No poly presidents, eh?

Thanks to Amy Gahran for passing along this gem, just as my Google news alert discovered it as well. Ten Zen Monkeys reports on the top 20 taboos for presidential candidates, including, of course, polyamory.

The #1 taboo for candidates is–you guessed it–”Sexual Non-Conformism,” which the monkeys define as:

Presidential candidates can’t be openly gay or transsexual. They can’t have open marriages and relationships or practice polyfidelity or polyamory. They can’t openly enjoy orgies, consensual gangbangs, or pornography. They can’t even be real swingin’ bachelors or bachelorettes. During the ’90s, we made it to: “I don’t care if he got a blow job, as long as he does a good job.” Now we need to get to: “I don’t care if he’s going to move his pet sheep Sweetiecakes into the White House and post videos of their long nights of passion on YouTube. If his policies could save millions of lives, what’s more important?”

First, why can’t we go two seconds discussing alternative sexuality and relationship lifestyles without mentioning sheep and goats? What is America’s obsession with bestiality, really? Are there really that many people in the bestiality forums, pining away to be accepted? Or is that just the embodiment of Middle America’s biggest fear–that gays, polys and people who enjoy porn are all secretly lusting after pet goats, horses and sheep?

The #2 taboo is more disturbing and quite sad:

No presidential candidate can advocate sex-positive attitudes including open marriages and relationships; they can’t be pro-porn, positive about teen sexuality, or generally advocate the sophisticated notion that eroticism is life’s greatest gift.

[sigh] I’d argue, but it’s true. Somehow, we’re all supposed to believe that sex is bad and our leader don’t have any despite the obvious presence of children. Or perhaps we’re supposed to believe they had it two or three times for procreation, but they never enjoyed it. I do live for the day when adults can sit down and talk about sex rationally, without “morals” and religion getting in the way. Fact is, our bodies are built the way they are for a biological reason, and to me it just makes sense to acknowledge that like a grown-up instead of sniggering over the girl with the giant hoo-ha’s walking down the street.

In short, I’m pretty sure whatever president we choose will have a penis. (Hillary may keep hers in a drawer, but I’m counting that). And I’m pretty sure that he will have used it once or twice. And he might even have enjoyed it.

3 comments to No poly presidents, eh?

  • bigbrother

    Loved the Hillary statement, Minx…lol

    I would only take issue with the statement that religion gets in the way of sexuality. I firmly believe that religion itself isn’t the culprit, but rather the perversion of religion by humans who would seek to control a beautiful creation.

    But that’s just one nutty guy talkin…heh.

    More to the point of your post, though, I think you’re spot-on in that a lot of people are so repressed (possibly by choice) that they can’t stand to see someone actually *enjoying* their sexuality. That perspective may change, but it won’t be anytime soon, I’m afraid.

  • Anonymous

    What do you expect in a country that was founded by Puritans? It’s sad but true; our nation has had unhelathy attitudes about sex from it’s beginnings, and it’s been very resistant to change since then.

  • Anonymous

    Maybe they can’t be sex-positive, but they might at least promote a live-and-let-live attitude in the government. It’s not unreasonable to say, “It’s not the job of the government to get involved in people’s private lives. We have enough to do without adding private behavior to the list.”

Leave a Reply

 

 

 

You can use these HTML tags

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Make a Donation

Poly Weekly Playmates!

Wanna play?
CatalystCon West '14

Poly Weekly on Facebook

Poly Weekly on Twitter