Americans made history on Tuesday. We showed up to the polls in record numbers and we made a difference. But, to be honest with you, if you had asked me how I felt about the election while I was standing in line waiting to vote I probably would have shrugged and given you some sort of witty and indifferent response. Or maybe I would have said, "Remember when President Clinton 'did not have sexual relations with that woman'?"
What I find interesting about the Clinton-Lewinsky scandal is not necessarily the fact that the American President was sexually involved with an intern (partially because I think it's none of my business, and partially because if I wanted to be entertained by sexual drama I'd buy a tabloid), but rather the idea that President Clinton was able to find refuge in the arguably problematic definition of "sex" in the English language to defend the veracity of his statement.
According to the Oxford English Dictionary online, "sex" is defined as,"physical contact between individuals involving sexual stimulation; sexual activity or behaviour, spec. sexual intercourse, copulation. to have sex (with): to engage in sexual intercourse (with)."
I must say that this is perhaps the most inclusive definition I've encountered with regard to the word "sex." More typically, I've found sex defined in a much more limited sense. For instance, Dictionary.com defines "sex" as, "the instinct or attraction drawing one sex toward another, or its manifestation in life and conduct," or "coitus"?which is further defined as "sexual intercourse, esp. between a man and a woman."
If I'm not mistaken, from what the Kenneth Star investigation apparently uncovered, it seems that the only way Clinton could have honestly denied having had "sexual relations" with Lewinsky is if he defined "sex" exclusively as the act of penetrative vaginal intercourse between a man and a woman. I find it very difficult to believe that an intelligent man and powerful head of state such as Clinton would argue that heterosexual intercourse is the only type of intimate relation that falls under the category of sex. However, his statement did serve to privilege heterosexual intercourse above the many other forms of sex available to human beings.
To make heterosexual intercourse into the de facto definition of sex implies that all other forms of sex are, in some sense, less legitimate. But then, we must ask what exactly makes one form of sex more legitimate than another? If we are judging the situation based on physical intimacy, I would argue that there are few things more intimate than oral sex?I mean, it's literally right in your face. Perhaps penetration could be used as a standard for legitimacy?but that would mean that strap-ons and anal sex would be considered legitimate. How about if any sex between partners of opposite genders were considered legitimate??No, wait, that would legitimize BDSM.
What I'm trying to get at here is the radical exclusiveness of the definition of "sex." In a culture that worships shows like "Sex and the City," "Californication," and "Gossip Girl," sex inevitably becomes a significant component in one's identity. So, it would be nice if our definition of sex were a little bit more inclusive, so as not to alienate those people who prefer to do things outside of the missionary position. Furthermore, when heterosexual intercourse is given primacy in the cultural understanding of sex , there is occasion for misunderstandings during the consent process and devaluation of individuals if any sort of forced or coerced situation should arise during a sexual encounter.
There are few better examples of the over-valuation of heterosexual intercourse in the definition of "sex" than the Clinton-Lewinsky scandal. This has become an iconic moment in America's recent cultural past, and for good reason. As a result of the problematic definition given to the word "sex," Clinton was able to deny as false the allegations that Lewinsky brought against him?effectively defaming and devaluing Lewinsky on live television aired nationally.
It's now been almost a decade since the Clinton-Lewinsky sexcapades, but definitions are still up in the air. America still can't seem to decide on the definition of marriage, and questions continue to arise with regard to when exactly life begins in the womb. Political debates regarding "sex" are never ending and no doubt will continue, and perhaps change, throughout the Obama Presidency. All I can say is that sex is a powerful thing?it can convey feelings of romance and intimacy, confer legitimacy, and bring pleasure, pain, or confusion. So, no matter who's in the Oval Office, try to remember all of the things that sex can be to you before you try to define it, and always leave a little room for those things you haven't tried yet.