File: 2Spooky4Me.jpg (95 KB, 1280x840) Image search: [Google]

95 KB, 1280x840

Although it seems straightforward enough to say that everyone has either had sex or they haven't, the way that virginity is defined is ultimately contingent upon some highly arbitrary social choices, with problematic implications.

The most obvious factor is that sex itself is an ambiguously defined term. Most people would agree that limiting yourself to Penis-in-Vagina intercourse is too limiting considering the wide varieties of sexualities in modern life, there's a great deal of debate over whether various lewd activities count as sexual activity. Does touching count? Does licking count? Furthermore a big issue is that many people who consider themselves virgins have in fact engaged in quite a lot of sexual acts, they merely have not engaged any other people in these acts. But why should we consider such people to have an incomplete sexuality?

The deeper problem is one of grammar. When we say someone is a virgin, we say that they have virginity, and then they lose that virginity when they have sex. But this way of description is not how we usually refer to undergo new experiences. People who visit a new city for the first time or try a new food are not "losing it" they're just trying new things. To treat virginity as a noun is to treat it as something special, either something sacred and pure which needs to be preserved, or something embarrassing which needs to be lost. But both attitudes are a very limiting attitude towards sexuality. People should be able to try new experiences, sometimes alone and sometimes with some nice friends, without it being treated as becoming a new kind of person.

Sex is something a lot of people seem to enjoy and I think I should try it some time. But to create a world full of social justice, we need to move beyond such narrow ideas like virginity. Only then can we have truly liberated sexualities.

Picture not related.