Archive | November, 2016

To Make A Sexuality: The Personal and The Political of Ecosexuality

27 Nov

ecosexuals-believe-having-sex-with-the-earth-could-save-it-body-image-1478044301As we have discussed in class multiple times, identity is a tricky, liminal, shifting thing. However, perhaps nothing is trickier than sexuality. Sexuality involves multiple factors, some of which might be essentialist. However, many other elements may be voluntary or tied to one’s mutable emotional attachments. Also, these factors might be different for different, separate people. Perhaps no sexuality defies classification more than ecosexuality—that is ecosexuality as a sexual orientation.

Sexuality’s politicization has been a part of humanistic theory and discourse since the adoption of the feminist slogan “the personal is political.” That is to say that feminists believed that the distinction between public and private should be questioned, troubled. Thus, sexuality (the private experience) should be questioned politically (the public address). And ecosexuality is a bizarre yet direct mixing of both elements of public and private.

Portraying sexuality in public is thus using private behavior in the wild where everyone can see you. Add this to the politics of ecology—sustainable sex toys and non-chemically invasive lubricant—and you nearly have all sides of ecosexuality. But, of course, you need to add an extreme element, which is provided by those that actually believe in making love to the earth: a participant might, then, stimulate themselves with holes in the ground or tree branches. Yet the act itself, while not necessarily reproductive, may be productive.

It makes a certain sense that if one loves the Earth, they are more likely to wish to save it. However, the connection between sex and love might be a bit too literal in meaning for a sexecology follower, the kind of person envisioned and nurtured by Annie Sprinkle and Elizabeth Stephens. Here Sprinkle and Stephens take the spectacle of visual performance to a new level in blurring the lines between public and private. And maybe this theater has the purpose of saving the planet.

If one is to play identity politics for the betterment of all, then perhaps sexecology is a con for good. Identity, as we have discussed, is a sort of real fiction, based on the body and behavior. But maybe ecosexuality is a postmodern answer to the need to change our politics. The question still remains, however, if one can be so on-the-nose with constructing a sexuality that one can simply ignore the obviously fabricated nature of this particular take on sexuality.