If, based on this, he is not one already,
then we'll make an Old Labour High Tory of Ed
West yet:
Of all the phrases that are going to become
overused and tiresome in 2013, I’m putting my money on “pornified culture”. I’m
already bored with it, and I generally agree with the claims made by Diane
Abbott that there's a “striptease culture in British schools and society, which
has been put beyond the control of British families”. Abbott has, much to the
confusion of many people, started talking like the small-c conservative she was
always destined to become. At a meeting of the Fabian Women's Network last week she said: “For so long, it’s been
argued that overt, public displays of sexuality are an enlightened liberation. But
I believe that for many, the pressure of conforming to hypersexualisation and
its pitfalls is a prison. And the permanence of social media and technology can
be a life sentence.”
The issue of sexualisation has been discussed by various columnists since. From the point of view of a
father of a four-year-old girl, I can see it already. Watch a music channel
aimed at young girls and you’ll not just see a succession of curvy, strutting,
half-naked young women; the entire essence of womanhood projected is one where
a lady must appear as sexually alluring as possible, the underlining theme
being that any woman who doesn’t arouse the opposite sex is some sort of leper.
Many people see this and wonder how it chimes with the high-minded feminism of
their youth, but are concerned about appearing prudish, which is a deeply
unattractive trait to many people. Yet something clearly went wrong.
It’s a widely held belief of the Left that
economic liberalism leads to exploitation, inequality, monopolisation and
abuse. It’s why Left-wing activists, both secular and religious, are happy to
use the concept of shame in exposing what they see as the greed of businesses
(shame is the method used by UK Uncut and the living wage campaigners, for
instance, and I have some sympathy with both). Yet this logic is rarely applied
to sexual liberation [Ed needs to get out more], partly because there is so much emotional investment
applied to 1968 and all that, partly because those who gained from liberation
are so much more vocal and influential than those who lost, and partly because
of an aversion to the idea of sexual shame. But you can’t rein in exploitation
and abuse without some unpalatable ideas such as shame and stigma, and more
concrete rules about what is right and wrong.
As soon as anyone makes this basic point, people
from across the political spectrum start to compare them to Victorians or
Puritans and even use the word medieval. But the principles about social
responsibility and money apply to sex too. As Michel Houellebecq wrote in
Whatever, a quote I’m fond of repeating: “A world where sexual pleasure is made
a pre-eminent good is one where the gap between haves and have-nots is
magnified along new dimensions.” Another thing they have in common is that
highly-sexed and highly-materialistic environments also make lots of people
very unhappy.
Abbott is being ideologically consistent with the
Labour tradition here, especially since girls from poorer backgrounds are
hardest hit, being already less likely to have a father or a highly-educated
mother, less likely to be taught about Marie Curie or Emmeline Pankhurst and
more susceptible to the ideal of the woman as sex doll pop star. I wouldn’t
even mind so much if the music wasn’t so rubbish. At least my parents’
generation had The Beatles.
No comments:
Post a Comment