Should we only blame boys for the highly-sexualized culture?

Man helping a woman with proper handgun marksmanship
Man helping a woman with proper handgun marksmanship

If you wanted to read just one article that summarizes a lot of my views on radical feminism and the Sexual Revolution, based on my experiences with young women in high school, college and the workplace, this article from The Federalist would be a good choice.

I am going to excerpt a piece of this for my post, but you really need to click through and read the whole thing.

Excerpt:

Let’s build on that foundation and ask why porn is driving expectations for young women.

As with the prevalence of porn among boys, the answer to this question has two parts. The victimization half of the answer is that we’ve deliberately avoided giving girls any other kinds of expectations. Think about it for a moment: Why should it be so hard to tell a guy “no,” as girls reported in the survey? Why should she think it’s mean?

Feminists would have you believe that all girls are shrinking violets who never learned how to lean in, but the far better answer is that these girls don’t really know of any good reason to say no. “I don’t want to” is a reason, but it’s the kind of reason one must weigh against others’ desires in any kind of voluntary relationship.

Chastity, which is the view that relationships work better when sex is confined to exclusive, permanent marital commitments, is out of favor in our society, thanks to feminism. In place of chastity, feminism encourages young people to have recreational sex outside of marriage.

What happened next?

If sex is just meaningless fun without any moral or spiritual dimension, and if youth is just a time for sexual adventures without any thought to actually forging a lasting relationship—as we are all taught these days—then surely it would indeed be mean to arbitrarily withhold that meaningless fun from someone she is fond of.

In a sexually amoral context, having sex with him so he’ll watch a movie with her is a decision with no more gravitas than watching “American Ninja Warrior” with him so he’ll watch “The Bachelorette” with her. Without bringing chastity back into the conversation, there’s no meaningful objection. The only expectation is that the boy and girl work out their different wants together, and they have already done so.

In the past, sexual expectations were founded in marriage and family—that sex is part of a permanent and exclusive partnership rooted in a mutual commitment to one another’s well-being and the promise of future children to whom that commitment is extended. Those are the expectations girls were taught, and they generally navigated relationships according to them. They provided a foundation to undergird their refusals.

Unfortunately, feminists found such expectations restrictive and demeaning, and over a generation successfully uprooted them only to replace them with… nothing of substance. It’s only natural that media depictions of sex—porn included—would fill that void and create new expectations.

[…]We cannot meaningfully condemn this situation unless we venture back into the world of sexual morality. After all, if our only concerns are for the desires of those involved, nothing proves the girls’ desire for emotional connection without providing sexual gratification is any better than the boys’ desire for sexual gratification without providing emotional connection.If this is the extent of our concern, then our response should not be the horror we feel in the pit of our collective stomach, but rather pride that these two different groups were able to negotiate terms by which both sides can get something they want. It would be like the end of a children’s program where everyone learned to compromise and work together.

If girls in general want a deal with terms more favorable to them, there’s always collective bargaining with the boys. Nevertheless, it’s difficult to see how the results would substantially differ from traditional sexual morality. After all, most girls would need to withhold sexual access until granted a commitment more meaningful than “I promise not to sleep with anyone else until I want to be done sleeping with you.” Accordingly, the “scabs” (to borrow union terminology) who give away access for less would have to be treated with less respect than those who maintain the bargaining position.

Meanwhile, the other side’s interests would need to be taken into account or they would have no incentive to come to the table. The popular boys are already getting what they want, and the rest are already going their own way. Providing sex couldn’t be held off for decades while education and career take a front seat.

Plus the long-term commitments boys offer as they become men could not be so one-sided that the woman could unilaterally dissolve these at any time and simultaneously claim a man’s home, children, and future income. In other words, any mutually beneficial bargain would have to restore chastity, slut-shaming, and early marriage while ending no-fault divorce. What collective bargaining will never achieve is the feminist pipe dream that boys be dutifully subject to feminine whim. They have no incentive for that.

And this part further down is really good too:

Is it really safe to assume these girls have hooked up with a completely random and evenly distributed sample of boys their age?

It would be more accurate to say that the boys who are popular with the girls are generally like this. After all, it seems rates of teen girls’ sexual activity are actually somewhat higher than those of their male peers—a gap particularly pronounced among whites. The disparity is probably even greater since other studies have shown that men are prone to exaggerating their sexual activity while women are prone to minimizing it.

All of this suggests that a larger pool of girls is competing for the attentions of a smaller pool of boys. Many anecdotal accounts reinforce this, suggesting a version of the 80/20 rule is at work in hookup culture (i.e., that 80 percent of the girls are sleeping with 20 percent of the guys). That particular proportion is almost certainly an exaggeration, but the disparity is there.

Most likely, the sexually inactive majority of boys aren’t receiving sex acts in exchange for their attention, just as the sexually inactive girls aren’t providing any. Plenty of boys are left out in the cold who would happily adopt a measure of chastity and provide emotional intimacy if it meant access to romantic relationships. The girls are simply choosing not to enter relationships with those boys. So why are the girls going for the boys who make the demands they reportedly despise?

I just don’t see how you can do better than that. This is a very conservative view, because it respects traditional morality, but it is not one that is championed by most “conservatives”, who want to just blame men for refusing to put out after feminism has re-made the culture.

In the old days, many men expected women to give them something physically if they spent money on dinner and movie. In the present day, fake man-blaming “conservatives” expect men to put out marriage for women who have done nothing at all to prepare themselves for it. In a world where chastity has been replaced by radical feminist hook-ups, and marriage has been replaced by no-fault divorce, there is no incentive for men to engage. Trying to get them to engage by attacking their manhood is just plain stupid, but unfortunately, most “man up” pastors and “conservatives” ARE just plain stupid.

5 thoughts on “Should we only blame boys for the highly-sexualized culture?”

  1. Well said. Attacking or faulting men is not the answer to the serious problems in this area of pre-marital and extra-marital sexuality. But, you touch on the fact that the debate is framed by the feminists and many Christians and conservatives do not seem to recognize that.

    Let me offer another dimension of the problem that some do not want to discuss. We were asking for trouble in our society (the US) when we accepted both delayed marriage and earlier physical sexual maturation in our young people. You want a really radical idea? How about re-doing our educational system so that young people can be out of high school at 16 (as they are in many countries today) and then they can be out of college or a trade school a few years after that? Also, how about removing the traces of hormones in the meat and dairy products that our children consume so that puberty returns to the age it occurred in our grandparents’ day?

    Many young adults married and stay married for life at ages of 21 or so just a few generations back. We could do it again if we really wanted to.

    Like

  2. The answer to the entire post is:

    Calling out men for their sin is easy. Men are pigs who commit sexual sins all the time, is the perception.

    Calling out women for their sin is difficult. You can’t do this with women. Because there’s an unspoken assumption on the part of many Christians and conservatives that women don’t sin. Especially, women don’t commit sexual sin. If a woman is having sex it’s because a bad man duped and tricked and manipulated her into it.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. It’s ridiculous because when you look at the Sandra Fluke people who are the spokeswomen for young, unmarried feminists, they are flat out saying that they want taxpayer funded birth control and taxpayer funded abortion PRECISELY BECAUSE they want to have recreational premarital sex with “fun” men who they know WILL NOT COMMIT TO THEM.

      The recreational sex is not seen as INCOMPATIBLE with an exclusive courtship and being chaste for your future husband. We used to tell women that this was wrong, but now we don’t. Instead, parents and pastors tell chaste men to man up and marry women who have played the field into their 30s.

      Like

  3. About that last line…

    How about, “most “man up” pastors and “conservatives” ARE just plain gutless and hypocritical because they know they can pile on the guilt-mongering on the men and men will “take it”, but the same will never dream of calling women out on their responsibilities regarding men (in marriage or outside of it)? Such pastors are hypocritical as they rant incessantly about men’s responsibilities regarding women, but never touch the same issues with women because to do so would provoke a “reaction”/backlash (and they would rather NOT have to deal with that as women are VERY creative in making men “pay” for comments they’d rather not hear about their behaviour or attitudes). Such hypocrisy is ample reason for men to TOTALLY ignore the “man up” propaganda”. So when will they start up a Promise Keepers for WOMEN?? Women do want to be equal? Don’t they?

    Liked by 1 person

  4. Paul Gosselin
    03/30/2017 AT 4:59 PM
    “…Women do want to be equal? Don’t they?”

    The answer to that is that women LOVE “Equality”, but they HATE being treated “equally”.
    As shown by their feminist rhetoric versus their actions, they DO want “equality”, BUT ONLY for as long as “equality” gives them the “rights” of all men, plus all the benefits, perks, and advantages that only the most wealthy, handsome, and powerful men get to have.
    BUT when the issues of “male responsibilities” and “male duties” is raised, these same women THEN hypocritically bring up the issue of them being female — which is when they demand “chivalry” because of it.
    The often-mentioned short answer is “that women want ALL the rights and benefits of both sexes, but NONE of the responsibilities and duties of either”.

    Too see this in action (and for a good laugh), go to any article about how some women are now paying “spousal support” and/or “child support” to their ex-husbands; although these women are VERY few in number, nearly all women don’t like it AT ALL.
    You can also go to any article about the foundering of the ‘Costa Concordia’ in 2012, and read the comments by the men vs. the women regarding how women were exposed to “equality” and how they didn’t like it.

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s