Exclusive to GOPBR. All rights formally transferred.
Americans and sex have an odd, slightly nauseous relationship. While the hardy souls that conquered the country certainly took our Lords admonition to "go forth and multiply" at face value, rather than as the words of a Father politely telling his kids to Eff off for a bit before he goes into a murderous rage and calls down a flood or fire again, they did seem to have some pretty uptight attitudes about it. Everyone does it. Everyone knows that everyone does it. No one ever admits it.
What nearly took William Jefferson Blythe Clinton down? It wasn't his foot dragging over several humanitarian crises. It wasn't his tendency to pick up any unaccompanied money. It was his regrettable choice of cigar humidor.
Yet at the same time, sex is everywhere. It sells everything from hemorrhoid cream to aircraft. Outside of San Francisco, show me a garage that doesn't have a girly calendar on the wall. Inside San Francisco, it might be hot guys - whatever floats your boat. Who's gonna judge?
So why the dichotomy? The desire to fit tab A into slot B (or C, D, E, or even F and G if you are particularly creative) is a universal. It is tempting to blame the Puritans. I mean, come on, the name even sounds up tight and straight laced. That would be totally wrong. They were randy sods who took satisfying their wives or husbands as a holy duty. Those sensible shoes had buckles on them to stop toes curling. The buckle on the hat, use your imagination for what that were for.
We need to move forward at least two centuries.
Queen Victoria gets a bad rap. Her name is synonymous with sexual repression, despite her having 10 kids and a reportedly satisfying if not downright dirty sex life with Albert and several others. Yet her stern look somehow ignited something in the American psyche. Maybe it was because she was photographed, after Albert died and that picture went viral. Maybe it was the conflation of Queen Victoria with Queen Elizabeth (the incredibly not virginal queen) in the popular mind. US culture was pretty much imported from England at the time, Dickens complained like hell about it, and it really could be something that small.
Not that photography was a small influence on both sides of this culture war. The chances are, Daguerre's second ever picture was of his wife, sans bloomers. It's been around for centuries. Those pictures on the walls in Pompeii? That is not erotica to get you in the mood - it's the menu. In France, Hollande divided his time and boner equally between his wife and his mistress, and the only criticism he got was for riding a moped. Anthony Wiener snapped a picture of his (admittedly unimpressive - resist the urge to look it up, the guy's first name should be Tintin) namesake and it was all over the news for weeks.
With the Hobby Lobby case verdict, there is a resounding YES! from the Right, who take it as a common sense verdict for, well, common sense. The Left hate it, passionately, with calls to have sex in the stores, and otherwise cause mayhem. The sex in stores thing is unlikely to happen. The number of people who willingly wave their junk around in a store full of glue, glitter and scissors has to be vanishingly small, but they are upset. There are probably a few, but they are most likely too good customers of the stores to risk the disruption to their arts and crafts supplies.
Sex is fun, if it's between two consenting adults. So lighten up already. The sage Homer Simpson was wrong. It is sex, not beer, that is the cause of and solution to all of life's problems. At least in America.