Verified by 
There are some things that people just naturally believe to be true. Such things are said to have high Face Value. No discussion is necessary and no amount of evidence to the contrary will ever change anyone's mind. A good example of this is the value of a loving home when raising a child. Parents that genuinely like their kids are going to produce happier, healthier and more successful offspring than are those who don't - Right? Wrong! In point of fact, the correlation between the two has never been demonstrated. Some kids get lots of love and wind up serial killers while others are left pretty much to fend for themselves and grow up to be CEO's of major corporations and loving parents in their turn. About the only thing that studies of early childhood rearing practices and later adult behavior show is that consistency is better than inconsistency. The worst parents, it would seem, are those who swing back and forth. One day their tops and the next day you want to run away from home.
In looking at other areas of life, there seems to be a similar relationship. Measure the satisfaction of workers with their bosses and the inconsistent ones come out at the bottom of the heap every time. The considerate guy and the demanding one will both have their fans and detractors but it will be hard to find anybody who likes the happy one day and nasty the next type. The same holds true for spouses and neighbors and...well...just about everybody. The problem seems to be that you never know where you stand with such people and, what's worse, there never seems to be anything you can do to remedy the situation. It takes any sense of control out of your hands and it makes any move toward stable adjustment impossible. The mixed message - today what you do is good while tomorrow the same behavior will be bad - makes for the most physically and mentally stressing situations imaginable.
The reason I tell you all this is because of the many mixed messages people receive regarding sexual behavior. A recent report out of China says that 20 to 30 percent of the 1.3 billion adult men in that country suffer from one or more forms of sexual dysfunction. Sperm counts, according to a Reuters news release, have dropped by 12% since 1987 and only one out of five men tested were found to be "highly fertile" by the national sperm bank. Of course, pesticides have been suggested as a possible cause along with laundry detergent and "environmental hormones" in food. Increased levels of stress at work and at home were also mentioned as possible contributing factors. My question is, when you see a sex problem, why not look at sexual attitudes for a possible answer?
Having just returned from SE Asia, I can tell you first hand that they have become as crazy when it comes to sex as we are here in the West. Just consider the following news items and then ask yourself if it's really necessary to consider "endocrine disrupters in plastic containers" (another popular theory) when faced with impotence. It seems to me that mixed messages alone can account for much of the problem.
In Shanghai, the mere mention of sex after the Communist takeover in 1949 could have resulted in severe punishment. But now, with more liberal attitudes sweeping the land, talk of the birds and the bees has become more acceptable. A new museum devoted to Chinese Sex Culture has opened its doors on some 1200 historical objects and texts. This is said to be the first such public exhibition in 5,000 years. However, the authorities have refused to allow the word "sex" to appear on the sign in front of the building. Now let's get this straight, you have a sex museum but you can't use the word sex. Is that a mixed message or what?
Moving over to Bangkok, sex workers gathered there to attend a five-day convention devoted to the difficulties associated with their profession. The Empower Foundation, which hosted the event, issued a statement decrying the hypocrisy found in Thailand. Home to an estimated quarter of a million prostitutes, the government officially considers prostitution illegal. This failure to admit the existence of the sex industry was doubly irritating to convention goers because, they said, people of the highest standing privately use the services while publicly denying the existence of the servers.
And in Kuala Lumpur, the organizers of a foam party had to apologize to Malaysian authorities for a provocative advertisement they placed reading, "Come in beachwear or nothing at all." The police, along with the Federal Territory Religious Department, raided the site but found nothing indecent. There were about 40 youngsters (fully clothed) playing in a foam filled pool. Undercover agents had been there the whole time and reported no violations of law or morality. Despite that, the host and hostess were taken into custody for questioning. The next day they were charged with Disturbing the Peace (it was decided that the music was too loud) and fined $1,000. The audio equipment and the foam machine were also confiscated.
Now keep in mind that we're talking about areas of the world known for easy sex. You want it - and "it" can mean almost anything - you'll find it there. In fact, regularly scheduled vacation packages take tourists from Europe and the U.S. to SE Asia for Red Light tours. So who's kidding whom? Yet the double standard, mixed message regarding sex continues in a kind of schizophrenic frenzy.
Closer to home, Las Vegas (otherwise known as Sin City) has been less than receptive to an annual Swinger's convention. Part of the problem seems to be that some of the women show up dressed just like the girls pictured on the hotel's giant billboards. Let's pretend I'm an alien from outer space. Now, can anyone explain to me why the one is right and the other is wrong? I didn't think so.
