How Would You Define "Cheeky"?

Today's entry will not technically be NSFW, but since the topic at hand will be a news story involving human sexuality, and there are those that go a bit red in the face based entirely on the fact that I just used the words "human sexuality", I'll write it in stages of "naughtiness". I'm putting this preface in here to give those individuals who are already mortified a chance to decide that they would rather go read Garfield or something (or better yet, read Garfield minus Garfield, as it's a lot more interesting).

Okay, now that we've gotten that out of the way, I was intrigued by yet another fascinating study that's currently being reported on. Apparently, the good people at the Family Research Laboratory at the University of New Hampshire-Durham have determined that spanking your children may lead to "sexual problems" later in life, including arousal by spanking. Wow. Thanks for clearing that one up. I don't know how we've all gotten along thus far without that tidbit of information to guide our parenting. I can only hope that this received government funding, as it's far more important that school supplies and whatnot.

This totally cracks me up for a couple of reasons, the first being the idea that this might stop someone from spanking their child. Of all the arguments against corporal punishment, I'm guessing this one is not going to be the scale tipper. I'm trying to imagine the conversation between two parents on differing sides of this argument here:

"That's it. I've told Junior for the last time that he's not supposed to throw the ball in the house. He's getting a spanking."

"But dear, spanking is cruel, and has repeatedly been shown to be an ineffective form of punishment when trying to get someone to change their behavior."

"Bah. Spare the rod, spoil the child,"

"Okay, but if Junior ends up wearing a ball gag all the time and marrying a woman who demands that she only be referred to as 'Mistress', you'll have no one but yourself to blame."

Yeah, that's going to happen.

We now pause for a moment to give those who have dared come this far to question whether or not they really want to go further. Instead, maybe they would feel more comfortable simply closing the browser, going to get a nice cup of coffee, and moving on with their day. Imagine the sense of accomplishment and self righteousness, knowing that you, gentle reader, decided to take the high road and walk away, not needing to know what depths of depravity I may have exposed you to had you continued.

Waiting...

Waiting...

Waiting...

Getting sick of typing gerunds...

Good. Now that we got rid of the quitters, we can get on with this.

So, what really cracked me up was the way that the different news agencies sensationalized the headlines to pull people in. Some were fairly reserved, and seem to reflect the actual findings. "Spanking colors sex lives" or "Spanking may lead to sexual problems later", that kind of thing. Others took the ball and ran with it. "Spanking raises chances of risky, deviant sexual behavior". Now that sounds pretty serious.

What gets to me is that everyone's opinion of "deviant" is pretty well self-defined. I mean, what does or does not arouse a person is completely dependent on the person. Some people are completely asexual, and nothing can arouse them. For others, that couldn't be further from the case. As Xander Harris put it in Buffy the Vampire Slayer, "I'm 17. Looking at linoleum makes me wanna have sex". Indeed.

So that leaves a pretty wide berth of behaviors. At what point would you say we hit "deviant"? Being turned on by brown eyes? Long legs? A graceful neck? The fact that we're talking about a giraffe? Beats me man.

Seriously, we live in the age of rule #34 - if it exists, there is porn about it. The internet has done nothing as impressive as revealing just what the full spectrum of human sexuality truly encompasses. If you've seen even a millionth of what is out there, the idea of someone being turned on by a spanking will seem quaint and charming in comparison. So I think maybe we need to back down on the name calling and maybe consider what it means that other people, people who seem normal and likable, people we probably know, are most likely masking something "deviant". After all, they're not making this stuff for themselves, right? So maybe, just maybe, we can all take a step back and try to be a little more tolerant of others when discussing something as fluid and unique as passion and arousal.

Unless of course we're talking about furries. Those people are *&$%ing freaks.

UPDATE:
Just to be clear, I have no intention of allowing images or links in the comments to this post. Those that this rule applies to know who they are.