Humans by their nature are contrary and kinky.
But exactly how kinky is determined by the arena of their lives in which they express their kinkiness.
Physically – that is to say, sexually, is the least kinky arena – because with sexual kings, you are limited by the amount of physical discomfort that you can endure – a built in safety zone, which is expanded upon through safe and sane conceptual concepts – safewords, limitations agreed to, types of play contracted between players.
So kinky sex takes place in a culture of respect for personal boundaries, clear communication before, during and after – very similar to how role playing gamers distinguish between character interactions and player interactions.
If you are emotionally or psychologically kinky – you are probably not self aware enough to really understand the depth of your kinkiness because when you cross boundaries, you have no sense of your limits because the pain is emotional or psychological.
And in this regard, the human capacity for adapting to suffering conditions remains unplotted – partly because of the variation in the species and partly because, I don’t think anyone’s done a lot of big picture thinking about it.
People have found ways to cope and survive all sort of psychologically, emotionally and physically punishing context from the easy emotional hit parade of bringing up WWII/Holocaust survivors, the various genocides and pogroms, dictatorships and theocracies – and in secular democratic nations – bigotry and oppression of any minority that the majority holds in contempt and lesser value.
The fact that groups are lesser value an inequality exists under secular law – should be the reason alone for allowing gay marriage.
Because the freedom of a group to believe in the religion of their choice does not include the ability to make society reflect any given religious belief.
The reality that is the shared reality is that every citizen is equal under the law.
Denying any citizen the ability to access what other citizens can take for granted is oppression and it is based in religious belief – there is no legal reason for the government to deny any citizen of consenting age the ability to manage their life and have the same legal benefits and protections and responsibilities as any other citizen.
There needs to be a distinction in people’s minds that what they believe, they can do as they wish in their own homes – but their beliefs do not get to form the basis of how to interact in the wider world – where their beliefs are not necessarily shared.
And that their private beliefs do not entitle them to infringe on anyone’s else personal sphere of sovereignty.
So, the state has an interest to ensure that children are raised in a manner that allows them to become participating members of society – that means that they have a sense of civic responsibility, including age appropriate understanding of their rights, entitlements and responsibilities as citizens – and they are able to access legal protection if need be.
Children need their formative years to be loved and cherished, be the centre of their world – and when they get older, they need to understand that their early life was just normal for them and isn’t normal for everyone – but be able to form relationships with peers to be able to understand this through experience. Seeing how other people live – and coming to an understanding of what the range of norms is within their society.
What’s normal for you at any given stage, compared to what’s normal for others and how that range falls within normal for the society.
This works best in places where there’s a diversity of people, and less so in homogenous communities.
But until we start to really think about the various realities that we carry around in our heads and understand that the distance between the reality bubble that each of us lives inside our head and knowing how far off the social norms our bubble is – is the range of discussion we can have with each other.
If a person cannot distinguish between how they’d like the world to operate and how it actually operates, then, there can be no discussing any of the world with them, because it simply does not enter or factor into their reality.
If we really want to make sure that we can coexist in a respectful and peaceful society where multiculturalism is the norm and the range of human capacity and potential can be unleashed – then it’s critical that every person can make reality distinctions.
Without that, there is no perspectives, no nuanced understanding of the world – and worse, no incentive to change.
Much has been made of the various recent dates for the end of the world – and most people found the idea that people would believe that the world was ending on a specific day humourous.
But, I see no difference between a person who believes that a deity will trigger the end of the world and a person who believes it’s this Saturday.
Both people are operating on the assumption that the deity is real and that at some point, this deity will end the world.
Because if that’s your belief, then it’s no wonder that people can’t get upset with climate change, massive weather pattern disruption and natural disasters – they just see all that as preparation work, it’s all part of the plan.
Worse, they vote in politicians who think the same small terrified ways – so it’s little wonder that the religious right doesn’t like science or art or anything that;s about human accomplishments – they don’t like humans, they don’t want to be humans, and this life is a test of how much they can resist temptations in order to be found pure enough to get into heaven.
Which is why its not a big deal when you get caught with a dead girl or an alive boy – as a flawed person it’s not that you gave into temptation, it’s the quality of your repentance that matters.
So there is no discussion possible with people who live in their own reality bubble, because the mechanisms of cognitive dissonance are hard at work to ignore, deny or make apologist word games, fallacies, and excuses – whatever is needed to maintain the integrity of the reality bubble where their beliefs are real.
Until we can educate people out of this mind set, there is no negotiation, no compromise possible, because that mind set is absolute and black/white.
We have to encourage them to turn off the 1950’s family sitcoms in their heads – and bring them into the colour world that we share today.