\u201cNidhi Goyal only knows how to talk about sex\u201d was the rumour that reached me when I first started working on sexuality and sexual rights eight years ago. I went from being offended to being entertained in a matter of minutes on hearing this. What I started observing from that day onwards is how much the understanding of sexuality is reduced to sex, but then again, sex can help to assert, express and claim one\u2019s own sexuality and orientation, of course it can.<\/p>\n
For some, sex is a discovery of their fantasies and their bodies, for some it is pleasurable, for some it is linked to romance, for some it is an obligation within a relationship, for some it is a negotiation tool, for some it is a site of trauma, and for some it may be all of this. But what is still hidden for many is the multitudes of ways sex can be experienced. A quick street-survey even in urban India will tell you that sex for most is still a peno-vaginal act. And therefore, \u201cIf they are a lesbian couple how will they have real sex?\u201d, \u201cHis lower body is paralysed how will he have an erection or put it in?\u201dThese questions really arise from the Kama Sutra subscribers of sex. Leaf through the pages and glance through the sex positions and you will know that if you want sex you better be as flexible as a malkham<\/em> performer, as light as a ballet dancer and as fit as a yoga guru. It is worse than the slim models with perky breasts selling lingerie and making you feel that if you are not an exact 36 D, you are unsexy or in the case of the Kamasutra un-sex worthy.<\/p>\n Oh, come on! Haven\u2019t theories and papers and our own experiences told us that sex happens in the mind? We all know that media and advertising are selling sex in the minds of people. The undertones in ads for all sorts of things ranging from perfumes to lipsticks and shampoo to soup are all about getting laid. But again, the message shouting at us from them is problematic because it says only bodies of a certain kind, voices of a certain texture, smiles of a certain calibre deserve their sexuality and deserve sex. We need to turn around and say \u2013 poo to you!<\/p>\n It is funny, if sex were a person, how discriminated against it would feel. Like in advertising, so in real life, sex is forced to speak in undertones, remain in the subtext, be invisible, or pretend that it does not exist. As a comedian I get a brief from corporates, \u201cPlease crack jokes around romance, dating, being a single woman, but but but\u2026. no jokes about sex, please\u201d. And the world, as they say, loves its taboos. As writer and film-maker,\u00a0Paromita Vohra<\/a> said in an article \u201cOne way sexual life becomes tabooed is when we don\u2019t discuss sex as sex, but hide behind abstract terms like sexuality or the double entendre of analogies.\u201d<\/p>\n But who is allowed to call sex sex? Who is accepted if they express their desire for sex without being given labels of \u2018desperate\u2019, or \u2018fallen\u2019, or \u2018unnatural\u2019? Not many at the bottom of the social normative ladder; and the largest group would be women. Bollywood sometimes perpetuates stereotypes, but really, it reflects hegemonic mind-sets. The hero who has multiple sexual partners, has an active sex life, watches porn, is cool and a stud and a bad boy in an\u201cahh\u201dso desirable and \u201caww\u201d so adorable way. Whereas when a Sarita Silk expresses her lust and desire for sex in a film that is supposedly\u2018liberated\u2019 yet named The Dirty Picture<\/em>, a significant part of the acclaim it received was that the actress was very \u2018bold\u2019 to take on this role.Entertaining, how \u2018bold\u2019 is used as much for othering or calling female sexuality \u2018abnormal\u2019 as \u2018god-like\u2019 is used for persons with disabilities. But as Vidya Balan<\/a>, the protagonist in The Dirty Picture\u00a0<\/em>rightly says, \u201cWomen want it, need it and like it as much as men do.\u201d<\/p>\n While what Balan says is true, many women from marginalised communities have a deeper issue to consider before talking about sex. It is about their sexual self. Media, public discourse and popular cultural lenses make many believe that they don\u2019t deserve to have a sexuality, let alone express desire, or feel sexy, or have sex. For example, it is common for labels like asexual and non-desirable to be associated with women with disabilities. When the language of norms saturates social media and public conversations and messaging,women who \u2018deviate from gender expectations\u2019 \u2013 dark women, short women, fat women, disabled women and so on\u2013are forced to internalise the chatter, in many cases creating decreased self-worth, suppression of desire, and negatively impacted choices. In the light of the resonating phrase \u201cbeggars are not choosers\u201d, they are forced to create a hierarchy of facets of sexuality and constantly negotiate the lowest common denominators for themselves.<\/p>\n Those who don\u2019t internalise the suppression of their sexuality and sexual behaviours, struggle between the personal realisation and the public calibration of their desire, often leading a life of pretence and silence. The silence around sexual behaviour, whether or not women are having sex, whether or not they think it is okay, or ways to deal with emotions, desires, or any baggage that comes with it, leaves them in a vulnerable position. The vulnerability comes from isolation<\/strong>: always puzzling about whether others have done it;\u00a0reduced agency<\/strong>: when they cannot claim the act they have consented to; and,\u00a0self-doubt<\/strong>: whether it was correct, what it would mean socially, whether they would be judged. This isolation and vulnerability particularly impacts those women who already feel like they do not deserve sex and have no access to information or peer circles so easily. Many women from closed communities of disabled persons, of lesbians, or from conservative cultural communities live in the fear of being outed about their sexual engagements as a part of violating their trust or as a form of revenge. Thus making them fear naming and shaming and further harm.<\/p>\n There are persons (particularly young adults) living with their families or in strict housing, rental and other arrangements, who don\u2019t find safe and private spaces to have sex\u2013 because with police barge-ins on consenting adults, we know hotels and motels are not safe anymore. There are adults who have a strong desire to have sexual engagements with another,but have restricted access to larger society (as with people with disabilities) because of social exclusions and prejudices. We know that for many women, expressing their lust is unacceptable. With this lack of possibilities and growing unfulfilled lust, many persons (especially women and youngsters) start expressing the need for a socially accepted space for sex or give in to the pressure of marriage. Somehow, marriage then becomes the only validation, a way to claim their sexuality, to feel sexy again, the liberating space where they feel they could express their desires.<\/p>\n But the confusion \u2013 while sex sometimes can be fun, and at other times complicated and frustrating \u2013is always love, lust or desire: which one you are signing up for and which one did you want to actually explore? This is just another of the myriad ways of exploring sex and sexuality \u2013 experiencing the drive and complication of desire while navigating the social, cultural and personal barriers of expressing desire \u2013 and fusing sex back with sexuality.<\/p>\n