to understand it, but first we have to answer some questions for ourselves. Questions such as: What is the relationship between sexuality and sex? Or between sexual identity and sexual behavior? What is the importance of defining your sexual orientation? Is it necessary to define anything at all? What is sexual attraction? Do different, non-sexual types of attraction exist? What is the relationship between biology and sexuality? How is sexuality related to how you feel about your body? How does my sexuality affect how I act and how I am treated within my society. In short, we aim to create dicussions about about sexuaity through this magazine, sexual education workshops, presentations, movies, world today, a special edition of RCN Lets Talk, and a panel discussion. This week we (myself and all members of GAS EAC) encourage you to read, listen, discuss, and ultimately, decide what sexuality means to you.
- Julia Damphouse, on behalf of the RCN Gender & Sexuality Group
Some Thoughts On Pride Parades Ylva Kjellberg
I went to my first pride parade this summer. It was in Stockholm, the sun was shining and it was close to unbearably hot. I was watching it together with my friends and about 600 000 other spectators and with close to 60 000 people participating in the parade it took several hours before it was over. The streets were filled with people, music, dancing, balloons, and of course: rainbows. It was a day devoted to celebration, happiness and pride. While I believe that pride parades and festivals are important there was a thing or two that bothered me with this one. Other than non profit organisations and activist groups actively working for the rights of LGBT+ people a number of companies and political parties joined the parade as well. At first I was happily surprised, appreciating the support of the LGBT+ community shown by these companies and well established politicians, but after a while I started questioning the reasons they had for joining the parade. Because something is not right when the former prime minister1 and leader of the government that supported forced sterilisation of trans people participates in a pride parade. Something is not right when a TV channel that frequently shows several different TV series filled with homo- and transphobic jokes participates in a pride parade. Something is not right when companies, brands and political parties not doing anything at all to support LGBT+ people during the other 364 days of the year participates in a pride parade. For many people being LGBT+ means having to explain and justify your existence perhaps not every day, but often. When an event such as pride, which exists to raise awareness and to show support and pride is being taken over by those mainly seeking publicity it loses its value. I believe that pride still is important and there are many groups participating that actually work for equal rights and against discrimination. And while I value the celebratory atmosphere I think that could be what leads the pride movement away from the topic and opens up for groups not relevant to the parade to join. Pride is and should be an important event, not to be sold out to companies so that they get the attention instead of the marginalised and discriminated groups of people the event is made to support. As long as focus is on LGBT+ people, pride can be a celebration, a festive parade or a serious demonstration. But if too much of the attention is drawn away from the purpose and the reason pride exists, it will no longer get my or many others’ support. 1
1 Fredrik Reinfeldt was the prime minister at the time of the parade, but after the election in September 2014 he and his party are no longer in power.
Whenever you put some labels in yourself feels like you are in a box.
At first it might seem as your comfort zone and somehow finding, defining and helping to explain yourself.
But the more you put the box becomes smaller…
And smaller…
And smaller…
And once you see that it got so tight you cannot move.
by Helen Khachatryan
-From conversation with friend
A lump of flesh, a stream of blood Tense at the touch, The fabric of unfurling clothes Rivulets of pleasure down my spine A dry sort of friction, fictional barriers, walls made of shriveling skin, separating truth from truth Ultimately we are all the same, so why be picky?
Long live the cultural police Maria Teresa Julianello
"Reclining nude" by Modigliani (top picture) “Puberty� by Edvard Munch (lower picture)
I love those guys I swear….you know who I mean? Yes, you do…Those risible, depressed, untractable folk for whom dialogue is an affront and who always look filled up with the wrong kind of angst---not the Camus-type of angst that is creative and evolved, but the paralyzing anxiety that fossilizes the self and therefore ensures you become an antisocial bore. Not the type of person that would love your Shakespeare and have a Macbeth moment like “Is this a titty that I see before me?”, but rather the Elizabethan censor that read the plays and seldom got the innuendo and the chutzpah, poor soul. My long suffering students know what I mean: they are routinely exposed to doing books that have been or are challenged and/or banned, but true to form they can also ban them from their IB life and do others. I celebrate that two books this year were not accepted as the recommendations were the result of discussion and valid reasons. The cultural police would probably have preferred more athletic methods like storming the book room in A21 and bust all the copies of The Catcher in the Rye and Lolita and since they like to rip artwork from the walls, you may have seen them tearing pages from offending novels and those plays like the ones from that South African anti apartheid guy some obnoxious teachers are so fond of. One thing about the cultural police is they love their exercise: you can see the passion for fitness in the hours employed in defacing photo artwork too. What with this appalling weather who wants to trek all the way up to the TSK when you can be warm and cozy in the kantina, I say, and get your double fix both of muscle enhancing and saving humanity from offending bushies? I told Reidun there is a reason for all this and she is to blame: your phone is always busy, you are never around and your art room is always closed, therefore the cultural police never have a chance of establishing contact and debating deeply and maturely the reasons why Modigliani and Munch are bad for the students’ eyesight and a looming threat to their digestions. I would have welcomed their reasons, I swear, what with my eye problem that I can’t see straight. I would have even been inclined to accept mildly that burning your Toni Morrison novel on rape or those lewd and feministic poems by the chick Angelou in the Guy Fawkes November 5 bonfire would have helped for the intercultural understanding in the college and so off to the pyre with that Miller Jew that banged Marilyn to boot.
I have always been a fan, I tell you, from the days when they used to come round to the house and look for the offending union pamphlets my dad used to print. It was a very useful way to teach a five year old how to do a thorough clean up in 10 minutes. Maybe the cultural police could teach students how to search efficiently for all those phones, cameras, money, SIM cards, occasional laptop and even clothes that have a habit of slipping from our sights, falling into cracks and vanishing into thin air like Hamlet’s father’s ghost…(that damn Shakespeare again). Not to speak of the fabulous muscle-developing potential implied in busting so many rooms in a given period of time—tempting indeed. The love affair became intense in adolescence when the cultural police introduced the banned books list in high schools as a great service to the decency of the young population. That was better than LSD and the best grass imported from Brazil as the search for the forbidden books became an obsession and you got to meet the most exotic and intelligent guys in the black market: existentialist types that had read all those titillating American authors defacing our library here, French new graphic novels, Marxist theorists and Russian iconoclasts. The counter culture guys had long hair, bursting jeans and all the Hendrix vinyls to boot….those were the days, my friend where the world was kaleidoscopic and swirling in feminist writing, banned cinema and theology of liberation essays. And then, when I thought I could not thank the cultural police enough, there I met them again at university, beautifully YES!YES!YES! ripping artwork from the walls in the School of Fine ARTS (disgusting word), scribbling posters for political meetings and plays openings which sent us into an overdrive of gratitude because we read, watched, attended, sang, recited, danced, spoke, debated til the wee hours in underground cafes, impromptu gatherings and even in rooftops (those were the days before the cultural police had drones, mind you). And now the fjord: the cultural police continues to woo with their obstruse (I wonder if this word is too mind boggling?) take on what young women can paint and exhibit. It reminds me of my LA court interpreting days: Case 1 Exhibit A the cultural police against Modigliani: “Your Honor-- the prosecution says he paints too orangy and therefore may be dangerous to public health”. “Sustained” Case 2 Exhibit B the cultural police against Munch: “Your Honour—the prosecution feels there may be intention to portray that there is an offending private part lurking in the bottom part of subject in exhibit B”. “Overruled: that is presumption not evidence, counsellor” Ah, nice weather in California and those endless beaches—thanks for the memories, cultural police. And all hail for this last master stroke: I wonder how many people know that Modigliani was a Jew so now we have a double whammy—not only an artistic but also a racial and political statement. Rock on.
You should not judge a person by their rainbow
Photographs by Anna Margr茅t Sverrisd贸ttir Models: Chantal Smeland & Tao Gadd
About labels People tell me that I am weird And slowly I have started to believe them. I know I shouldn’t. I know there are others like me. I am not alone. In fact there are many more like me. We are no different from the ‘rest’. We are all human beings. So why aren’t we all treated as such? Why aren’t we all treated as equals? Sometimes I feel accepted. Sometimes it feels like I have found myself. Then someone tells me I’m wrong. That I can’t be this or that I can’t be that. I am just trying to be true to myself. But it is hard when society wants something else. Why all these labels? Why do we feel this need to label? Each other and us self? And why are we so interested, In the labels of others? - Anonymous
Not ‘straight’ doesn’t mean bent Daniel Rey Rosas
Design by Anna Margrét Sverrisdóttir
I have always believed that the words we use determine our view on everything. In the last months I realized that when we refer to others, many concepts we use are not only tricky but actually create in us a lot of misconceptions we get stuck with. Not a long time ago I overheard a conversation between two persons when, all of a sudden, something caught my attention, one of them asked to the other: “X, are you straight?” As a 16-year-old guy, UWCer, I was not impressed by the kind of question but by one word: STRAIGHT. In this case, the word straight is related to sexual orientation, specifically heterosexuality. According to the dictionary, straight is “a part of something that is not curved or bent”. OK! But, why should someone’s sexual orientation be called ‘straight’ only because they are attracted to people of the opposite gender? Sexual orientation, as I hope everyone knows, is not the same as gender. Sexual orientation (homo, hetero, bi, pan, a, etc.) involves someone’s sexual identity in relation to the gender to which they feel attracted. Therefore, if heterosexuals are ‘straight’, all the remaining are…’bent’? Gay, ’straight’ or whatever are just one part of us and there is a lot beyond that. Ideals, values, interests, feelings, moments, goals, people in our life, that’s what really defines us. It is not fair to tag people under their sexual orientation, it doesn’t tell much, rather it becomes an unnecessary prejudice. Unfortunately, the society’s wrong ideas about sexuality and minorities make sense. This is because many people around us have such a bent way of thinking that they often say “Straight is the only way to go”. Then, why can we move to the left, to the right, up and down? Why is the Earth curved and keeps on moving in an orbit instead of following a straight line? I don’t really blame whoever uses the word ‘straight’. That’s why I propose referring to heterosexuals as… heterosexuals! Of course, if anyone has another idea, feel free to propose it. As I stated in the beginning, this is a tricky thing and is straightly related to one’s straight background and straight state of mind. Not ‘straight’ doesn’t mean deserving tags. Not ‘straight’ doesn’t mean being underestimated. Not straight doesn’t mean not being proud of who we are. Not straight doesn’t mean going in the wrong way. Not straight doesn’t mean bent.
A Simple Guide to Safe Sex Clara Edwards & Ylva Kjellberg
Consent can be defined as “permission for something to happen or agreement to do something� and is the number one thing to make sure you have if you are about to have sex. It must be given completely voluntarily, without any kind of persuasion or coercion. It is not an ambiguous thing and it cannot be questioned. A yes is a yes, but more importantly: a no is a NO. Important to take notice of is also that not saying yes means no. Silence is a no. A maybe is still not a yes. It is not unclear. The only thing that counts as a yes is a clear and outspoken one. There are many factors affecting if consent can be given such as alcohol and other drugs, change of mind, age differences and position of authority. When it comes to consent under the influence of alcohol or any other intoxicating substances there is a difference from consent when sober and not under any influence. Someone so drunk that they can barely walk or speak cannot give consent as they are not in a position where they can make a well informed and free choice. The definition of consent stays the same, but if a person’s ability to make that free choice is affected consent can no longer be given. What about change of mind? If a person initially said yes but changes their mind there is no longer consent. This is important to take notice of and always make sure that all parties consent to everything. And that is everything and all the time. When it comes to difference in age and position in authority there are different laws in different countries. Laws regarding age of consent say that under a certain age one is then not able to give consent, a law which is there to protect young people. An older person can be considered to be in a position of authority, but that is not the only case in which there is a possible power imbalance. If the person is in a position where they depend upon another person financially, emotionally, through work or education consent cannot be given to that person, as it is impossible to tell if it is entirely voluntarily. In conclusion, the only thing that is a yes upon each other.
is a yes, given that the parties involved are not dependent
So you have step one, consent, figured out. But before having sex, it is important to remember protection against sexually transmitted infections (STIs) and unwanted pregnancies. Safe sex and sexual health involves both consent and protection. The most common protection is condoms. The various types of condoms are the only things one can use to avoid STIs (other than abstinence) and they also prevent pregnancies. There are other ways to avoid unwanted pregnancies, hormonal contraceptives such as birth control pills, but they offer no protection when it comes to STIs.
Based on what works best for you and your partner(s) you can choose the type of protection that suits you the best. It is not that complicated, but it might be easy to neglect. Protection also links to consent as a person can give their consent to have sex with protection, and if said protection is not used it is seen as non-consensual.
So, two things for you to remember if you are going to have sex: 1. Consent - Given freely and throughout the entire time. 2. Protection - Whatever suits you and your partner(s) the best.
Purity?
Purity, cleanness, integrety, honour, manhood u name it According to thesaurus.com the words above are synonyms for virginity. Shit, right? It gets better, guess what these words are: dishonour, evil, disgrace, wildness and corruption? Yup, antonyms for virginity. Virginity is a word I hear at least twice a day. Usually as a joke, maybe in a totally not sexual context such as losing one’s TSK virginity: the lack of experience in an area. And that’s not frowned upon. But oh dear Lord when it comes to sex – isn’t that just the most revolutionary and essential information one can have about me. And how low does the person’s jaw drop when I tell that I am a virgin! And then you get the feedback: “Never in million years did I think you were a virgin”, “I totally thought sex was your thing, being confident an all”, etc. etc. So yeah, honoured of these comments? Nope. Losing one’s virginity is considered to be a ritual on the way of discovering yourself, on the way to adulthood: something you need to do, something to lose. When you finally do it – great? Well I cannot answer that question. The way one’s first time is greeted by other people is different also depending on the gender of the person but that’s an essay of its own. I haven’t sworn a virginity pledge. (I did think telling people that the pledge was a reason to avoid judging stares.) It was never a conscious choice of not having sex. It just never took place. Yes, I did consider getting hammered and having sex with a stranger just to “get it over with” but I didn’t, which I think was a wise decision. Maybe there will be a new movie called The 41-year-old UWC Virgin. Who knows. The only thing I know is that I have become to be cool with my purity and corruption can wait. It doesn’t make me less of a person of not having sex. It doesn’t make anybody else more of a person of having sex.-
A virgin called Ester
WHY DO YOU ALWAYS HAVE TO BRING IT UP? Mariano Giampietri
OK, I get it. It’s your life. But why do you people have to keep bringing it up? Sexuality and sexual orientation should be private things, something between you and whoever the object of your affection is! Why force me to constantly have this issue in my face? I mean, I’m your friend and all, but every time we hang out in a public place, do I really have to hear your comments about whom you think is attractive? Don’t you realize I find it shocking that you talk so openly about your sexual interests? Then there’s all those TV shows and movies and novels, now. It doesn’t matter whether it is mystery, action or comedy: in the background there’s always the romantic relationship, the pursuit, the sexual scenes, even… Is that the only thing you folks can think about? Does it pervade your life so thoroughly? Sex, sex, sex? And of course, if you’re married there’ll be a ring in your hand: there you go again, screaming your sexuality to the whole world. Can’t you heteros be a bit more discrete? -------- o -------So, let me pull apart these paragraphs for you. Of course, when we are at a dance club or a cafe or any public place, it is the most natural thing in the world that a friend should nervously tell me: “Look! She’s looking this way! Do you think I should go talk to her, or should I wait and see if she comes over?” There is nothing shocking about that. There is nothing wrong with a woman and a man walking down the road holding hands, either. And when I am at the bus stop, it is also ok for that boy and girl I always meet there to play at being Siamese twins joined at the mouth. I’d like a bit more privacy if I were them, but who are they hurting, after all? And indeed, I am not offended by the idea of heterosexual love expressed in fiction. Quite the contrary, in fact. There are some beautiful love stories out there! Romantic love is an experience that most of us can empathize with. Although I do admit that when the purpose of sex scenes is simple titillation, I lose patience sometimes. If the plot is poor, appeals to the latent horniness in people can only get you so far. Especially if the one watching does not share the object of your excitation. Finally, I do realize that wedding rings and other items that people wear after marriage symbolize, first and foremost, their commitment and not their sex lives. It is true that in most of the world, where same-
sex marriage is prohibited, these items also proclaim a heterosexual orientation, but that is incidental.
The truth is that commitment and love and support and romance are always wonderful to witness. Or they should be. What actually happens is different, unfortunately, particularly if one is not heterosexual. The idea that homosexuality is acceptable as long as it does not come up too often is disingenuous. Misinformed. Those who hold or express it are not aware of the special privileges most societies afford them. They do not realize that their sexuality is being constantly broadcast and validated by their society. In addition, they do not appreciate to what extent their romantic relationships and personality are nurtured by the support of family and friends, but also of the larger community. Neither love nor people can grow to their full potential if they have to hide. Those who are made uncomfortable by talk or signs of homosexuality in others may not have a very clear view of themselves, either. “You know I have no problem with you being gay”, a very close friend told me once “but why is it that whenever we meet we end up talking about it? The topic is always hanging in the air…” Of course, she hadn’t realized that my enthusiastic description of the LGBT film festival I would be attending that weekend was a direct reply to her question: “What are you doing this weekend?” Also, we had spent the last hour talking about her and her husband’s problems at work, her mother in law’s insistence on feeding candy to her children, and how handsome her new dentist was. So, to summarize: Yes, in the last forty years or so (much more recently elsewhere), non heterosexual people have begun to talk more about their sexual orientation. It may seem to you like you hear a lot about them, that they make a lot of noise, that this crusade they have is getting out of hand already! But that is mostly because you are so constantly surrounded by talk of heterosexuality that you are not even aware of its pervasiveness. It’s like when you’re at the beach enjoying the silence and you are suddenly startled by some kids playing nearby, or some birds cawing: it may seem to you they broke the quiet, but you don’t realize that the ocean and the wind have been rumbling in the background all along. Non heterosexual people began to raise their “dissonant” voices because they were tired of living in hiding, of being fired or denied social benefits others take for granted, of not being able to form their own families. Hopefully the day will come when we’ll all stop hearing them, though. When these voices also become part of the background. The day when finding out your best mate is dating another guy will in no way alter your perception of him, not even for a second. The day when marches, themed film festivals and sexuality weeks are no longer necessary.
Baltering
(bôl’ter) v. To dance gracelessly, without particular art or skill, but perhaps with some enjoyment.
A theatre production by Mateo Dupleich COMING SOON
Describe me, I dare you Define me Place me in one of your boxes and I will burn right through it For I am fire, which will not be contained Give me a name, I implore you And call on me Write me on a label and I will be the sea dissolving it For I am water, and I leave nothing behind Separate me, I plead to you Cut me down Plant me in a different soil, and I will be the mountains, crashing down For I am earth, vast and resolute Confine me, Please Shackle me in your strongest iron Try convincing me of my place, and I will be wherever else For I am air, everywhere and nowhere So try to define me, I dare you Try naming me, as something you would want me to be Separate me from yourselves Try putting me in prison cells And when you try, and don’t succeed I will be laughing where I go I am the sun, the moon, the stars I’m light and dark, and everything between And though not all would let me be I feel at ease, and smile With wind in sight
by Amanda Björkman
Pansexuality 101 Tao Gadd
Photographs by Anna Margr茅t Sverrisd贸ttir
So, turns out that pansexuals aren’t actually attracted to pans or, in fact, any kind kitchen utensil. Pansexuality is actually defined as having sexual or emotional attraction to people of all genders. Pansexuality rejects the idea that gender is binary, which is the idea that the only genders there are are male and female. Pansexuals find themselves attracted to everyone in between the binary genders, as well. A lot of pansexuals would agree more with the idea that gender is a spectrum and they find themselves attracted to people who place themselves at any point a long that spectrum. For example, people who identify as Agender (no gender), Transgender (opposite gender to their sex), Genderfluid (having a fluid gender) and everyone else. In my experience there has been two ways of defining pansexuality, the first being that pansexuals are attracted to people of all genders and the second being that they are attracted to people regardless of gender ( they are “gender-blind” ). Pansexual is a term that many people are unfamiliar with and a frequently asked question is “whats the difference between pansexuality and bisexuality?”. Well, Bisexuals are attracted to two genders ( “bi” meaning two) and pansexuals are attracted to all genders ( “pan” meaning all or every) Its as simple as that.