Sex-Positivity
Let's start with the basic assumption that, with the exception of asexuals (whose unique needs deserve special consideration), most people desire sex (setting aside, for the moment, the reasons why, as well as any moral judgments of that fact), and that when performed properly (which is to say, in a way that is most beneficial to its participants), sex ought to be both physically pleasurable and psychologically satisfying, with a minimum of adverse side-effects. This is the ideal case; however, this should not be construed as implying that there is necessarily anything fundamentally wrong with a sexual act that does not fulfill these goals - provided it is still consensual and generally harmless. It may simply be a sub-optimal encounter. After all, everybody has off days, and you often have to experiment to find what you do and don't like.
This is the basic foundation for a sex-positive framework. Not all sex has to be good - and bad sex needn't constitute soul-crushing trauma. But sex should at least strive to realize its greatest potential. Although it can be twisted around and turned into a weapon to selfishly satisfy one's self at the expense of doing harm to others, this (alone) should be considered an unnatural perversion. At its core, the purpose of sex is to make people feel good. And this is a good thing. But believing this doesn't require one to turn a blind eye to the potential risks and dangers of sex - a uniquely intimate act in which we may engage (intentionally or otherwise) with people we do not fully know or trust. A sex-positive doesn't believe that all sex is sunshine and rainbows - just that all sex should be sunshine and rainbows.
Towards that end, a sex-positive necessarily supports and advocates for the adoption of safe and responsible sexual behaviors. You may note, with some irony, that the groups who campaign against making sex safer and more pleasurable for its participants all too frequently espouse toxic beliefs in the (alleged) shamefulness and sinfulness of sexual activity. This is no coincidence. If somebody doesn't want you to have sex, they're going to want to make it as dangerous and unpleasurable for you as they can. Sex-positives want you to have all the sex you want to have (whether that's a little, a lot, or none at all), and they want it to be as safe and pleasurable as it can be.
Safer Alternatives
While emphasizing the importance of responsible behaviors - being informed, attaining consent, and using safe practices - we can still acknowledge that the sexual impulse is a wonderful thing, and that there are myriad ways to indulge in it without shame or guilt, that can mitigate if not completely eliminate many of the risks and dangers. Consider voyeurism/exhibitionism and the sharing of pornography online - taken together (as they go so well together), they can be seen in the form of the mutual sharing of flirty and erotic pictures that young people frequently engage in, and that we thoughtlessly caution them against. Yet, like masturbation, these are harmless, contact-free behaviors that can alleviate sexual tension without risk of pregnancy or the transmission of disease.
We live in a black and white culture when it comes to sex. A culture of extremes. Abstinence or addiction. Prudishness or perversion. It's like there's no room to get your feet wet in a safe environment - you either stay on shore, or you dive into the deep end. This is dangerous for individuals, and dangerous for society. We should embrace the middle zone - the grey area of sensual eroticism in everyday life. Like wearing a short skirt. According to society, this is either an excuse to be sexually penetrated against your will (i.e., rape), or else a completely nonsexual desire to stay cool in warmer weather. Why can't it be cool and flirty yet still not consent (i.e., to be raped), and we just leave it at that?
If you look at approaches towards nonstandard sexual behaviors - that is, behaviors not consisting of the typical routine of two people rolling around naked in bed - instead of a flirty middle ground of eroticism, you see them construed by a conservative echo chamber as bastions of perversion. An act that results in teenage pregnancy, for example, while socially condemned (depending on who you ask and where you live), is the result of an otherwise normal impulse (which was merely insufficiently guarded against), but heaven forbid, using a condom would have been an unholy transgression against God! To say nothing of performing in a context where a screen (and countless miles, not to mention at least some semblance of anonymity) separate all participants. But no, only whores and perverts engage in those acts (unlike, you know, the girl who dropped out of high school to have her baby, and the deadbeat who skipped town after knocking her up - bastions of virtue, am I right?).
A Matter of Perspective
Instead of an easy, stress-free sexual release in the privacy of one's home, without need of a partner, porn use is viewed as an antisocial behavior that belies a poor sexual adjustment, contributes to the oppression and degradation of women (even if the porn involves two gay men), and devalues the concept of sex as a holy union by stealing it away from married couples (are we still living in the Old Testament here?). Voyeurism and exhibitionism, instead of being viewed as a kind of light foreplay, wherein people take erotic delight in the sight or gaze of others - often in public, and involving skimpy clothing (as regularly worn to the beach or gym), if not partial or full nudity - without the need for any kind of mutual contact (or even interaction, necessarily), is instead stereotyped as a disturbing perversion expressed by a minority of social outcasts who maybe don't have enough concern for common decency or the privacy of others.
Aside: I have a hypothesis that the reason voyeurism and exhibitionism are still very taboo in our society (despite other sexual advances our culture has recently made) is because they directly contradict feminist rhetoric (goddess forbid!) - that women are harmed merely by being the object of a man's sexual attention, despite the fact that many women enjoy such attention (in appropriate contexts - not always from strangers), and that in most cases (obviously not including the ones feminists choose for their heartstring-tugging anecdotes), that attention is really very harmless.
Anyway, my whole point is that there is not only one way to view these things. Viewing them as deviations (with a negative slant) as opposed to variations (more neutral-leaning) is not the only possible perspective, or even necessarily the best one. I'm offering an alternative perspective - the sex-positive perspective. It gives people the benefit of the doubt when it comes to their sexual behaviors and desires, while at the same time acknowledging the potential risks and dangers of sexual activity, and advocating a safe and responsible approach. It does not use this as an excuse to demonize human sexuality at its core - on the contrary, it seeks to find alternative ways for human beings to seek out sexual satisfaction safely and without shame, that do not erode the fabric of society, even as it asks society to be more understanding and less judgmental of the wonderful diversity of our kind.
My Vision
I want to see masturbation, pornography, voyeurism, and exhibitionism viewed not as fringe sexual perversions, or the outlets of a sexual deviant, but as the relatively safe and healthy practices they are - as stepping stones or learning guides towards the more advanced goal of sexual intercourse. In a sense, sex on training wheels. Sex with bumpers. I want to live in a world where well-adjusted sex is considered to be more than just two people rolling around naked in bed. Even if you allow for this activity to be performed for recreation and not procreation, and expand your definition of what constitutes a couple (i.e., allowing for same-sex pairings), you may be a step above the fire-and-brimstone preacher, but you're still a long way away from what normal human sexuality looks like.
It involves a wide variety of flirting and preening behaviors, and can be part of a person's public persona, or their private lives even outside of interpersonal relationships. It involves things they do alone, in their own bedrooms or at their own computers (and sometimes elsewhere). It involves interacting with people through a digital interface, sometimes anonymously, in ways that would be alien to a pre-internet society. And sometimes this exploration begins from a young age. Yet these things are all normal, and healthy when not taken to extremes (as can be said about anything). I want our culture to acknowledge this, and stop shaming and, worse yet, legislating against people who engage in these behaviors - which, outspoken or not, is a majority of the population.
