Sex and reality
Ian M. writes:
Among people of my generation (those in their twenties and thirties), sexual indulgence has blinded them to reality.
When a young man senses that there may be something wrong with the current order, he simultaneously senses that he would have to give up too much (i.e., sex) if he embraced a more traditional worldview. He may at first feel some guilt when he embarks upon the road of promiscuity, but eventually this feeling dissipates as he fornicates more and more. He ultimately reaches a point where he cannot imagine ever going back to a chaste life. In fact, he cannot imagine that it is even possible for a normal man to be chaste, he is too addicted to the pleasures of sex. And if something is not possible, then it must not correspond to reality. In such a way he blinds himself to reality by his sexual excesses.
Since many men of my generation will break up with women who refuse to sleep with them, women feel that they must capitulate if they ever want to have a long-term relationship. A woman who gives up her chastity now finds that men are willing to date her. Promiscuity leads to “better” results. Even if she senses that there may be something wrong with what she is doing, she simultaneously senses that she would have to give up too much (i.e., relationships) if she embraced a more traditional worldview. She assumes that chastity would entail a life of singleness and that no realistic code of values could possibly demand that of someone. Again, if something is not possible, then it must not correspond to reality. In such a way she also blinds herself to reality by her promiscuity (but in a less direct way than the man does). At the same time, a woman in the modern world must strike the right balance: if she refuses sex before marriage altogether, men won’t date her; if she sleeps with too many men or gives it up too quickly, she’s a slut and no man who’s not a loser will want to marry her.
Reinforcing this attitude toward promiscuity among the educated class of my generation is the fact that they are surrounded by intelligent liberals. An intelligent 18-year old goes off to a prestigious school and he is immediately surrounded by people who are both very intelligent and uniformly liberal. He begins to question any traditional beliefs he may have: these people are obviously intelligent, clearly more so than the “rubes” who raised me. How is it that they could be so intelligent and be wrong? He eventually concludes that, indeed, they can’t be wrong. They are too intelligent to be wrong! The doctrine of “consent” taught so effectively in his college years provides convenient intellectual cover for his promiscuity and further blinds him to reality. The doctrine of consent has reason behind it; traditional morality does not (or so he thinks).
Posted by Lawrence Auster at October 29, 2012 12:10 PM | Send