Putting sex in perspective

John Ince is merely another in a long line of hedonists who can't get through their heads the difference between a culture of propriety and one of prohibition, as was evident in your article last week ["Horny like me," Dec. 11]. And if he wonders why propriety is important, he should heed Philip Wylie's warning: "The great inhibiting organ that keeps trying to compel us to think does so because it is trying to keep us from acting like swine."

Ince may well have something to offer through Erosha (his version of sex therapy), but even that happens in an exclusive context of adult consent. Defending Erosha does not also mean advocating public nudity or journalistic leniency toward erotic images or explicit and abundant sex education. These are separate situations: one is legitimate by being unequivocally private, the others are not because they're blatantly public.

Putting sex in perspective is not an act of fear but of civility. Knowing that various aspects of life have their definite time and place is not a sign of repression but of balance. Ince, however, equates this sense of context with the impulse of denial, as if the "how" must destroy the "what," as if the only mindlessness can guarantee "an open, fearless orgasm." Wrong. A thoughtful respect for privacy is a far cry from the anxiety of the squeamish.

Ince sees only the superficial dichotomy between erotic imprisonment and erotic liberation, and cares nothing for the distinction between those who revere the sexual act by embracing its escape from the world, and those who simply consume sex to the emancipation point of public anonymity - but to the detriment of private intensity.

» L.S. Cattarini

Pro-life heads-up

I noticed Birthright got a mention on your Student Survival Guide [Sept. 4]. I would suggest that you provide a disclaimer indicating that the group is pro-life and will not provide abortion referrals.

I'm uncomfortable with an ideological front group being included, but some additional information would at least allow for greater truthfulness/transparency.

» LN

Frankel feud

For Jordan Frankel's comments on my Middle East policies [Letters, Nov.13] let me try to help him out a bit.

Israel did not "enforce" the refugee problem on the Palestinians. That problem was created when Arab armies attacked Israel the day of its creation and lost. It has continued because Arab regimes wish it to, in order to direct anger towards Israel and not themselves where it rightly belongs.

As for the treatment of Palestinians in general in the West Bank and Gaza, that is another matter. I do not feel, as he suggests, that all is black and white. The creation of Jewish settlements deep in those territories and their continued expansion is wrong. The trashing of olive groves is wrong. The destruction of homes for being built without permits (as opposed to those of murderers) is wrong. But given the circumstances, Israel has done better than almost any country in dealing with a hostile enemy. And as for the strong response to the intifada, the rate of murders of Israeli citizens has been greatly reduced as a result.

Israel exists not just because of the Holocaust but because Jews have always been there, have always wanted to return there and having been oppressed almost everywhere else, did so when the opportunity arose. There could have been a bi-national state and there could have been a Jewish and an Arab state there, but all attempts at either have been consistently rejected by the Arabs with the rejections immediately accompanied by violence.

For Jordan's benefit, let me point out that there are three possible solutions to the situation. None of them is a bi-national state. Israelis would be out of their minds to trust their future to anyone else especially their neighbours whose "good will" has been demonstrated over and over again.

Israel can be annihilated by force or by the return of the Palestinian refugees. Israel can expel the Palestinians from the West Bank and Gaza and annex it for themselves. This is the traditional method of almost all other victors.

Or there can be two states there. For that to happen, Israel will have to give up most of the settlements. The Palestinians will have to give up violence as a prerequisite and the so-called right of return. I'd vote for that option.

As I have known Jordan for a very long time, I know him to be both intelligent and articulate. He can also be wrong. In his letter, he was all three!

» Ken Frankel

Info summit spies

Regarding The World Summit on the Information Society [Angels & Insects, Dec. 11], you might find even more reason to award an insect to the organizers at www.nodo50.org/wsis/. It seems that it was not only possible to get in with fake credentials but the WSIS also appeared to be spying on representatives in attendance.

» S. Ettinger

WE WELCOME LETTERS TO THE EDITOR!

Send your comments, compliments or criticisms to:

Letters to the Editor,
c/o Montreal Mirror,
465 McGill, 3rd Floor
Montreal, Quebec
H2Y 4B4

You may also fax us at (514) 393-3173, or reach us by e-mail:

letters@mtl-mirror.com

All letters should include your name, address and daytime phone number.

If you wish to reach someone in particular, here's a list of people involved with the production of the newspaper and this site.