CRITERIONThe Student News Magazine of La Sierra University | February 2014

S E X

contentsfebruary 2014

05//editor's note

Join the conversation on an essential part of us: sex.

06//reality of sex

A varried look into the sexual perceptions of our campus.

14//sex talk

Being candid about our sexual experiences.

16//danielPEREZ interview

A conversation with a leader of our LGBT community.

22//aids

The relevance of AIDs in Adventism, rediscovered.

24//the sexy lie

How many lies can you take in one day?

28//sexual fantasy

What does sex look like in film and art?

30//female fans

One fan's take on the existence of women fans.

32//desire or love?

Is there even a difference between the two?

35//marriage and sex

The religious perspectives of the sexual ethic.

36//the porn industryWhat draws people to the

porn industry?

Editor-in-Chief

Arts Editor

Sports Editor

Features Editor

Layout Editors

Advisor

Writers

Photographers

Jonah Valdez

Janell Haylock

Brenda Delfino

Adrian Wilson

Evan AumackRachel Cho

Israel Carreón

Jonathan Rojas Baraa Alaraj

Adrian Wilson

Abel MedelLorel DurantSimer Kaur

Caitlin CuencaMax GutierrezTeodora Balaj

Shannon TaylorNicole SamilaAmar KiswaniJamie PerchezCesar Saldaña

Matthew ValdezKyle CespedesSyria Armenta

Sarah LancasterKevin Alexander

Aaron Schoonover

Religion EditorDaniel Peverini

Essay EditorIsaac Carreón

04

EDITOR'S NOTE

I thought sex was optional.

I was in the fourth grade on the verge of the decade mark and I knew things—yes, even things about sex. I knew the stork and baby explanation was fiction. I knew “making love” and sex were separate, but equally effective means of impregnation. I knew that a penis enters a women’s vagina and that was sex. I knew that couples engaged in kissing and hugging and that was “making love.” I knew this from the movies, as the actors did so, burrowing themselves under the covers, as the music played harmoniously. What did they have to hide? I knew that a person could make their choice: pregnancy through “making love” or pregnancy through having sex. I had always assumed that my parents chose the former. Kissing and hugging, or, “making love,” just seemed so much easier, anyway. Sex looked like a real pain.

I knew things, but I obviously had no bearing on the sexual realities of life.

So, to destroy the myths, enlighten my ignorant mind, and once and for all, set the record straight about sex, I turned to the church. But it wasn’t my pastors that broke the truth. It wasn’t my youth leader, and it wasn’t even my parents.

On a Saturday night, waiting for a church board meeting to end, I stood on the rocky soil of our church parking lot, under a tree, next to the parked cars, hidden from the lights in the secrecy of shadows, and in the company of my friends. Becuase I usually spent a lot of time with my older brother, most of my friends were older that I. These individuals were in sixth grade, kings of the elementary. They were truly in the know. So, when we got to talking about sex, I perked my ears for an education. They told me that sex was the only way to get a girl pregnant and chuckled at my primitive dualism of “making love” and sex. My cheeks reddened and I stood embarrassed. But I realized I was now really in the know. I felt like I joined the club, a new rank of maturity. On that Saturday night in the church parking lot, my pre-teen friends beat my parents to the punch. They gave me the truth. Thus, my conversation of sex had begun.

Sex is perhaps one of the most pervasive enigmas of society. There is never any easy answer to good sex. A large, sweeping solution for preventing sexual abuse hardly exists. Sexually transmitted diseases are still a reality for even the most educated societies. Sex has even morphed into a marketing tool, luring millions into buying products, watching films, and engaging in activities through the erotic idealizations and sultry advertisements. Scientists, psychologists, counselors, and therapists have been working to understand sex for years, and still, there is much to learn of such a bodily function. While sex is many things, its ambiguity should not work to dissuade. In fact, its vague character works as a sort of invitation for even further discovery. How so? Let us recall the notion of friendship.

When you gather together with friends, you always want to listen to each other’s stories and latest news in each other’s lives. From irritated laments about a particular professor that drones on for hours with a dry, monotone voice, to the stories of a romantic interest in a particular boy or girl, friends crave details. Friends want to know what makes this professor so boring, how he keeps the same facial expression and bodily position the entire class period, only shifting to click for the next side or to laugh at his own lame jokes. They want to hear about how that cute girl walked up to you after university worship and gave you her number, or how that mysterious, quiet good-looking guy that always sits in the back, actually smiled at one of your jokes, which set a flurry of butterflies in your stomach. Love at first sight. Friends, no matter the circumstance, tell it as it is. Friends are concerned with the truth.

The same applies to our situation of sex. The topic is not easily defined, and yet we should be demanding the details. We should be looking for the gritty facts, the things that drive the notion forward. We should be concerned with the truth of sex. In a society where the media is the most effective educator of sex, we are in desperate need for a reality check. Engage with this issue and the matters brought forward like a conversation with a good friend. Engross yourself in the stories as if we are that friend, spitting the details and colorful phrases, causing moments of laughter and spells of urgency, but most importantly, informing and building accountability.

Let’s talk about sex.

Peace,

Jonah Valdez

Editor-in-Chief

//jonahVALDEZ

On January 22, President Obama established a task force in a recent effort to combat sexual assault within college campuses. The President’s cabinet was at hand, beaming down on their leader, smiling for cameras, nodding their heads in approval. President Obama was seated on a wooden desk, varnished to a shine, bearing the stately Presidential Seal on its front. The curtains, a bright yellow, gave life to the room, along with golden candlesticks across the walls. The East Room of the White House, which often holds musical concerts, banquets, and dinners, was fit for a celebration, a regal event. But for the President, there was no room for smiles, as he signed the memorandum with his classic solemnity. These efforts stirred in the wake of a recent report, released by the White House Council on Women and Girls, during the anniversary of the landmark Roe v. Wade ruling on abor-tion rights. The report showed that out of the 22 million women of America that are raped in their lifetime, the majority suffers this experience between the ages of 16-24. The heart of this age range encompasses the college demographic. Only 12 percent of this group notified the authorities about their assault. Seven percent of college males have admitted to either committing or attempting rape. Two thirds of these male individuals have done so on multiple occasions.

The report detailed, “Many at-

tacks occur at parties, victims are often ‘abused while they’re drunk, under the influence of drugs, passed out or oth-erwise incapacitated.’” With an urgent tone, the President called upon “our basic decency and humanity,” maintain-ing that “We’ve got to keep teaching young men in particular to show women the respect they deserve and to recog-nize sexual violence and be outraged by it, and to do their part to stop it from happening in the first place.”

Amidst this sobering national report, reverberating across social media and into the minds of administrators and stu-dents alike, college campuses in America are reminded of two things:First, sex, whether consensual or nonconsensual, is a reality for college students; and second, a more robust, open, and helpful conversation about sex is lacking.

Sex in America

Sex is no taboo secret. Sex is a reality of life. It’s even ingrained in our nature. Virginia Johnson, prominent sexologist of the mid to late Twentieth Century, once commented, “We are born, man, women, and sexual beings.” Beyond nature, its various forms and portrayals bombard our experiences. There is sex on television, the movies, the Internet, in our homes, in magazines, video games, novels, the Bible, and as a

result, it dominates the typical collegiate conversation. During the early days of pubescence, sexual urges begin to rise and we start to really think and function sexually. Most call upon the mentioned outlets of media and literature. These outlets, in some ways, become our sexual instructors. They give us images of sex, what sex can look like, and we set forth into our teenage years, seek-ing a tangible release for our formulated imaginations and fantasies. In college, more than ever do we think about sex and engage in sexual activity. Additional to the harrowing numbers of the White House report, Discovery News reported in their study that 86 percent of the college-aged respondents admitted to having multiple sexual partners. In a recent study conducted by the Guttm-acher Institute, it was reported that by the age of eighteen, 61 percent of Ameri-cans have had sex. This figure grows to 71 percent for nineteen-year-olds. Sex is happening, it’s prevalent, and we stare at these numbers in either concern or obvious agreement. Sex can be a joyful experience; it can also be frightening.

“Yes, it is important, particularly among students who have not had sex yet. However, the unintended conse-quences of ‘pre-marital sex’ are just as ‘real’ as is the demand for pre-marital sex on campus,” said Sasha Ross, as-sistant professor of Global Studies and director of the Women’s Resource

reality of sex

news

06

Center, an organization established at La Sierra University in 1996 which seeks to deepen the conversation about gen-der and encourage women and men to greater equality.

Professor Ross highlights the various risks that come with pre-marital sex, including, “the prevalence of HIV and other sexually-transmitted infections on campus, the long-term emotional, finan-cial, and social consequences on female students if they get pregnant, and the emotional and spiritual loneliness that both men and women may face. More than 1 million women are raped each year, with 1 in 4 women affected by sexual violence in their adult lifetimes on average, and over 6 million women and men are victims of stalking and sexual harassment each year here in the U.S.”

“A lot of people approach sex with either a certain naiveté, or at the other end learn the hard way the problems that can and do come with sex,” she said. Attributing this prevalent sexual behavior in part to the sexually objectify-ing aspects of society and pop culture, Professor Ross warns against a mode of thinking that disassociates a person’s body from their mind and soul. “Without thinking, we can let people into our life or put ourselves in situations are not in our own best interest,” she said. “Poor advice from friends who turn out to be untrustworthy, proximity to high-risk

locations, and the lack of an effective vocabulary to say ‘no,’ can have a long-term impact that you would never know-ingly choose,” she said.

Depression and a low sense of self-worth, a pattern of broken relation-ships in one's family or inner circle, the emotional fall-out from one’s childhood or parents’ relationship(s), and family hardship were also cited as factors that may influence peoples’ decisions about sex. “Premarital sex has consequences, and they are usually worse for women than men, both at the individual and col-lective levels,” says Professor Ross. If you’re skeptical about whether women have it worse than men when it comes to sexual consequences, just ask Dr. Paul Mallery, a social psychologist here at La Sierra University who special-izes in Gender Studies.

“Certainly women have it worse than men in terms of social stigma as-sociated with premarital sex,” says Dr. Mallery “Adolescent and young adult men who have premarital sex are con-sidered somewhat more positively than women who have had premarital sex. For women, it can lead to being treated poorly and becoming less popular more than for men. And being stigmatized and treated poorly can make you psychologi-cally distressed. So though there is more psychological distress for women than

men on the whole, the cause seems to be more because of the social stigma than something essentially tied to gen-der.”

It’s evident that sex outside of mar-riage comes with a load of consequenc-es for both genders. Still, the common student would remain a skeptic. I am committed to my partner. We have safe, responsible sex and it’s great. If sex is fun and makes me happy, why should I stop doing it?

Along this sentiment, an anonymous male student who responded to the Criterion’s recent online survey, which asked students to share their sexual ex-periences and perspectives said, “There is always going to be a disconnect between what we should be doing and what we are doing. My question is more about if we are teaching the right way (safe sex, dangers of promiscuity, emo-tional boundaries) to have sex instead of if we should be having sex.”

A female student also responded by saying “I fully believe that explor-ing my sexuality has made me into a more confident and satisfied person. As long as the sex that I'm thinking about participating in is safe, I'm very open to exploring it even further. I don't think that abstaining from sex is the answer, but rather choosing your partners care-fully and approaching it with open com-

munication.” If all the factors line up and one were to engage in consensual sex, Dr. Mallery offers that across the board, premarital sex isn't associated with negative psy-chological outcomes; it depends on the people involved and the circumstance. People who have had consensual premarital sex don't tend to differ from those who haven't in terms of happiness, psychological disorders, or how satisfied they are with their marriages.

So, in other words, it is possible to be emotionally and psychologically healthy and still engage in premarital sex.

Some argue and present multiple reasons why one should have sex and if anything, the many negative factors of sex cannot always be assumed as a reason not to have sex. In fact, one can just as easily say that it is perhaps an invitation for a cautious, yet open and helpful conversation of how and when to have sex.

The Ethic That Drives Us

While acknowledging the great need for a deeper conversation about sex to exist, still, the dialogue comes in diverse forms. Navigating through the many responses to the sexual realities can be

tricky.

As it pertains to sex, what is the response of our own university? The De-partment of Student Life has created an entire policy and official, written stance.

The La Sierra University Student Handbook states that “we resolve to live consistently within traditional Christian values and teaching on sexuality.” In short, we adhere to the Christian ethic of sex, the Christian ideal and expectation of sex. From this ideal, they have formu-lated this stance: “The university expects that students will not engage in sexual intercourse outside of marriage nor en-gage in any sexual behavior that would interfere with the learning environ-ment and its community. Students who engage in this type of sexual activity will be subject to disciplinary consequences. La Sierra University does not condone cohabitation by unmarried students . . . the university reserves the right to take action against the students involved, including canceling registrations or with-holding permission to register.”

The University is calling this com-munity to treat sex as a, “gift from God,” something that should exist only within marriage. Based on the Criterion’s online survey responses, many of the student respondents agree in calling sex as a gift from God and should save sex for marriage. So, when one considers the

08

listed numbers that reveal widespread sexual activity amongst college-age individuals, how should they label these figures? Alarming? It depends. Mislead-ing? At first glance, yes. If one were to place these national numbers side-by-side with the Christian ideal of sex, the disparity is obvious. But is it fair to make such a comparison? If one were to infer that as a Christian community, La Sierra University is therefore different, better, or somehow exempt from these num-bers, the individual would be entering some murky waters.

For some clarification, we turned to Associate Vice President of Student Life and Dean of Students, Marjorie Robinson. Speaking on behalf of her experiences and her knowledge, she made sure to point out that she is not, by any means, speaking for the entirety of the Student Life Department. The handbook, also being a communal, group effort, is only interpreted by Dean Robinson. Her statements are based on prior experience when dealing with students and stand as a vital point to this conversation.

When asked about the significance of the national numbers that portray a college demographic that is seemingly hooked on sex, Dean Robinson respond-ed, “I think these numbers are absolutely relevant. We are not here with blinders on. We understand that those numbers are very real. We are not under the as-sumption that ‘No one does that here.’”

Acknowledging these numbers in an understanding light, there is still a level of uncertainty and alarm. “We look over situations with students who have been involved sexually and see the repercus-sions of falling outside the ideal and fail to see that there is something better.” She went on to say that all the different difficulties, which she has seen, that pre-marital sex has caused or brought about, helps her in her understanding of the issue. “When you are connecting with somebody in a physical way, there are so many other components that are a part of it. It is not just an act of expressing physical love. Now you’ve connected to somebody at a totally different level. So if at some point there is no commitment, people do not take the time to under-stand that there is so much more.”

In trying to rationalize the pervasive sexual activities of the college demo-graphic, Dean Robinson pointed out what very well may be the highest rate of pornography usage that history has ever seen. She notes how it has skewed our view of what sex is and was meant to be. Like Professor Ross, Dean Rob-inson attributes these issues with the greater whole of society, commercials with sexual innuendos and other pop culture elements.

And what is the response to all of

these possible pitfalls of society?

“There has to be an ideal somehow, somewhere. It’s good to have some-thing to reach for,” says Dean Robinson. “And that’s why it is important for us as an institution to have the ideals and also have the open conversation about what is sex in a positive light, or sexual relationships, to be able to put it out there. As a Christian university, part of our responsibility is guiding and reedu-cating our students to Christian morals and values, including education relating to sexuality. As a Christian institution, we want to be intentional about encourag-ing our students to have open conversa-tions about the positive, God-given and intended nature of sexual relationships. And so, it is important to guide and instruct our students to act thoughtfully and responsibly."

And when students choose to engage in sex, Dean Robinson assures that the conversation will always be one of openness and willingness to help, ulti-mately leading to the Christian ethic and ideal, “We still offer them the resources to guide them to that ideal, the Counsel-ing Center, certain programs and initia-tives on campus, and discussion.” She maintained that the office of Student Life deals with each and every case on its own merit, and relates to each person involved with dignity and sensitivity.

Dean Robinson further emphasized that when Student Life advises students, they consider them as a whole person with the power of choice. La Sierra Student Life Department focuses on spiritual growth and maturity, which is a critical step to a fulfilling Christian expe-rience. What is key when analyzing sexu-al issues is developing an understanding of who we are intended to be spiritually first. When students make decisions, the aim is that afterwards, God will grant them a sense of peace, knowing that their actions were within His will.

Nevertheless, there will always be many that do not adhere to the ethic and would argue for their side and call for change. So, in response to possible change toward the Christian ethic, Dean Robinson responded in favor of healthy caution and vigilant consistency, “There are certain things that we will not bend. We will always give people the power of choice, but there would probably never be a point and say, ‘okay, you’re right.’ Because in our position, we have seen the devastation of students who really stray from that ideal, end up in a way that is really bad—issues with a partner, themselves, and depression. So what happens when they deal with that real-ity, and students say, ‘this is who I want to be, this is what I want,’ more than not, we deal with students and those issues. Just because the way that we look at things change, I don’t think the ideal should change. We have a God that does not change His ways and purposes of love for His children."

Sexual Dilemmas

Yet still, beyond this ethic, when an individual that has grown up knowing that sex should only be for marriage, he or she may feel a sense of wonderment toward sex that still exists. Many things drive one to consensual premarital sex: Curiosity, natural hormonal urges, overwhelming feelings and emotions, and often times, a lack of a meaningful conversation.

At this stage in life, college students thirst for fun. When we hear a rule that poses a threat to the euphoria, we find a way around it—or in some instances, straight through. This leaves the college demographic, particularly within the Christian community, without a solid way forward on how to navigate the realities of sex.

What may be needed is less of the “traditional” Adventist or Christian ideal and more a pragmatic sense that drives

If all the factors line up and one were to engage in consensual sex, Dr. Mallery

offers that across the board, premarital sex isn't

associated with negative psychological outcomes

the conversation about sex, rather than a moralizing tone. As opposed to a dominating ideal, Sex could be talked about in a culturally contextualized and rational manner that is mindful of the problems in the society of today and in the ancient world of the Biblical writers.

Sex and Tradition To help us understand this notion, we turn to Dr. Wonil Kim, Associate Professor of Old Testament Studies at the HMS Richards Divinity School. When asked about the practicality of our existing Christian ethic toward sex, he responded, “If ones view of human sex-uality is based on a foundational theory, meaning, there is some cosmic founda-tion that gives meaning and definition to sexuality, and therefore, within Christian traditions, that it comes from God, there-fore it becomes absolute. Therefore, for some people, the question of practicality may be as irrelevant as, ‘Is law against murder practical?’ Because prohibition of murder is not just a question of practi-cality, it is an absolute category.”

Dr. Kim went on to explain the common Christian view of marriage as a sacrament, or, a religious rite that is observed with a sense of sacredness. The common view of marriage and sex is that both are sacraments, both are significant observances of faith in Chris-tianity. Therefore, if one were to have sex outside of marriage, this would contra-dict the sacramentality of it all. Since sex and marriage are both sacraments, they are inseparable and cannot be done separately. That is the common Christian ethic, one that our University adheres to.

And if one were to stray from such an ethic, Dr. Kim says, “You have to make your decision and be willing to live with the [social] consequence. So, if you and your partner may believe that you are truly committed and you will consum-mate that commitment in sexual act and consider that sacrament, and you don’t need institutional sacramentality to validate it. If that’s your conviction, I would respect that as your choice and decision.” Nevertheless, such actions come with its fair share of setbacks. “I would say to the couple, you have to be

ready to live with the social and commu-nal consequences. Because the commu-nity will not agree with you. And to what extent does the community count for the integrity of your authentic existence, you have to make that decision.”

We are all communal social beings, but it does not mean that we are all totally submerged and totally submis-sive to everything society takes. We are always selective, and this is one of those areas where we have to make that choice and be willing to live with the consequences, says Dr. Kim.

“Whether you do it outside or inside the institution of marriage, you have to feel whole; own the act as your truth, and be responsible to yourself, your partner, and your community” says Dr. Kim. “And while we are communal be-ings, sex and sexuality are also extremely personal.”

If there emerges among the new generation a question of individual choices on this matter that may poten-tially challenge the traditional views and the communal codes, Dr. Kim believes it should be openly addressed at all levels within the community.

“Any theological, doctrinal, philo-sophical issue is subject to constant revision, constant reevaluation. We may at the end of such conversation and reaffirm what we have held on to, or we may come up with a different formula. But I think there is an intrinsic danger in thinking that everything we have been saying is final. In all aspects of life, we always need to be open for further dia-logue. Whether it be a theology of sex and sexuality, or any other theology,” say Dr. Kim.

This may seem to be quite radi-cal to a consensus that lives under the traditional Christian ethic of the campus community. The hypothetical questions that inform such skepticism include, If God spoke to writers of the Bible, isn’t it all absolute? God’s word is final! Where is the danger there? If God never changes, how can our ethics change?

In addressing these concerns, con-sider a brief history lesson from Dr. Kim. He says that it is vital for any individual to realize that reevaluation is very true all throughout Biblical tradition. Dr. Kim ex-plains that if you look at culture, history, and context, the Bible we have is a long history of constant revaluation of the tra-dition that each generation has received. For every generation, in ancient Israelite culture, they always dealt with what they received from a previous generation. They did not simply adhere to it and bow down, giving it absolute authority. They would wrestle with these traditions and would try to make sense out of it in their own new situation. These people of the Biblical cultures dialogued rigorously

If there is ever to be a sexual ethic that exists to inform in directness, openly work with, and fully address the realities of sex, this method and mode of thinking may be scooting ever closer. It is a way of thinking that is founded on the prin-ciples of our campus in seeking, knowing, and serving.

10

with the tradition they had received, and they came up with a new tradition, one that would become text. And that is the Biblical pattern. Adventism was born within a similar pattern, spurring from such reevaluation for the question, “Why has Jesus not come?” So we are still try-ing to reevaluate that question, among many others, today within the Adventist church. So, Dr. Kim asks, why should sex be an exception?

“It is always healthier to reexamine everything that we have held on to, then to be stagnant. That’s my general belief. A question on sexuality is no differ-ent,” Dr. Kim asserts. “People may feel uncomfortable about that, because they feel we may end up desacramentalizing sex and marriage. I would not worry about that. I would rather look at it as an opportunity of re-sacramentalizing in a new situation.”

And how does that process happen?

“We leave that answer to the pro-cess of the dialogue. The process may well reaffirm what we have. Or it may give us a new insight that would lead us into a new path that would enrich what we have. What is essential in such a pro-cess is the openness to surprises instead of pushing one’s agenda, whatever the agenda may be. If we believe the Holy Spirit to be part of such a process, then we have nothing to fear” says Dr. Kim.

While the process is still unclear, we can turn to other “sacraments” that were once considered “absolute” and beyond any form of change. Take marriage for instance. Marriage used to be an abso-lute sacrament. God intended for two individuals to commit in a monogamous relationship, and this commitment was supposed to last until death—even if it meant weathering unhealthy re-lationships, domestic abuse, volatile exchanges, and incompatible partners. The sacrament, or the ethic, as we knew it, was untouchable. However, today, people are divorcing while still remain-ing faithful to God. Divorced individuals are accepted in churches, along with remarried peoples, some experiencing a second marriage, others a third, or even a fourth. And so, while there is always a relationship between practice and sacra-ment, each are not absolutes.

A Colorful Conversation

Still, there is healthy, cautious oppo-sition to such openness toward change that exists within this community. Con-trarily, there are also those that have ex-pressed distaste for the current Christian expectation on sex, all together. As one male respondent to the online survey responded, “I think abstinence is a naive dream. We are sexual beings who desire sex.”

In such a situation of dissonance, the easy thing to do is to point fingers. It’s our Christian ethic’s fault! It’s our university’s fault! It’s society’s fault! It’s my partner’s fault! It’s sex and sexual desire’s fault! Daniel Nyirady, a clinical therapist at the La Sierra University Counseling Center approaches such statements of inner conflict and sexual struggles from students on a regular basis. “There are many reasons why abstinence makes good sense. There are also many rea-sons why students choose to engage in sexual activity,” he says. “My goal when students come in to talk about issues with sex or sexuality is the same as it is for any issue - to assist the student to thoroughly explore their experience, to evaluate all the options available and to make the choice that they feel will serve them and those they are in relationship with the best.”

The questions that frequent the of-fice of Nyirady are honest starting points for those that are searching for an un-derstanding of their sexual identity and sex itself. Common questions include the following:

Is it possible to separate your emotions from sex?

I am still friends with my ex-boyfriend. He keeps pressuring me to have sex. I know I shouldn't but I do enjoy it. What should I do?

Why does the school care whether I am sexually active or not?

I plan on getting married someday. Will being sexually active now affect my marriage sexual relationship in the future?

I'm having a hard time stopping myself from watching porn online and mastur-bating. I feel like it's affecting me in a negative way. I'm thinking about sex all the time. I'd like to stop. What can I do?

I am haunted by memories of a very negative sexual experience. How can I get these thoughts out of my head? I'm attracted to women but there is no way I can "come out." My family will freak. And I'm afraid my friends will creep out if they know I'm a lesbian. I don't know if I can take that kind of rejection.

While the conversation may be full of opposing views, clashing ideals, and diverse realities, there is still room for personal exploration and the personal space to make a choice. “I believe the most helpful conversations are those that explore the personal meanings entwined with one's sexuality and the reasons why one does or does not en-gage in sexual activities,” says Nyirady.Dr. Kim and Dean Robinson would agree with this sentiment expressed by Nyirady: there is great importance in the individual.

For both, the decision of the person should result in what Dean Robinson de-fines as spiritual growth, or “a sense of peace with the decisions made.” Dr. Kim would call it soul integrity, which means, “Right here in this moment that God has given me as a Gift, am I maximizing its value or am I participating in the act that deteriorates the value of this very moment? Or, do I feel whole about what I am doing?” If there is ever to be a sexual ethic that exists to inform in directness,

openly work with, and fully address the realities of sex, this method and mode of thinking may be scooting ever closer. It is a way of thinking that is founded on the principles of our campus in seeking, knowing, and serving. And perhaps in this knowing, there can be an end to negative realities of sex that plague our community and society at large, overly extensive sex, rape, sexual abuse, STDs, HIV, AIDs, and molestation. As victims of these realities, change is forthcoming.

In hopes of intriguing possible dialogue, consider the bottom-line questions, as Dr. Kim’s highlights them, “Instead of asking, what is the rule to be, ask, who am I? What am I being? And what am I becoming to myself, to my partner, to the world, and to God? How do I understand and perceive my integrity and to what extent do I allow community to dictate it? What extent do I maintain my own independence from the community and how do I live in harmony?”

12

I believe the most helpful conversations are those that explore the personal meanings entwined with one's sexuality and the reasons why one does or does not engge in sexual activites.

SEX

TALK

We asked you to tell us your sexual experiences and what you think about premarital sex. The responses were not overwhelming in number, but those that did contribute were far from subtle. Those that had the audacity to stand up and talk about sex did so with a bold voice, one that matters, as with all voices here on campus. Some upheld the traditional Christian ethic of sex, calling for the benefi t of abstinence. Others pitted themselves against tradition and expressed a serious desire to fi nd a sexual preference and a sexual identity. Like you would with a friend or another college peer, try and lend an ear (or eye) and listen closely. Respect their openness, their courage to be vulnerable, and most importantly, their value of honesty—revealing truth.

Never had it but cant wait to one day experience with that special someone!

I fi rst had sex when I was 14. I've had positive sexual experiences with partners in serious relationships for 1year+. I think that sex is something people need to do before marriage. I believe that sexual compatibility, and the ways that a relationships dynamics can change after sex, are things that people should be aware of before getting married. (I am born and raised Adventist)

Sex isn't bad. It's good, in fact it's great! It's what God made in order for his creation to procreate and bond. Not to mention sex is like a sixth sense. Besides the sight, the touch, the feel, the taste, and the smell, sex is what unites two human beings heart and soul. I would dare to call it a spiritual sense. Which is why it should be something so absolutely private and special, between two forever! (as cheesy as that sounds, it's the truth.) I have noticed people go one way or another about such topic. You have some people that think sex is repugnant, or at least that's what they have been instilled. By "repugnant" I mean sex is all about the "fl esh" and the fl esh is weak. So, if you want a relationship with God you must stray away from those "fl esh calling desires". How unfortunate. I don't think God could have made it more clear, he created sex, he never abolished it. Then you have the "YOLO" peeps. Why not experience sex with multiple people right? I mean how could you possibly marry someone without "knowing" if you like them in bed. If you are with someone just because of the sex, well that my friends is a diff erent story. God didn't speak of abstinence to control you, to force you "to wait", to make you feel guilty if you were to have sex. He simply cares. He cares so much. I don't care how many people brag about having sex and not feeling any emotions towards the other person. It's psychologically proven that human beings are aff ected and infl uenced by their experiences. God would hate to see you hurt, heartbroken, anxious, insomniac, depressed, and feeling worthless all in response to what he created for you! He created it so that you may feel fulfi lled, blessed, and happy, but at it's right time! So you may be wondering why I believe sex should be between only two individuals? I am not married, yet. So how would I know that sex is great? Let's just say after a three year relationship (sexually active) that didn't end well. Everything went downhill. I was broken, hurt, anxious, insomniac, and confused. Then I understood. It was never God's plan to condemn me for my actions. He just wanted to protect me, he wanted me to be patient. The last thing he wanted was for me to go through such pain, such grief, I literally felt like half of me was gone! But it happened. Still he was there for me. Please, don't let his love and grace be an excuse for being impatient. After all, true love is patient. And sex, sex is a beautiful thing but like it says in the bible, their is a due time for everything. And truth is, you shouldn't even be asking yourself if your ready to have sex when your personal identity is nothing but a blurry distant thought. Find out who you are in God, seriously. Who are you? God will take care of the rest. This, this is what I think about sex.

My fi rst sexual experience was awful, I was manipulated into having sex. I felt nothing because I didn't want to be there. Now a days I don't like having sex, personally I try to avoid. I think it's the person decision to have sex or not. I haven't had sex with a girl yet but I want to

Personally, I've never had sex. Everyone always assumes I have because of the way I dress, or the way I look, or because I can talk to anyone without reservations. I've always wanted to save myself for marriage, and I intend to do so. My current boyfriend and I are on the same page. We both want to wait until marriage, but all my past relationships, my boyfriend would push me to go further. I always had self control then, but to be honest, if my current boyfriend pressured me now, I don't think I would be able to say no . . .

14

I love participating in BDSM (bondage, discipline, sadomasochism) and no one would ever guess because I'm the bubbly modest Christian girl that goes to church every Sabbath. There's something about this type of sex that is wild and exhilarating; I love it because it's so different from my day to day life. I fully believe that exploring my sexuality has made me into a more confident and satisfied person. As long as the sex that I'm thinking about participating in is safe, I'm very open to exploring it even further. I don't think that abstaining from sex is the answer, but rather choosing your partners carefully and approaching it with open communication.

I feel like it is important to wait until you're married - or at least I feel that it is ideal. But I also feel that it causes people (like myself) to want to get married for the wrong reasons. I feel like (some of) those who have waited to engage in intercourse think "I can't wait to get married so I can have sex" and then get married in a rush/with the wrong mindset. I was in a long term relationship. we talked about marriage seriously and I know that that influenced my choice to want to get married. (Luckily) we broke up, but it makes me think that premarital sex causes you to want to get married for more solid reasons. I have waited to engage in intercourse, because I have waited this long - it might as well be with my spouse. I would also like to be with someone that has waited and if I don't wait, then it ruins my chances of that happening. But I feel like the longer I wait, the more it would influence my decision to marry the next person I'm in a serious relationship with. #torn Note: We engaged in oral/hand/fingering/BJ/HJ/etc but no penetration - mostly because of risk of conception and because we figured we might as well wait since we were planning to get married within a year or two. I masturbate a lot, so that helps.

My sexual experiences have varied greatly. My first time was awkward and weird looking back. I was 16 and she was my first serious girlfriend. It was more or less us discovering where things went and what felt good. It was new to both of us and we both were extremely nervous. I had always been borough up knowing that sex before marriage was bad but at the same time I really wanted it because I was a 16 year old guy. I can’t really say my first time was terrible but it was nothing compared to things I have done more recently. I’m now 25 and much more experienced, for better or for worse, in my sexuality. Sex to me is like anything else in this world; you get better at it the more you practice. I’m not saying you should have sex all the time with anyone so you can get better at it. What I’m saying is that to really enjoy sex you have to be willing to try new things and make mistakes in order to improve yourself and learn about what you like. whether we should be having sex or not is really a personal decision. There is always going to be a disconnect between what we should be doing and what we are doing. My question is more about if we are teaching the right way (safe sex, dangers of promiscuity, emotional boundaries) to have sex instead of if we should be having sex. Because I think abstinence is a naive dream. We are sexual beings who desire sex.

Premarital sex is okay because the line Christianity has drawn is very outdated. If you think about it, Christianity is thousands of years old. It was basically founded in a time where things were very primitive and society was controlled by man. Looking at it more so from a historical perspective, it looks like men didn’t want women to promiscuous. Relating more to now, if there is more of an open view of sex, where people are educated, they can control it better. When people have to surpass sex, there is a very small percentage of our population that force sex, through rape. There should be a balance, and more knowledge into how each person thinks about sex. It shouldn’t be definitive, ”No sex before marriage.” It should be this special, sacred thing, that doesn’t need to exist within marriage, as long as its consensual and passionate and that you love each other. It is nothing freaky. It is normal.

//interview

daniel perezEarlier this month, we had a chance to sit down and talk with the president of PRISM, Daniel Perez. PRISM is an unofficial club

on campus, an established advocate and voice of our own LGBT community. In his conversation with the Criterion, Daniel voiced the many perspectives of the LGBT community and their place within the Christian community and society at large.

16

Criterion: How did you come to be president of the Prism club?

Daniel: I was introduced to PRISM last year at the beginning of Spring Quarter by one of my friends, and I spoke with Rebby (the former president of PRISM). And she was graduating and she really wanted someone to keep pushing the envelope, and I said I was willing to do it. I knew when I came to Las Sierra, God had a plan for me, because I did not plan on coming to a Christian University. I grew up in a Christian academy. I liked it, but I needed that break just because being LGBT and Christian, you’re some-times forced with a choice, and it gets really hard and it strains your relation-ship with God. You know how people talk, “Gay people are going to hell!” But God sent me to La Sierra, and things just fell into place. I said, “God I know you have a plan for me, so, I’m going to roll with it.”

So, I noticed that on PRISM Facebook page, the about section lists the group’s purpose as “dedicated to bringing awareness of the LGBTQ community, breaking myths, learning more about the LGBTQ history, and getting involved with other universities and schools.” Now that’s what the official PR information says. I want to know what you say. In your eyes and from your heart, what is the main driving purpose of PRISM?

The main driving purpose of PRISM is to provide a place where LGBT people can go to and have open conversation in a Christian environment, because there’s a lot of places that LGBT people can go to. University of California Riverside has an LGBT resource center, Cal State San Bernardino, and they’re open to the public, but it’s not Christian and they aren’t focused more on Christian values. For example, if I were to propose a Sab-bath walk at one of these places, they would think I’m crazy! The topic of God

and being Christian, while being LGBT is not received too well in other places, because of what Christianity has said about the LGBT community, exclud-ing them. PRISM is also for allies and non-allies to come and kind of see what being LGBT is, and I think that is kind of misconstrued here.

Also in the “About” section, the infor-mational excerpt lists reference to the community of non-heterosexual indi-viduals not as LGBT, which is what the public conventionally hears, but LGBTQ. In the cover photo, it is listed as LGBTQ-IA. What is the meaning of those extra letters at the end? Why the “Q” and the “IA?”

So, I know that it is Lesbian, Gay, Bi-sexual, Transgender; “Q” is Questioning , or Queer, “I” can stand for Intersex and “A” could be Asexual.

Let’s refer, again, to PRISM’s aims and goals. Among them is “breaking myths.” What are some myths about the LGBTQ community that are swirling around our society and our community that you and your club are working to break? Here’s your chance to settle all of this non-sense, once and for all! Go for it.

Myth #1: If you are LGBT you are exces-sively promiscuous, or that you are promiscuous at all. I know many LGBT people that don’t participate in sexual activity. And when others think about heterosexuals and he’s a male, they think, “Oh, he’s probably checking me out!” But when you look at other peo-ple’s lives, just because you are straight, that doesn’t mean you are attracted to every girl. It kind of sucks that they put us in this bracket that says, “You are sex driven people.” It’s sad when people think that’s what defines us as LGBT. Sex, being a part of every other demo-graphic, such as with heterosexuals, it’s just a side note, not something that

defines you.Myth #2: You cannot be LGBT and Christian. That hurts my heart, because I know some people that walk away from Christianity because of what other people tell them and what they hear from others. To me, if God is the most loving Creator that we know him to be, that having Him in your life is so free and that it makes everything better, it’s really sad that everyone can’t have Him. Also, to say that you can’t be LGBT and Christian, you’re forcing people to have this choice, which is really difficult. It’s like telling someone, you have to choose between heterosexual and loving God. It’s a part of you; it’s not something that you can choose. It’s different from choosing between stealing or loving God, because that is a choice. It’s some-thing that you can say, ‘Yes or No’ to, not something that you are. I’ve seen the strongest relationships with God in LGBT people. One of my friends has been told that he can't have God and that God will never love him. It's forced him to dig deeper in the Bible and to dig deeper in his relationship with God. You look at him and you say, “That guy has God with him, wherever he goes, and he touches people’s lives.” And those are two basic things for me personally: LGBT people are sex driven people, for that is defi-nitely not true. And you can’t be LGBT and have a relationship with God.

All right, so moving on to some other things people say, pretty habitually. You’ve heard it all before, “man, that’s gay.” “That’s so gay,” “Are you gay, or something?” All of these phrases exist in normal conversation amongst people here on campus and in the greater society, and they typically hold negative connotations. We all grew up around such talk amongst peers. What do you think about these statements? Do you find them offensive? Should we ap-proach them lightheartedly? Are they just jokes that should be laughed at?

Should we take them seriously as deep-seeded problems in our minds? Do they breed hate and separation? What do you think?

Personally this question is hard for me, just because I was raised in a family and around friends that use the phrases, “Man that’s gay,” “Dude, that’s gay,” and it has become a part of how I speak. I think the more that I realized this hurts people, the more I realized that it’s never toward something that’s cool or awe-some and amazing, but it’s usually to something that is abnormal, or kind of sucks. So personally, I have stopped using it, because you never know when you are around someone and he, or she doesn’t know where they’re at in life, and one thing can push them over the edge. And if saying, “Man that’s super gay,” makes them feel a little worse about themselves, it will kind of push them over. You don’t want to be that person to push them over. Having to hear those stories, I heard so many that have thought of suicide, attempted suicide, attempted suicide and actually killed themselves, and others who just planned it in their head. It’s the little things that get to our head, each day, and eventually it will push them over the edge until they can’t take it each day. So personally, I would like to see that word being stopped. Because if we use his-tory and we refer to certain words in the African American community, and the White community, we know that they carry deragatory connotations. And today, people say it, and we are at a loss because we wonder, “Can we just say it openly? Can only certain people say it?” To me, any words that carry on a nega-tive connotation toward a certain demo-graphic, or words that are denigrating to a certain race or demographic, we shouldn’t use them at all.

So, as are a part of the LGBTQ com-munity, that is also within a Christian community, here at La Sierra University. How do you feel the LGBTQ community has been received here on campus and in the greater Christian community?

On campus, it’s been mixed. I’ve heard of people that stick up for LGBT people, saying, “They’re no different from the rest of us, why do we treat them like a different species? Why are we mean to them? They’re just as human as the rest of us.” But then I’ve seen the people who are in the middle, who feel that as

long as someone doesn’t act gay, then they are cool. On the more extreme side, some say, “They [gays] are not going to heaven; they can’t be loved by God, they are an abomination.” It is sad because I don’t think there is enough people on the defending side for LGBT people, standing up to those that try to put them down. There aren’t enough people like that on campus to offset the comments that put them down, such as, “You’re going to hell.”

I had the opportunity to watch a screen-ing of the film “Seventh-Gay Adventists” directed by Daneen Akers and Stephen Eyer. In the film, some of the gay indi-viduals in the film expressed feelings of initial fear during their experience of sexual discovery. Do you regularly have members during your meetings that express such sentiments? Do some people that you’ve met feel separated, like an outsider, or having the fear of judgment or rejection? Take us into the reality of such sentiments that people have expressed to you.

People have expressed to me at differ-ent stages of their coming out, because it’s not just a single event, it is a long process. Throughout the stages, one thing is reoccurring: “I don’t want to be judged; I don’t want to be hated.” They don’t want to be judged or hated by their family. Because when you come out as LGBT, it is really nerve wracking. You don’t know what your family is go-ing to say. No matter how awesome you think your family is, it’s really a toss up. What they say can really hurt you. I’ve seen people kicked out of their homes, disowned, have been told, “you’re dead to me” for coming out. This is what is really sad: When people come out, they are at their most vulnerable place. Because when one comes out, you could have people that are on board and people that are off board. A lot of people that I know have lost loved ones and friends after coming out.

On a personal note, I remember when I came out. Since junior high, I’ve had this really large group of friends. It was hard because I didn’t know what they were going to say. And I just remember when I told one of my friends, she came up to me two weeks later and said, “I am sorry that I was so quiet when you told me, but I just think it’s so sad because you’re such a good Christian, you’re such a good guy, and you’re nice to everyone

you meet, but it’s sad that you’re not go-ing to heaven.” And that’s the thing that a lot of people experience, especially if you’re LGBT and Christian, I feel like you can lose so much.

Now, I am not sure if you are comfort-able with this next question, and you can tell me if you’re not, but it will dig a bit into your personal life. How did you re-alize your sexual identity and realize that you are not a heterosexual individual? And when did you decide to come out? If you’re willing to, explain this important portion of your life.

I knew I was gay when I was in the first grade. I remember my first crush. It was nothing sexual, I just really liked this other guy in my class. We played Pokémon with each other. A group of us would go and beat each other up and pretend we were Pokémon. But I just knew I was different. I remember when my dad and other male family member spoke, especially when it was about women, they would say, “Man she’s hot! Man this girl.” I asked my dad, “Why do you guys always do that.” He respond-ed, “Well, that’s just what guys do. And if you don’t, then you’re gay. Are you gay?” I told him no, but inside, I realized that I really was. I didn’t tell anybody for a long time. I kept it very secre-tive. I remember telling my best friend during Freshman year of high school, and after that, I didn’t say anything until my Freshman year of college when I was at a public school. I saw all these people that were really open and really accepting, and I realized it was time for me to accept myself, because this battle between my Christian identity and myself has just been too hard. So that’s when I started coming out to the rest of my friends, my parents, and my frater-nity brothers at Cal State. That was a very important part of my life, because I realized that people could love me, just for me. There were some people that were questionable at first, but I didn’t have to experience what many of my fellow LGBT people have had to experi-ence, where they were kicked out of the house, where their friends just stopped talking to them. Honestly, I think God put the friends that I have in my life and He put them there early on, because that was a hard period in my life. Not only was this going on, but a lot of fam-ily issues were going, as well. It was just difficult, but God showed His mercy and He put the right people in my life, and

18

that’s sort of how I dealt with it.

So, as you know, this Criterion magazine issue is exploring the sexual perceptions on campus, as well as the sexual expec-tations that we function under. Among these expectations is the Christian ethic. The ethic states that sex, as a gift from God, should not exist before or outside of marriage. Also, within Christian tradi-tion, particularly on the SDA statement page, online, it says that “sexual intimacy belongs only within the marital relation-ship of a man and a woman. This was the design established by God at cre-ation. The Bible makes no accommoda-tion for homosexual activity or relation-ships. Sexual acts outside the circle of a heterosexual marriage are forbidden.” You’ve heard it all before, and I don’t mean to get too deep into theological arguments, and in no way am I trying to trap you with some crazy question to get you to contradict yourself. However, what do you feel about such a stance? It’s the official stance of this Christian community; it’s a stance that uses Jesus in their argument of opposition, the same Jesus that you, and all gay Chris-tians pray to, worship, and love. What is your initial, visceral response to all of

this, and secondly, how do you find it possible to come to terms with such a straightforward stance that holds dis-sonance and opposition toward a part of your identity and the identity of many other individuals, a part of you that they [the church] call a sin?

I think the actual stance to what you just said is suffocating and there is no room for questioning. You either take it as it is, or you don’t. For me personally, I don’t believe in premarital sex. I believe you should wait for marriage and have that connection, because it’s not just for procreation. Sex is a deeper connection that you share with the one you love, and it should happen during marriage. There are a lot of psychological things that happen when you have sex with multiple people. To me, it’s a slippery slope. It’s kind of shaky with the subject of homosexuality and marriage, so it’s hard to fit the sexual ethic inside the conversation. To me, I think that LGBT people should be held to the same stan-dards as heterosexual people. You wait until you have that one special person. And then that’s who you can have that deep connection with.

I think the stance is once sided. It was made by people who might not have had contact with LGBT people, and they simply read and interpret things. How I deal with it personally, we all have one Bible, but from this one Bible, we all it interpret it differently, hence the many denominations within the religion of Christianity. Although that I am a Seventh-day Adventist, there are certain parts that I don’t agree with, such as their stance on homosexuality. I came to terms with it through struggle. I heard it from my parents that I need to be a celi-bate and I can’t have a relationship at all. I went through a lot of prayer and a lot of crying. I was very confused and it’s hard when you don’t have a lot Christian support. And mind you, being Christian is as much a part of me as being a part of the LGBT spectrum—I will not let either go. I spoke to a lot of pastors; I read a lot of online exegesis of the Bible, trying to get my answer from scripture, seeing what was happening at that time in history. I realized that I have to let that go, because there is always going to be different views when it comes to scripture, and I can’t get that unanimous vote saying that this is totally how it is. I have my own truth, but more impor-

tantly, I feel that God showed his truth to me. Amidst all of the family struggles and relationship struggles with teachers, friends, and pastors, I realized that I am asking the wrong people, and I need to be asking God. I know that when people pray, most do not believe in miracles and that God shows himself, but, I know this sounds crazy, when I say that God gave me the most peace I’ve ever felt in my life, I am not lying. After all the ques-tioning, asking God, “Why this? Can’t you give me something else to struggle with,” I realized that I am going to hold myself to the same standards that my fellow heterosexual church members have. I am not going to have premarital sex. I am going to wait for that one per-son that I believe that God will put into my life and we will go from there.

This summer was huge in regard to legalities, the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn California’s Proposition 8. I want to know what you think about that.

It was obviously a huge day of celebra-tion. If the federal government could recognize this, then hopeful it could take off from there. What do you think about the whole sociopolitical sphere toward homosexuality and the LGBT commu-nity?

I think that we’re progressing a lot, and I think some people expect things to progress exponentially. But if you look throughout history, things take time, and for me being a part of organizations since I was young, things really do take time. I takes a lot of influencing and opening people’s eyes to different pos-sibilities and different views. I think that we are progressing, and obviously faster would be nice, but I am not worried in terms of the LGBT community in the United States. There are certainly other things in the world that are worse.

When you think back in American history, being a part of the LGBT com-

munity, they thought you were mentally ill. Personally, I am happy that there is a separation between church and state. I am not expecting the church to ac-cept gay marriage, but on the federal level, with all the benefits that married couples receive; gay marriage needs to be on that level. They [the government officials] don’t abide by our religion, they should give us a choice and they shouldn’t force others. If God, our cre-ator gave us a choice, why can’t they? I am extremely behind the separation of church and state, because if another re-ligion were to come in and dictate what we do in the US, that would be terrible. We can have our own faith, our own church, and it’s great. But there needs to be a boundary.

There are some government officials that have inferred the argument of “sav-ing the institution of marriage,” which implies keeping marriage only between man and women. What would you say

20

to them, if given a chance to speak to them?

I would say that it’s sad. We are at a point where divorces seem to outnumber the amount of people that get married. We are at a point where you can go down to Vegas and get marriage after a belliger-ent night. There are people that get married and after twenty-four hours, and they realize it’s not for them. I think it’s sad that so much time and money are put inside this Christian shield that wants to “save marriage.” They put all this effort and money in keeping people from mar-rying the one they love. As Christians, we could be doing so many better things that we can place our time, money and effort on. The LGBT people in Russia that are getting beat up, burning a gay individual in Uganda, or people starving across the world, why don’t we help them? We already do some things similar to this, but if we could do more, like helping God’s children, rather then keeping people apart and adding to segregation. I know that Christians are not perfect and I acknowl-edge that not every looks to hate gays, but I believe there are things that we should all agree on—saving lives, helping them, being a light to the world, using our opportunities here in the US to aid others, rather then keeping people away, both straight and LGBT. It is a hard subject. As the president of PRISM, and as a leader for the LGBTQ community, what would you like to say, first, to someone who may be struggling with his or her sexual identity, second, to someone who is still struggling with acceptance of gay individuals, and third, to a person that simply looks to help and be an ally to your cause?

First and foremost, I want to say that God loves you, no matter what people say. If there’s anything to not do, it would be to not let go of faith, because it will bring you through the hardest issues, whether regarding the LGBT issue, or not.

Secondly, I would like to say that you are not alone. There are so many people that might even walk by you that are going through the same struggles. Don’t feel like you have to ostracize yourself. Go talk to someone. If it’s really something that’s hurting you, go talk to someone. The counseling center is there, mind you, it’s not just for crazy people. There are people here to help you. Don’t ever think you’re alone because there are people

that will help you with your relationship with God and with others.

To the person struggling with accept-ing us, I know that it’s hard. Whether or not you are influenced by Christianity or culture, you can never be wrong when being nice to someone, even if you are struggling to accept these people. You can never be too nice. Love them like you would love anyone else. You don’t want to be that last voice that could end their relationship with God or to push them over the edge to end their life, because they feel unworthy to anyone, no mat-ter what they do. As you struggle with acceptance, pray hard, and pray that God will fill you with His light in an unbiased way, searching for God’s desire. And while you do all of this, just love as much as you can.

To the person that simply looks to be an ally or join the cause, come to PRISM. Show your face and come support. The biggest help is to not treat people differ-ently, not expecting anymore or any less of them as a Christian, we are people, just like you guys. If you want to help, there are many places that you can go to help, like PRISM, and we can connect you with other place and with other people. You don’t have to be hypersensitive. Just be their friend.

PRISM meets twice a month in Amb's Hall. For more information, search PRISM on Facebook or contact them via email at prism.lasierra@gmail.com.

Lets flesh it out. This stigmatized disease that is entirely consuming and devastating, taking over sense of self, roughly 2.3 million a year in addition to a global community of 35.3 million. In most class discussions we come close to a sense of sympathy for those inflicted by the virus, but many times it is a superficial conversation with no real purpose. A useless conversation mentioned for political correctness. What’s the point of that? For the first time in my college experience, I sat in on a sincere lecture about the reality of the widespread nature of AIDS and how each one of us is implicated in the fight against it. Dr. Fritz Guy, the orator, told a powerful story of a family battling with AIDS that is quoted below:

In December 1985 there was a funeral in Lilly [Pennsylvania] for a little boy named Dwight Burk. He was just [a] 20 month old. He had been born prematurely, with respiratory problems and an enlarged liver. His tiny body was riddled with fever, and he was kept alive in an oxygen tent. Eventually he went home from the hospital—not to get well, but to die. There were just too many things wrong, and he couldn’t make it. Dwight’s family on his mother’s side had lived in Lilly for four generations, and everybody knew about the little boy who was so sick. But when he died, not one resident

of the town came to his funeral. The reason people stayed away was that Dwight’s illness was Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome (AIDS) and the folks in Lilly were afraid of a family with AIDS. Dwight got AIDS just by being born—or, more precisely, just by being conceived. He was infected in utero by his mother, Laurie Burk, but who didn’t know she was infected when she became pregnant. She had been infected by her husband of two years, Patrick Burk, who had hemophilia and had been treated for several years with a medication known as Factor VIII, a distillation of the clotting agent in blood made from blood plasma. Patrick and Laurie Burk had no idea they were infected with the AIDS virus until Dwight’s illness was diagnosed when he was two months old. Now they were too sick to work. Patrick would die of AIDS, and maybe Laurie too. The healthy person in the family was Dwight’s older sister Nicole—Laurie’s daughter from a previous marriage. Nicole was blonde, blue-eyed, and six years old, Like many other children she lived in a world of grandparents, school, and ballet lessons. But unlike other little girls, she was forced out of her nursery school by

the anxious parents of other children--parents who were afraid their children would be contaminated by Nicole, whose brother had AIDS. Medical tests showed that Nicole did not have AIDS, and the results were public information, having been reported in the local newspaper and on the radio, but Nicole had to leave the school anyway. Happily she was admitted to a Head Start pre-school program, and then entered a Catholic kindergarten, where the priest promised to stand by her, whatever people might think. Because of AIDS, Nicole became familiar with death at an early age. One day she asked her grandmother, “Is Daddy gonna die? Is Mommy gonna die too? When they die, can I come and live with you?”

I was curious to find out how the Seventh-day Adventist church is entangled in the conversation of AIDS and sexually transmitted diseases in general. My preconceived idea considered a statement from the General Conference (GC) of the church mentioning AIDS prevention and care as methods of reaching out and evangelism. Indeed, this was essentially the core of the statements I read online discussing their stance on the topic, but what I came across however was a new realization.

//janellHAYLOCKaids

features

22

The Seventh-day Adventist church believes there is biblical evidence supporting abstinence before marriage and monogamy after marriage. So, lets digest this. AIDS is predominately a sexually transmitted disease, meaning that most infected persons come into contact with the virus through sexual contact of some sort. If you are an Adventist person, then the GC says you severely reduce your chances of infection. Why? Because 1) you’re abstaining from sex before marriage, and 2) once you do get married, it is an honest and monogamous relationship. Sadly, life is messy. Even if you do follow these guidelines, if your significant other has had sexual contact with only one other partner the chances of obtaining a sexually transmitted disease increases.Essentially, AIDS shouldn’t be a problem for Adventists. Then, why is it? This question brings us back to the topic of sexuality. How do we feel it, embrace it and express it? Today’s pop culture promotes evoking emotion into nearly every conscious decision we make. Emotions are fickle, changing feelings that constantly change on a daily basis (if not hourly) in our lives. How, then, can we be expected to make right-minded decisions when looking solely at how something makes us feel? We can’t. This leads to a huge problem for the youth of our generation. How can you limit the emotions brought on by your sexuality while experiencing fulfilling and happy relationships? Adventist youth find themselves either having sex, wanting to have sex, knowing people that do, or waiting patiently until marriage … whenever that is supposed to happen. In church we are given a sermonette on the black and white stance on premarital

sex: don’t do it. There is no discussion about the reality of sexuality in our generation and how many of us are no longer getting married in our early twenties, but instead we hear rehearsed answers given to previous generations that do not face similar societal pressures.

In coming to the realization that I would very much like to raise the question of how La Sierra finds itself in the conversation of AIDS, I returned to the person that had impressed me with the issue from the very start. Dr. Fritz Guy invited me into his office for a conversation and we discussed AIDS as well as sexuality in its general form. Dr. Guy agreed that there is a fracture in the method which Adventists approach the topic of sexuality and discuss it with our generation, mentioning the formation of a new club on campus called Prism supporting LGBTQA (Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgendered, Questioning, and Allied) students. During our conversation we noted how interesting it is that La Sierra has a club to discuss the reality of diversity in sexual orientation, but not one that promotes abstinence or has a general “sex talk” conversation. Without open, full and repeated discussions about sexuality it is difficult to maintain an open-minded perspective when coming in contact with the reality of AIDS and sexually transmitted diseases penetrating into the church. Dr. Guy commented, “The first person I knew who died of AIDS was a member of La Sierra faculty.”

If you doubted it was a problem for our campus, think again. Being a student of an Adventist campus with lots of morality and ideals means nothing about your sexuality and how you deal with

it on a day-to-day basis. The pandemic of AIDS is a reality that ignores the boundaries of religion and morality and it is worth having a discussion of what is our duty to those that are infected and preventing the infection of others. So what can we do?

As human beings, we can fight to embrace infected individuals and maintain an all-inclusive attitude breaking down stereotypes stemming from misinformation and ignorance of the subject. As a Christian campus, we can begin a conversation that will inspire us to action, to help our surrounding community and becoming involved with the fight against AIDS infection. As Seventh-day Adventists we must ask the difficult questions about our sexuality that make us uncomfortable. Questions like: why shouldn’t I have premarital sex, why does my religion say its better for me in the long-run, why is my generation so obsessed with immediate sexual gratification? These are questions and ideas you have to explore for yourself. Not your parents, not your pastor, not your friends, but you. Once you have that figured out, then you can maintain an open-minded attitude that does not seclude those infected by diseases or those making different choices. Confidence in your sexuality will allow you to help others like Nicole bruised by an ignorant and prejudiced society.

*This feature would have been impossible without the influence and information provided by Dr. Guy. The Criterion staff would like to extend a word of thanks for his indispensible input and support.

How many lies can you take in one day?

A person living in a city is approxi-mately exposed to 5,000 ads a day ac-cording to a research shown by Louise Story in the New York Times, 2007. This estimate keeps going up, as media becomes the center of social interaction. 5,000 times a day media tells you that beauty, love and happiness comes with a price. Ads set an unreachable standard for beauty, and present an impractical solution in the form of a product. The saddest part, these multibillionaire com-panies keep piling billions because we keep buying into the lie.

The power in advertisement is often underestimated, because many fail to understand that “Ads sell more than products, they sell values, images, con-cepts of love, sexuality, sex, who we are and who we should be” (Jean Kilbourne). Today ads are not limited to billboards, newspapers and magazines. They are now imbedded everywhere through media. Ads interrupt our TV shows, our music in the radio and the websites we visit every day like Facebook, YouTube, and Twitter. Even the apps that we think we download for free come with the price of ads. The unfortunate truth is that the money these companies pay to broadcast their ads are what keep our shows on, our radios alive and our websites running. So how can we fight something that benefits us and at the

//brendaDELFINOthe sexy lie

arts

same time is hurting our ideals about beauty and sexuality?Recognizing the problem is step number one, learning what is at risk is step two, and informing others is the final and most important step towards change.

First step: What is the lie that media sells?

Media wants men and women to believe that sex sells. If this were true, we would see just as many half naked men in ads as we see women. But this is not the case.

What media is truly selling is the concept that men are sexual subjects and women sexual objects. Subjects act upon, objects are acted upon. Alcohol, car and perfume advertisements are

a few examples of how media tries to empower men by convincing them that if they buy the product they will earn the complementary object: the sexy, skinny, superficial girl. Notice how it’s always that type of girl and not one with an av-erage body type. That is because media tries to convince women that their value is in their physical appearance.

Sexual Objectification

Sexual objectification means treat-ing a person’s body as an object for sex. Focusing only on their physical attrac-tiveness and ignoring other aspects of the being such as his or her thoughts and feelings. One way to identify the use of sexual objectification in media is when only certain parts of the body are shown, or when a body is replacing an

"A sex symbol becomes a thing. I

hate being a thing." -Marilyn Monroe24

object, for example, when a woman’s body is turned into a bottle of beer or the curves of a car.

Another more obvious visible lie is Photoshop. Photoshop is used in every commercial for clear skin and weight loss. This might not be news but almost every celebrity picture found online and in magazines has gone through digital enhancement. Flawless beauty is the first step to unreachable perfection. The reason why the main target is women is because statistically they spend the most money on beauty products. The pressure for woman to look beautiful is not an invention of media; it has been imbedded in our culture for centuries. In the Victorian Era women would faint while using tight corsets to achieve the perfect waist. Today women spend thou-sands of dollars to achieve this unnatural perfection. When it is a health issue, exercising to stay fit is a good idea but when it becomes an obsession with per-fection many women turn to unhealthy habits, like ingesting dietary products and poor eating. On average women spend 15 minutes in front of the mirror every day, just to put on makeup. They cut, dye, straighten and curl their hair. They buy clothes and accessories, they do their nails and toenails, they use push up bras, they shave, they wax… and go to great lengths in the name of beauty.

Step Two: How can it hurt to look good?

The concern men and women have over physical appearance is normal. Truth is attractive people have distinct advantages in our society. According to a researcher observed by Kate Fox from SIRC, it has been shown that at-tractive children are more popular both with classmates and teachers. Attrac-tive applicants have a better chance of getting jobs and even receiving higher salaries. In court attractive people are found guilty less often and are given less severe sentences. It is seems that our feelings towards beautiful people is always positive. What is not positive and acceptable is the standards of beauty set by media.

When it comes to physical appear-ance woman feel highly anxious about the way they look. When a woman looks into the mirror, all she sees are her imperfections. This may be due to the fact that women have been convinced that beauty means flawlessness. “8 out of 10 women are dissatisfied with their reflection […] and more than half may see a distorted image” (Kate Fox). The average American woman is 5’4 tall and weighs 140 pounds. In comparison the average America model weighs 115 pounds and is 5’11 tall. I think you are starting to see the picture now.

When looks become an obsession they begin to interrupt with daily activities. One example is habitual body monitor-ing. This act is performed by women 10 times every 30 seconds. Habitual body monitoring involves women’s constant concern for how they look. For example, when women speak they are also think-ing about their leg position, how their hair looks, and who’s actually looking their way. This act takes up mental space which affects concentration and may increase anxiety. Among the vary-ing struggles includes mental disorders like depression, anorexia, and bulimia.

Media, Sex, and Reality

Media, which appears to have all the answers about love and sex, gets it all wrong.

Advertisement uses art to achieve its message. But we have to be careful to consider ads as art. Nudity and the allusion of sex in advertisement can be harmful because it contains a message with a hidden agenda, to reach for your pockets. When nudity and the idea of

sex are expressed by an artist in a paint-ing it has usually nothing to do with money. The same can be said for graphic designers and film makers who are in it for the creation of art.

Media does not help when it por-trays sex as something purely physical and flawless. When a woman is con-vinced to look perfect 24/7 she will try to do just that, to the point of affect-ing her ability to enjoy sex. In the Ted Talk “The Sexy Lie”, Caroline Heldman teaches that body monitoring gets on the way of good sex. “Instead of being involved, you view yourself from a third party perspective and you worry about everything except enjoying the mo-ment”.

Celebrities: Marilyn, The Archetype of a Sex Symbol

Celebrities carry the struggle of body image in a high dose. Some movie productions make it clear that casting is more about looks than acting skills. The idea is that sexy actors give movies more revenue. Although this happens,

it is not why movies get awards. If this were true, Marilyn Monroe would have won a few Oscars. But Marilyn made a career out of her looks and flirtatious character. Unfortunately she was never taken very serious as an actress. Instead she was a sex symbol. Marilyn was aware of this and she often expressed her frustration when people didn’t take her serious. Like she once said, “A sex symbol becomes a thing. I hate being a thing”. To achieve fame Marilyn acted willingly in adult films and nude photo shoots. She adopted the character of a superficial pretty woman. She flirted with single and married men including the president of the United States, which at the time was John F. Kennedy. Every-one watched in approval, women want-ing to be her and men wanting to be with her. But this charade came with a high price and she was honest and brave to share it in public. In the “Anatomy of a Sex Symbol” Sheila O’Malley states that despite all her marriages and love affairs Marilyn did not have an orgasm until the last years of her life. Like she once shared with her psychiatrist, “Speaking of Oscars, I would win overwhelmingly

26

if the Academy gave an Oscar for fak-ing orgasms”. Marilyn slowly began to recover with the help of her psychiatrist but her life ended shortly after, due to a drug-related incident. In 1962, the year of her death, Marilyn expressed her anxieties, “I am a failure as a woman. My men expect so much of me because of the image they have made of me and that I have made of myself, as a sex symbol . . . I can’t live up to it.”

Marilyn Monroe is the perfect ex-ample of a sexually objectified woman who carried the burden until the last days of her life. She was not a victim but a symptom of a society with a dysfunc-tional perception of beauty. This ugly truth about Marilyn is often ignored, her positives aspects left behind and all that remains is the archetype of a sex sym-bol, adapted, used and reused.

Not all celebrities fall in the same trap. There are those who choose to embrace their natural beauty. Take Ti-tanic actress, Kate Winslet, for instance, who doesn’t allow the media to decide her weight. She refuses to accept digital

enhancements in her photographs and when GQ made her look dramatically thinner in the cover of their magazine she issued a statement saying that the alterations were made without her consent. “I don’t look like that and I don’t desire to look like that.”

Third Step: Spread the Knowledge

Now that we’ve seen the negative effects of sexual objectification and the role media plays, one way we can fight against it, is by spreading the knowledge and applying it to our lives. We should be thoughtful on who we choose as role models and we should also learn to pick our battles. We might not be able to de-feat these multibillionaire industries and their advertisement. But instead of stay-ing silent we can learn to point out the problem and not allow media to dictate what beautiful means to each one of us.

Sex has become a prime objective in society produced by the media. We all have our own set of beliefs that may come from our family and beliefs, but we also use the media as a reference as to what is normal in society now. Television programs, such as Jersey Shore, show that meeting someone at a club and having sex with someone new every night, is a new trend in which is deemed normal, and possibly cool. Then we have the romantic films that show a perfect couple that finds love in the first glance. Then there is pornography, which completely alters the entire idea of sex. There is strict roles of power and submission, and there is no reality to their acting. The 2013 film Don Jon exhibits these three forms of media with three unique characters that all contain different social beliefs.

The Blind and Infatuated Man

Jon, played by the actor Joseph Gordon-Levitt, plays a man who is more addicted to pornography than he is to sex. He lives his life through a particular set of things that are of importance to him. He cites this list as “my body, my pad, my ride, my family, my church, my boys, my girls, my porn.” Take notice that each item on his begins with the word “my”. He also cites that he “loses himself” when watching pornography.His life is based heavily on routine. He cleans his apartment and goes to the

gym daily. He goes to church every Sunday and confesses his sins to a priest. He also goes to the club, where he bartends at, and a finds a woman to take home with him. He is known as “The Don” because of his streak of being with a new woman every night. He also has a rating system of 1-10, on which they rate woman based on their sexual appearance. When Jon finds his “perfect 10”, he submits himself to her and lets her mold him. He claims to be in love with her with only after being with her for a month. Jon never refers to her as a relationship, but more so as another one of his objects. This “perfect 10” more or so being his trophy, or greatest prize. Sex in media is most often displayed as a competition among men, in which Jon constantly defends his idea that there is no girl better than his. When they have sex for the first time, Jon still finds that he isn’t satisfied and resorts back to watching pornography, right after. He stops for a while, but it doesn’t last very long. Jon is addicted to pornography, but more so the idea of it. He is addicted to the fantasy of two people being lost in the ecstasy of pleasure; a pleasure that he has never experienced with anyone. Pornography is how he wishes sex could be for him, but isn’t.

The Hollywood Depiction of Beauty

Barbara Sugarman, played by the actress Scarlett Johansson, is a “perfect 10” and is obsessed with romantic films. She plays hard to get, because she’s looking for a real man, at first. When she finally finds Jon, it appears that Barbara's idea of a real man is a mock up from one of her romantic films; a man who would do anything and whatever for their woman.

Barbara abstains from sex to make sure that this relationship is going to be serious. She also uses sex as a source of control, by holding a resource that her partner wants. She uses this control as a way to take hold of her partner, to mold him into the man she wants. Before they have sex, Barbara gets Jon to integrate with their family and friends, and convinces him to start going to school again. After the first night of school, Barbara calls Jon and initiates sex, which is an uncommon trend with sexual communication. Most often females are seen as the gatekeepers, and the men as the initiators.

When Barbara discovers that Jon, her partner is addicted to porn, she breaks off the relationship without trying to work anything out. Jon is extremely defensive of his addiction, but finally admits to her that it is a problem. This still doesn’t intrigue Barbara because her

//maxGUTIERREZsexual fantasy

arts

28

image of a “real man” and a Hollywood relationship is dead.

The Wounded Woman with Experience

Esther, played by the actress Julianne Moore, is a woman who is trying to rebuild her life after past traumas. Her husband and child were both killed in an automobile accident so she is still suffering with accepting such a cruel fate. We first see her character crying as Don Jon passes her abruptly to get to his class.

The next day, we see that she is also very confrontational and blatant. Esther goes to Jon and apologizes for her crying scene and also points out the fact that he was watching porn on his phone in class. Esther spends most of her time alone, and getting high in her car. She just tries to befriend Jon, but he tries to keep Esther at a distance and constantly

reminds her that he has a girlfriend.

Esther is constantly asks Jon why is he addicted to porn when he can easily get the real thing. She probes into his relationships and notices that he is heavily controlled by his girlfriend. When Jon breaks up with his girlfriend, they begin a sexual relationship which Esther claims was never exactly something she was looking for. Esther also points out to him that porn isn’t real, it is just acting. Esther has lived a long life filled with experiences that shake away most of the uncertainties in our world. She has lived, and therefore she knows.

A Realistic Ending

Jon asks Esther about what has been bothering her and displays an intrest in someone other than himself for the first time. They have sex, in which he cites at his confession the morning after

as a different sort of experience.Barbara and Jon meet one last time for the sole purpose of finding closure. It is a very short meeting, but ends with Barbara leaving upset. Jon apologizes for their relationship, but she doesn’t believe it to be enough. He tells her that she asked him for too much, but Barbara can’t accept that reality.

Finally, we get a montage of Esther and Jon, just living life together and “making love”

In Conclusion

Sex isn’t based on our most prized fantasies, and deepest beliefs. Sex is a beautiful connection between two individuals. Jon always looked at sex as being one-sided, and Barbara has always looked at romance as being one-sided. He lost himself in pornography simply because he was lost in himself and his own little world. Sex and romance, is not real, until you lose yourself in someone.We are selfish people, constantly thinking about how to control our lives. Whether it’s an image you would want to keep by having sex with random strangers routinely, or whether you are trying to find that perfect relationship, it’s all the same. Sometimes our fantasies will always be fantasies, and the reality can only be found in another. Wouldn’t you rather have something that works, instead of something that fits?

He is addicted to the fantasy of two people being lost in the ecstasy of pleasure

//adrianWILSONfemale fans

Another Sunday, another loss! That is how I felt while I ate myself into depression at Buffalo Wild Wings, as the Redskins take yet another loss for the season. While I was soaking in defeat, to my surprise I noticed something that I have never really thought of before until that day. It wasn’t because I was sitting there angry and about to explode. It was not the fact that everybody was laughing at me because I was wearing a Redskins jersey. What I noticed was beyond the game of football.

While I was eating my wings I noticed a couple next to me watching the Chargers game. To no surprise the girlfriend was asking million questions during the game and the boyfriend was getting annoyed by all of the questions. Another guy who was there that was

also watching the game asked the girl “Do you even know who the person is on the back of your jersey?” The girl told the guy that her boyfriend bought her the jersey and she just watches the games to support her boyfriend’s team. When the guy heard this, he became livid and accused her of not being a “real fan” of football. So, I started to question, “Do women really like the sport, or is it all for show?”

The next week I went back to the same place and watched the Redskins lose yet again another game, which frustrated me for another week. This time I was not focused on the game I was more so focused on the same couple that was at Buffalo Wild Wings. While I was analyzing the couple I saw that the guy was interested in the game,

while the girl was on the phone most of the time. It clearly looked like she was not interested in the game at all. As I was analyzing them I went to go check on my fantasy football team. The waiter that was taking my order suggested that I start a guy from the Cincinnati Bengals that no one has heard of. She said he was bound to have a big game. At first I paid her no attention, because I thought that she did not know what she was talking about, but then something amazing happened. The waiter explained why I should play this person and she broke down play-by-play as to why teams would win that week. I have to say I was quite impressed by her knowledge of the game. I almost felt like she was female version of myself when it came to football, the only difference was she was a Chargers fan.

After my encounter with two girls, I started to raise another question, “How are female fans perceived in the society we live in now?” Through talking with a few people, I realized that each individual has different perspectives on how female fans are represented in this country. Speaking with one fan at the restaurant she felt that some women are born into being a fan of a team. She told me while she was growing up that she was always a daddy’s girl and her dad always loved football, so she kind of followed in his footsteps and has been a fan ever since. She also says growing

When a female roots for a male athelete, or a male sport, it is viewed sometimes as "weird."

30

sports

up people did not take her seriously as a football fan because she did not know everything about the game of football. She said while rooting for her team she always felt that she had to defend herself against men to so that they could respect her.

Living in this society, women have had to be second fiddle to men. Is it fair? Probably not. But in this case, no one made it a rule for women not to be a true fan. Some women believe that they will never be respected as equal to a man, only because it is viewed as more reasonable for a man to be a fan of a team, more so than a woman. When looking at the word “fan” it is automatically characterized with the word “male” and that is where the error lies. With a man, for the most part, he would never be judged or questioned by anyone when it comes to rooting for a team, because society would automatically put you in a category that would not need to be questioned. While growing up, most athletes that are shown on television are mainly males. Yeah you have your Serena Williams, Lindsay Vonn, and your Hope Solos of the world, but are they looked at like a Peyton Manning or a Lebron James. They aren’t because media has focused on the male sports far more than the female sports. So when society looks at these guys as stepping stones for the age of sports, it makes you start to

wonder how did it ever get to be like this? When a guy roots for a girl athlete or a female sport, he is not questioned or ridiculed by females, but when a female roots for a male athlete, or a male sport, it is viewed sometimes as “weird.”

The girl that was with her boyfriend says that today’s world has changed from back then and that women are not scrutinized as heavily as they were years ago. She also states that while women can be considered fans, men also find it “attractive” when women are into sports. There may be some truth to that, but I do not think it is totally accurate. The boyfriend kind of agreed with me; he feels even though it may be a plus for a girl to be interested in a sport, the girl should know about the sport as well.

So what about the women that actually know about the sport? That is the answer that was the most bothersome. The waiter at Buffalo Wild Wings said that women who pretend to like a sport makes a bad name for women that actually love the sport. There are women out there that love watching sports and they do not get the respect that they deserve for watching it. Some women know more about sports then guys do, and still wouldn’t get the same respect as the guy that doesn’t have the knowledge. For some guys that were there, most of them said

that it did not matter whether a fan was a guy or girl, and that most of the time they would be treated equally, just as a guy would. One guy simply said he would prefer male fans over female fans because they don’t have to hear about how cute a guy is all the time. Another said “Isn’t that what cheerleaders are for?” It was unknown whether or not this guy was serious or not, but from the sound of it he might have been.

I think now, for the most part, for guys it really does not matter if a girl is a fan of sports, or not. With women in society, there may still be some work that can help the society recognize female fans as equals to men. As the years go by, I think this matter of female fanaticism in sports will no longer be an issue. The truth is, women love sports just as much as guys do, if not more. We, as a society, just have to realize it.

//danielPEVERINI

The Impasse

Imagine with me for a moment. It’s late Saturday night, and you are alone with a person of the opposite sex that you think is quite attractive. The other person is pretty in to you, too. But its not like you are in a serious, committed rela-tionship with the other person. You know that there is nothing lasting between you two. Yet here you two are, in a place where you won’t be interrupted if you decide have sex. It might be fun. Do you go for it?

It’s a toss-up. You might think you have good reasons to indulge your desires. Perhaps it’s been too long since you’ve felt intimate with another person, and you just want that. Maybe you are bored, and having sex will take away your boredom for a while. Or you just want the pure physical pleasure of sex, the climax, the sheer bodily-ness of it. But you might also think you have good reasons to abstain. You might make another human being that you don’t expect. You could get an STD. Univer-sity policy tells you that having sex is grounds for dismissal. You’re a good Christian, and good Christians don’t have sex outside of marriage. What should you do?

Clearly we have divided sexual expectations. As ‘good Christians,’ we all say that we don’t have sex. Yet as

college students with sex drives reaching peak levels, many of us do have sex with one or many partners. There is clearly a gap between what we say about sex and what we actually do in our sexual lives.

Almost as soon as the problem surfaces, it is silenced with an authoritar-ian purity ethics of one sort or another, expressed in statements like “sex is for marriage and for marriage only.” This ethics is obfuscating because it ignores our actual sexual practices. Once we be-come conscious of the complications of purity ethics, we might respond with an ethics of permissiveness, along the lines of “do whatever you will.” This ethics is as equally obfuscating because it ignores what we say about how we as Christians should have sex. Both authority ethics and permissive ethics fail to address the problem of our divided sexual expecta-tions.

I propose that understanding the various ways in which we might expect things (or persons) will help us under-stand and address our divided sexual expectations. Desire and love are two opposing accounts of how we expect. By considering these two ways of expect-ing, I hope to illumine the impasse of divided sexual expectations.

Desire Demands the Desired One by Law

Desire objectifies one desired by

treating desired person as a means to an end. I desire another for reasons external to the other: s/he is perhaps intelligent, or incredibly wealthy, or well connected, or good-looking. By this definition, desire is a way of expecting that uses another person for something, and sexual desire is a way of expecting that uses another person for my own sexual pleasure.

Desire is illumined by American theologian Robert Jenson’s concept of demand (or the law, as the Lutheran theological tradition on which Jenson draws has described it). Basically, the law speaks using an “if…then…” model. Law defined by communication-as-demand can be understood as the language of desire. Take for example the statement, “if a person has a nice body, then I desire to use that person for sexual pleasure.”

By using an “if…then…” model, the law expresses the demand of the desirer to the one desired. Law imposes condi-tions of desire on the desired person.

Love Hopes for the Beloved by A Prom-ise

While desire expects by demanding something from the one desired, love expects by promising something to the beloved. Jenson puts it well: “a promise goes: because I will do such-and such, you may await such-and-such.” For Jenson, promise is reverses the law of

desire or love?

religion

32

“if…then…” The love that promises does not expect anything from the beloved but rather seeks to give of itself to the beloved. For Jenson, as for most Chris-tians, love is most clearly demonstrated through God’s self-revelation in Jesus Christ. According to Jenson, “we can say straight out: what happened with Jesus is that love happened.”

The story about Jesus is a story of death and resurrection, defined by God’s raising Jesus from the dead. Now, to love another, as we said, is to make a promise, “a promise to promise uncondi-tionally.” But if the promisor dies, what becomes of the promise? Yet Christians claim that this Jesus, though he died yet lives. The concrete events of Jesus’ death and resurrection mean that one successful lover now exists.

Love made by a promise involves hope. According to Jenson, Jesus’ love is “at once something to hope for and perfect hoping.” Christians can hope for Jesus’ love, and yet Jesus’ love is itself a perfect hoping. By affirming the free-dom of the beloved by making a prom-ise, love hopes for the beloved to come into love. Love expects the beloved, but only insofar as it hopes to give itself to the freedom of the beloved. Christian love, it can be said, is a way of expecting the beloved in terms of a promise that hopes for the beloved.

Love is clearly irreconcilable with desire. While desire wants to use the other by a demand, love wants to free the other by a promise.

How can we love? By experienc-ing death and new life in the story of Jesus’ love, we too can hope for love. We become part of Christ’s body, and in so doing participate in his love. As John reminds us, we love because God first loved us. In Jesus’ love, we adopt a way of expecting others that hopes by the power of a promise. Living with transformed expectations in Jesus’ love is a possibility for all of our expectations, sexual or otherwise.

The Way of Love

Sexual love must always occur within the context of a promise that frees the beloved. For this reason, humans have almost universally made bonds of sexual

love within the context of a promise, such as the marriage covenant. However, participating in a marriage ceremony is not the only way that humans can make promises to each other of sexual love. Conversely, many who do participate in marriage fail to grasp the significance of the promise marriage makes.

Can two people of the same sex make loving promises to each other? Since this question is so important (but also beyond the scope of this article), I will leave it unanswered. I will suggest, however, that participation in Jesus’ love through sexual encounter is per-haps more open than some Christians might think it is. In any case, an honest understanding of love as emancipating promise does not deal in black-and-white authority claims.

Clearly, many sexual practices that are almost ubiquitous contemporary American culture are anything but free-ing to those who participate in them. Having sex with just any partner that happens to be at hand is not an expres-sion of Christian love. Sexual orgies and mindless hook-ups spread STDs, emo-tional trauma, and hopelessness, all of which destroy the freedom that the lover wants to give the beloved by a promise.

A good question to ask oneself before initiating any sexual encounter might be the following: “if I have sex with this other, am I freeing the other or am I using the other for my own plea-sure, perhaps to the detriment of the other’s freedom?” If you can honestly say that having sex with another frees her/him, you should go ahead. While in the past people perhaps had too little sex, the primary problem of here and now is that too many people have sex when they shouldn’t. Sex as the domain of love has been cheapened to appease the usury of desire.

While we should be wise enough to see that both authoritarian ethics and permissive ethics are too simplistic to address the problem of our sexual ex-pectations, perhaps we Christians should err on the side of having too little sex. In every case, Christians should assume responsibility for their sexual encoun-ters, trusting God to be faithful to his promise, no matter how far off Christians may sometimes be.

There is clearly a gap be-tween what we say about sex and what we actually

do in our sexual lives.

For centuries it was said that having sex before marriage was a sin. Even today that is what ideal religious beliefs teach us. Having sex before marriage defamed you in society and people looked down upon you but now things have changed. People have a broader mindset and accept many things we wouldn’t have in the past. Although things have changed, so have the reasons for having sex; it has become easier and the significance had decreased. People do it for fun and just for the experience. It does not have that importance that it should. I surveyed some college students to ask them what their thoughts were on this topic.

“Well according to my religion, sex is supposed to be during marriage but that’s not my personal belief that people should wait till after marriage. I think people should have sex even though they aren’t married but as long as they are in a committed relationship while being spiritually and personally bonded. “- Brenda Ramirez, Student at La Sierra University studying Social Work (Catholic)

“I think it should wait till marriage because having sex before can be harmful in a lot of ways.”- Allison Zecher, Studying English at La Sierra University (Christian)

“I don’t think sex should only

happen after marriage because it could lead towards your marriage falling apart if you don’t get what you expect from your partner.”- Elizabeth Reyes, Studying Psychology and Business at UCR (No religious affiliation)

“I don’t think sex should have to wait. Sex can be spiritual between people in they are compatible and in tune with each other but in our generation it is also possible to have sex without emotional or spiritual attachment. It really depends on the people.”- Sandip Gill, Studying Nursing at CSUSB (Sikh/Punjabi)

“Sex should only happen after marriage. Nowadays it is simply called “making love” for the fun of it.” – Meem Masud, Studying Biology at CSUSB (Muslim)

“My Christian background tells me I should wait till sex to have marriage but for me it is to wait for someone who you can trust and someone who will always be there. I don’t condemn to the idea of having no sex before marriage. It is unrealistic to ignore our physical needs.” - Anonymous, Studying English at La Sierra University (Christian)

The conclusion on the basis of these responses suggested that many college students think that having sex before marriage isn’t bad but it shouldn’t be

done for the wrong reasons. Two people should be ready and have the spiritual and personal maturity before doing anything. We often go by what our religion teaches us but at the end of the day, it is what we want as individuals.

//simerKAURmarriage and sex

religion

I have two very good friends who borrow my Netflix account, both of which happen to be girls. I logged on one day and I saw on the “Recently Watched” list a documentary titled After Porn Ends. I knew I didn’t watch it, one of my friends had to. One of the friends knew she was the one who watched the taboo themed documentary while our third friend was left in the dark. I suspected that that friend must have assumed that I watched that documentary because I’m a guy. It’s naturally assumed that men are more drawn to pornography. I assure you of my innocence, I’d even stake my reputation on it. Still skeptical that it wasn’t me? I don’t blame you. The main target demographic for pornography is generally geared for men. After the misplaced feelings of embarrassment subsided from this taboo snafu, I began to wonder what drives individuals to the porn industry.

In a modern setting where multiple sexual partners is more commonplace, I assumed that for many individuals entering the pornography business, earning some fast cash for a sexual experience that they would normally have with others outside of the industry would not only be appealing fiscally but also a sinfully pleasurable experience. According to researchgate.net, a study that was done in 2008 shows that the number of sexual partners that 18-25

year olds have is about 2-4. This doesn’t necessarily mean that the people in this age group have sexual escapades with 2-4 different people all in the course of one year or even all spread out. This average was determined out of a population totaling of 729 with a sample of this population of 433. The confidence intervals of this age group is 95%, which if I’m learning anything in my statistics class, 95% is the ideal confidence interval to be reached with dealing with humanity studies statistics. While 2, or even 4 different sexual partners aren’t too large of numbers, it most definitely surpasses 1 partner. Why do we seek out more than one sexual partner? That question delves into more a psychological discussion but I believe that one of the primary if not constant reasons individuals seek more sexual experiences from different partners is the enjoyable action of having sex. Sex is many things, one of which is desirable. Generally speaking, people want to have sex. It coded in our DNA to be subject to its stimuli. So with this very general statement that one of the possible reasons that people have multiple sexual partners is because they enjoy the action of sex, would it not be so far-fetched that men and women who enter the porn industry, do so because of the potentiality of getting paid to fulfill their own sexual craving?

Yes and no.

I did eventually watch the documentary After Porn Ends and what I discovered was very different set of responses from former pornographic actors and actresses on why they joined it, why they quit and if they regret entering the business at all. There were four responses I gathered from the documentary:

They entered the business because of troubled past/financial reasons, quit because of unhappy/destructive lifestyle, and they regret entering the business in the first place.

They entered to make some extra money, quit because got too tired of the industry, are thankful for their time in the industry.

Entered the industry hoping to get discovered to get famous, quit to partake in other business ventures, and would gladly make a “comeback” into the industry if allowed back in.

They entered the business because of troubled past/financial reasons, quit to create a more normal life for themselves, and are thankful for their time in the industry with no plans to go back.

14 actors and actresses were interviewed, each with their own personal story on how they got into the business. Some stories have similar

//isaacCARREONthe porn industry

essay

36

beginnings but usually have very different outcomes. Of these 14 actors, they primarily fell in to the categories I listed above.

I discovered the first category in former actress Shelley Lubben. Now a devout Christian, she spends her time dispelling the supposed glamor of pornography and offers help to actresses trying to get out of the business. Her story begins with a dejected upbringing. Tragically, she was sexually molested as a child and at the age of 16, left home. She remembers clearly that she was sitting forlorn and sobbing on a sidewalk curb not knowing what her next meal would be. A man passing by spotted her and sat next to her, trying desperately to comfort the crestfallen teen. Lubben suspected a guardian angel was sitting next to her when suddenly, he said, “Don’t cry, you have a

very pretty face. How would you like to make $35 right now?” The stranger invited the teen with no options to star in a pornographic film for food money. From there, Lubben’s career in pornography started. Lubben’s life subsequently propelled out of control as an actress in the porn industry. It was when she reached an emotional rock bottom that she decided to exit the industry. Focuses with an anti-porn itinerary, she now combats the industry by warning young teens and offering help to them.

We sometimes forget that porn stars are people too. People who probably didn’t think they would be pornographic stars. Enter Richard Pacheco, John Leslie and Randy West, all male pioneers in the porn industry. Their charm, wit and even artistic talent, made it almost hard to believe that these men were in porn. These men all entered the industry because then needed the extra cash when they were younger. Each spent way more than 8 years in the industry, which considering a female’s usual tenure in porn is about 2 years, is quite impressive. These men enjoyed, for what its worth, their time in the industry and two of them even had successful marriages at the time. The common reason for these men leaving the industry was for love. Love in the traditional sense of a family or longing to have one. Richard Pacheco left the industry for his children, John Leslie left the industry abruptly at the cusp of a big gig because he felt that sex was losing its charm and he didn’t want that to ruin his valued intimacy with his beloved wife. Randy West left to pursue a meaningful relationship with someone and sadly is still looking.

All three of these men contribute to society in a positive way now that they retired from porn. Pacheco is a hobbyist who wrote a book about his time in the industry; Randy West takes the proceeds of his time in the business and donates them to charity; John Leslie graces the humanities with his spectacular art. Overall the men were thankful for what the industry was able to do for them and how it helped them lead successful lives after their retirement.

Its worked for more celebrities than we think so for former actress Mary Carey, entering the porn industry was just a step onto fame in the mainstream media. At the time of the documentary, she just turned 25 and was retired. She was still however living on the proceeds of her time in the business and living comfortably. Her goal to become famous by any means necessary led her, if some may recall, to run in the political arena during the 2003 California recall election for governor. Shockingly, she

We sometimes forget that porn stars are people too.

placed in 10th place. Its obvious that she isn’t shy about her career and in the documentary expressed her willingness to enter the industry again if she needed to.

The most interesting story was that of former actress Asia Carrera. Her story begins similarly to Lubben’s. A troubled home life was all Carrera had to look forward to when she came home from school. This however did not deter her from demonstrating her academic prowess. Carrera was determined to do well scholastically as she felt that education was key to having a better life than the one she had at home. Carrera eventually earned a full ride to college at the end of her time in high school. While in college, she felt like she had to find a means to support herself. Now estranged from her parents, she entered lewd modeling which eventually lead to pornography. While in the industry, she learned from her job as an actress how to create films. From screenwriting, lighting, camera work and editing, she mastered them all and eventually directed some of her own films. She

expresses that she always tried to make the industry work for her and not the other way around. Eventually, she retired with her husband to Utah where porn is illegal and started a family. Unfortunately, her husband died in a car accident. Now widowed, she fell into some hard times financially. She asked her former fans for support and was sent not only money but also gifts and toys for her two children. She looks back at her time in the industry and is thankful that for all the help it was able to do for her, especially at the death of her husband. She however maintains that she is permanently retired and is looking forward to new things and careers in her life.

To answer the question before, “what drives us to porn?” it seems that it’s usually desperation, whether it be financial, a sense of security or even desperation to be famous, actors and actresses who enter the pornography business enter with real fears, aspirations and hopes of their own. We cannot forget that the individuals in the pornography industry are people

who lead very different lives when the cameras are shut off. It wouldn’t be wise to judge them.

SHELLEYLUBBEN

MARYCAREY

ASIACARRERA

JOHNLESLIE

RANDYWEST

RICHARDPACHECO

38

Criterion Conversation:

We want your feedback. We need your feedback. We are your voice.

Email us at "criterion@lasierra.edu"

OR

Send us a letter to: SALSU Office, Criterion Editor

La Sierra University 4700 Pierce StreetRiverside, CA 92515

Also, keep in mind of the coming public event, titled, "Let's Talk About Sex."It's a follow up to this issue in which we will openley discuss our sexual realities, perceptions and expectations,

all for the sake of progress and conversation.

Be on the look out for posters around campus for this event!

Photo Credits:Jonathan Rojas (Primary photographer).

Some images were pulled from the Google.com search engine. Publications of note are the Washington Post and the Huffington Post. Additionally, some photos were used from the La Sierra University Flickr page, taken by the great artistic talent on campus.