Elephant in the Room

Your political and ideological stances, Dr. Loy, are very apparent throughout your text--I like the way that you clearly articulate your positions because I think it speaks to the urgency of revolution that you call for. My question, though, is how much your social location as white, male, and heterosexual (I am inferring this from your Wikipedia page, which says you are married--if you do not self-identify as straight, I apologize) effects how you view the Buddhist take on sex and sexuality. Three instances in particular stuck out to me:

1 "Since the 1960s our lifestyles and customs have become very different from those with which patriarchal societies regulated sexual urges--often providing outlets for men while strictly controlling women and procreation." [italics mine]. Are you arguing here that the US is not a patriarchal society? If you are using this blanket statement as a means to contextualize what you're discussing, I can understand that, but the US is a patriarchal society and it does control women and procreation--women still only make 81 cents to a comparable man's dollar, 1 in 4 women will be sexually assaulted during their lifetime, birth control is not always covered by insurance but viagra is, and unsafe or untested methods of birth control are disproportionately used on low-income women and women of color. This list is by no means exhaustive.

2 "This is not to demean the pleasures of sex, or the libidinal freedoms we enjoy today...The liberation of sexual preference means that gays, lesbians, bisexuals, and transsexuals can come out of the closet, leading to an important reduction in collective social dukkha." Is the "we" you're referring to straight white males? If so, I agree; if not, I'm just gonna throw out there that the LGBTQ community still cannot marry, receieve healthcare or partner benefits, and can, in some cases, be denied the right to see their partner in the hospital because they are not legally recognized by the law in most states--not to mention the recent suicides that spurred the "It Gets Better" project.

3) The elephant in the room I was referring to--abortion. I do not wish to enter a debate on its morality, but I would like to point out that just because contraception exists, does not mean that "children...have become a matter of choice." Again, the concept of "choice" is very much wrapped up in social location; not only are laws in place that allow pharmacies to deny birth control to women, but there are economic and environmental factors that leave women with no other choice but to choose abortion. "Family caps" are placed on women receiving welfare so that after a certain amount of children, they stop getting aid; health care is still not a human right in this country, and women are unable to afford medical care throughout their pregnancy--and even if she opted for adoption, she can still be held legally accountable if she does not (and cannot) receive adquate prenatal care; finally, women of color disproportionately live in environmentally hazardous locations, so even if they desire a child, it may be too deformed to survive (this has been well documented within Native American communities). I can understand where your stance on abortion stems from, and it is your prerogative to think and write like you do (indeed, it makes for lively discussion), but I think it is disingenuous to not acknowledge that the lived realities of women & reproduction are not black and white, and that our own position on any issue isn't necessarily colored by our own biases and life experience.

--Samantha