The Sexual Revolution Has Backfired on Women by S. Moore
Before I paste in excerpts from the editorial, and though I’m a conservative, I’d like to say that I don’t agree with the usual conservative response to the “sexual revolution.”
First of all, too often, too many conservatives blame “women’s lib,” and the 1960s “sexual revolution” with any and all societal ills – conservatives will blame sexual promiscuity and so on for all that, but sexual promiscuity existed prior to the 1960s, and in other cultures.
Secondly, while I am not opposed to parenthood, the nuclear family, or marriage – or to the notion of waiting until marriage to have sex – too often, most conservatives instruct people that the way out of cultural rot is for everyone to marry, marry by the time they are 23, and have ten children. I disagree – for several reasons.
If you’re a Christian conservative, you should be aware that the Bible does not say that a “cure” for the individual or for society is marriage and parenthood – for more on that topic, please see (Link): this post, (Link): this post, and (Link): this post on this blog.
The Bible actually advises that singleness is preferable to marriage (see 1 Corinthians 7), and recall that Jesus of Nazareth never married, never had children, and he actually made some anti-nuclear-family-esque type comments (see posts linked to in the aforementioned paragraph for examples of that).
There are adults – like myself – who are single by circumstance (I had hoped to marry but it never came to pass). Some adults are single by choice, which is fine – nobody should be shamed or guilt tripped for being single by circumstance or for choosing not to marry.
The problem is not one’s martial status.
A person can remain single and celibate over a life time and manage NOT to rob liquor stores, not participate in looting and rioting, not pelt police officers with rocks, and not rape and murder people.
The problems stem from lack of self control and choice – do you choose to be a law abiding citizen or not? Being a law abiding citizen is not contingent on being married or on having children.
Hopefully, the editorial below does not fall back on the usual tropes of, “Oh dear me, if only everyone would marry young, have kids, and form their own nuclear families, society would be crime and sin free” fairy tale.
If women of any age are having difficulties getting a mate, or in staying married, the answer is NOT always or necessarily to return to stifling, sexist, 1950s American “pro marriage and pro nuclear family” positions.
Things are not always mutually exclusive or do not have to be – life for women does not have to consist of only two choices (this is a false dichotomy):
1. be a “sex positive” feminist lady who has sex with any body and every body or 2. be a traditional, stay-at- home wife and mother
You can cook up a third or fourth way of living life. Life does not have to be lived by only one or the other parameter above. I don’t know why most on the right and some on the left continue to depict life as though only two avenues for women are possible.
I don’t entirely fit into either the left’s or the right’s notions of how women should live, and the older I get, I resent individuals, groups, or organizations (whether right, left, religious, or secular) condescendingly trying to define me or tell me how they think I should live, and at that, based on my biological sex.
There were a few aspects of this I didn’t agree with, but most of it seems okay enough:
Young women today are more sexually liberal than ever, but this could be extremely damaging – as the modern Mary Whitehouse has warned us
by Suzanne Moore
May 31, 2022
Who wants to be thought of as uncool, uptight and no fun? Certainly not young women who have been brought up to be “sex-positive”. This means being open, tolerant and progressive about sex, removing all judgment and shame and believing anything goes as long as those involved consent to it. It’s a beautiful idea: sexual freedom and enjoyment for all and personally I cannot wait for this revolution to happen.
It’s something of a shock, then, to be reminded that we are supposedly living in post-revolutionary times. As feminist author Louise Perry makes plain in her clear-sighted new book, The Case Against the Sexual Revolution: A New Guide to Sex in the 21st Century, what this actually means is a flood of pornography and hook-up culture, where a few swipes lead to casual encounters, “rough sex” is seen as routine, prostitution is viewed as just another career choice and we have the lowest rate of conviction for rape in a decade.
… It certainly is “progressive” for some men, who get to sleep with women who have been taught that all desires are acceptable and transgression is erotic, but the number of young women who tell stories of being choked and spat on or pushed into sexual acts they were not sure of, during what used to be called “one night stands”, is disturbing.
…But there is a case to be made that today’s aggressively sexual culture does not make many women happy; indeed quite the opposite. Some are paying such a high price for our so-called freedom that we might question what it all means.