-
Downton’s Class System — and Ours
May 20, 2013 | 9 comments
-
The Mexican Kleptocracy: July 1989
April 19, 2013 | 0 comments
-
The Mexican Kleptocracy
April 19, 2013 | 3 comments
-
Black Plight: In Conflict With Unions
April 6, 2013 | 0 comments
-
An Assist from the Press
March 16, 2013 | 0 comments
Capitol Ideas
From ‘Happily Ever After’ to the Fall
The costs of the women’s movement and the sexual revolution are coming due.
(Page 2 of 2)
We are so immersed in this that we can hardly see how revolutionary it is. A recent book that addresses the subject persuasively is Mary Eberstadt’s Adam and Eve After the Pill: Paradoxes of the Sexual Revolution (Ignatius Press). She sees the gravity of the situation, for both men and women. Among other things she points out that Pope Paul VI’s unpopular encyclical, Humanae Vitae (1968), opposing contraception, has been borne out in every particular.
There’s also a parallel with the Communist revolution. “Incredible as it may seem in retrospect,” Eberstadt writes, the moral facts of the Cold War “remained disputed at the highest intellectual levels, especially on American campuses, until about two seconds before the Berlin Wall came down.” Now we have another world-changing force, the “destigmatization and demystification of nonmarital sex and the reduction of sexual relations to a kind of hygienic recreation in which anything goes so long as those involved are consenting adults.” It’s defended in liberal circles as fervently as Lenin defended Communism.
The Communist revolution was Russian, but the sexual revolution (I regret to say) is authentically American—from divorce in Las Vegas to Roe v. Wade in Washington. It will be defended to the death by liberal organs like the New York Times.
Mrs. Eberstadt skirts one issue that is likely to provoke a reappraisal—population decline in the developed world. It surely has been a consequence, and a desired consequence, of the sexual revolution. I believe its impact is already being felt in Europe. Populations top-heavy with old people will not be able to sustain income-transfer programs (from workers to retirees). Young people beware. Anyway, we will be hearing a great deal about this in the years ahead.
Well, I seem to have strayed far afield—from Jane Austen to Las Vegas; from the premarital courting rituals in Regency England to the disruptions of the sexual revolution today. If you want to delve further into both, I heartily recommend both Elizabeth Kantor’s Happily Ever After and Mary Eberstadt’s Adam and Eve After the Pill.
About the Author
Tom Bethell is a senior editor of The American Spectator and author of The Politically Incorrect Guide to Science, The Noblest Triumph: Property and Prosperity Through the Ages, and most recently Questioning Einstein: Is Relativity Necessary? (2009).
Letter to the Editor View all comments (78) | Leave a comment
More Articles by Tom Bethell
More Articles From Capitol Ideas
http://spectator.org/archives/2012/06/12/from-happily-ever-after-to-the
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
Current Issue
- Gabby Giffords Poisons the Well
- Celebrating Our Lady of Paris
- Of Weiner and Women
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
Jack in Wi| 6.12.12 @ 6:22AM
This is a great essay. Mr. Bethell is one of the best writers here. It is surprising how women who have to have organic food and watch every drug that they consume are on the pill. The pill is a powerful artificial hormone with many negative side effects, How many generations of women can consume these things before the genetic makeup of children is effected? There are many studies on fish and of homonal pollution on their reproductive systems. The homones pollute the drinking water and we are all drinking it in. My son is a water scientist and when I asked him about it he was quite well informed on the subject. Perhaps that is why men seem more effeminate in this day and age? They are getting too much estrogen from all these pills their mothers are using.
Pecos| 6.12.12 @ 9:31AM
You might easily be right. The other side of the hormone coin could also be a factor. Viagra. I can find very little research into the effects of Viagra on the female partner.
Brooksifier | 6.12.12 @ 10:08AM
But if they become lesbians they wont need contraception; so legalize all gay activity-- including gay marriage.
Now we're cooking with gas.
Albertus Magnus| 6.12.12 @ 12:34PM
More imbecility from the Imbecile-in-Chief.
limonrj| 6.12.12 @ 10:22PM
I really hope you are using satire.
Brooksifier | 6.12.12 @ 11:04PM
I'm making fun of your RINO-cluelessness, chumps. This is not 1980, you drained-out in the last 30 years.
MyAngle| 6.12.12 @ 11:23PM
More childish name calling to cover a dearth of logic. How passe.
C. Vernon Crisler | 6.12.12 @ 10:09AM
I think Bethel's argument is ridiculous. He appeals to psychology to explain the women's movement when the whole thing is an ideological phenomenon on the left. Why do feminists remain silent in the face of Islamic authoritarianism and mistreatment of women? The answer is to be found in ideology, not in post-pill psychology.
If abortion was determined to be okay with the "right-wing" you can be sure that the feminists would suddenly find some way to oppose it.
Brooksifier | 6.12.12 @ 10:46AM
"Why do feminists remain silent in the face of Islamic authoritarianism and mistreatment of women?"
All third world cesspools treat women badly, doesn't matter if they are located in the Mideast, Asia, or right down below us in Mexico. You want to go to Mexico for awhile to see how women there are treated? Not likely you would; better to merely pick on Islam instead, Islam's a safer bet than Latin nations-- Islam is more PC to pick on than our Southern neighbors.
Pecos Pete| 6.12.12 @ 11:09AM
Alan Brooks is back as Brooksifier.
Von Mises Jr| 6.12.12 @ 11:16AM
And stupid as ever!
irish19| 6.12.12 @ 6:58PM
"All third world cesspools treat women badly"
But only Islam codifies it.
Brooksifier | 6.12.12 @ 11:07PM
"But only Islam codifies it"
Because oil money makes Islamic nations a bit wealthier than the Latin, African, and Asian 3rd world cesspools-- so they have the resources to codify their bad treatment of women.
Von Mises Jr| 6.12.12 @ 11:23AM
Spot on, Vern. It is part and parcel with the socialist perversion of the language to fool fools. Only warped masochist can turn liberty and freedom into meaning getting free housing, food, clothing and rubbers. It creates unlimited ironies and folly since one cannot have a logical conversation with the fools that don't understand or acknowledge the classical meanings of words and the misuse of words by groups such as NOW to promote slavery under the guise of choice.
Fast and Curious| 6.12.12 @ 11:47AM
Women are slaves under Sharia Law and common islamic customs. If one disputes that, they are either unfamiliar with Sharia Law or the definition of slavery.
Von Mises Jr| 6.12.12 @ 5:15PM
In addition to a salient point, you have a great name. "When did he know and when did he know it."
KyMouse| 6.12.12 @ 11:59AM
Yes, artificial progestins, secreted in urine by women who are on the Pill (and other hormone treatments), often go from toilets into streams, and harm the reproduction of fish.
A 2009 report at www.environmentalhealthnews.com noted that in a study, "female fish exposed to the artificial hormone produced fewer eggs (3-fold fewer than controls) at all exposure levels, had more eggs that failed to mature, and became masculinized at the higher concentrations. Male fish produced fewer sperm, became less aggressive, and were less interested in spawning. After two weeks, egg production stopped in all of the exposure tanks...
"Given their widespread use in pharmaceuticals and likely presence in the environment, progestins should be considered as another class of hormones with the potential to impact the health of wild fish."
So why don't we hear the tree-huggers shrieking about THAT kind of pollution?
Derek Leaberry| 6.12.12 @ 5:05PM
I agree.
Bill Hussein O'Stalin| 6.12.12 @ 6:46AM
The fact that so many women openly endorse abortion shows that they are not the sweet helpless creatures often portrayed.
Millions have openly and casually murdered their unborn young falsely believing that state sponsored programs make it OK.
In return they believe they have found freedom, but state sponsored freedom is an illusion.
In the meantime, the reason many can't find husbands may be related to the fact that it's difficult to trust a woman who could kill an innocent creature with the disdain one would hold for an insect
KyMouse| 6.12.12 @ 10:16AM
The right to say "yes" to fornication very quickly became the obligation to do so. Young women who thought it sounded good to be free to say "yes" found that their dates would dump them unless they did so. The guys would simply go find other gals who would do as they wished, with no strings (such as marriage) attached.
I once suggested to a young, worried friend that she go only on double dates, and to public places such as restaurants; and never go to the man's apartment or any other secluded place.
She looked at me as if I were crazy. "He'll dump me if I do that!" she said. The right became the obligation.
The parallel with abortion -- the right to kill one's baby by abortion quickly became the obligation to do so. Refuse the father's gallant offer to pay for the abortion, and you're on your own, honey.
Unlimited sex without a wedding -- the sexual revolution made the dreams of men, not women, come true.
PolishKnight| 6.12.12 @ 4:34PM
One of the problems with the traditional date is that it evolved into a show of wealth by men. So going out for months at a time with marriage in mind is a financial investment for so-called traditional men especially in an era when women are often earning as much or more than men.
So called traditional dates are basically "escort" dates. Truly traditional courtship didn't occur at restaurants but rather men courted women at their parents' homes and were highly supervised but also treated politely.
And no, don't worry about the women being on their own if they get pregnant. Just the opposite actually. The Republicans foolishly bought into the notion of busting down upon "deadbeat dads" to "make them pay" and this made unwed motherhood VERY lucrative. A responsible father should lecture his son that even though women have the undesired option to get an abortion, young men don't have any options other than 18 years of hell. Young men should be more cautious, not less than young women.
KyMouse| 6.12.12 @ 5:01PM
I suppose that in many cultures, "truly traditional courtship" also involved the woman's parents coming up with her dowry. That could often be quite a financial investment from her side of the aisle.
I remember asking my mother, "The boy provides the money for the movie ticket and the pizza, but what do I give him?"
She answered, "The pleasure of your company."
PolishKnight| 6.12.12 @ 5:57PM
Frank Sinatra supposedly used to sing for his dinner on Aristotle Onassis's yacht. Young ladies who supposedly provide the pleasure of their company should keep the following in mind:
1) Please don't ask us where we work, what car we drive, etc. If you're getting a "free" meal, at least try to not be an OBVIOUS golddigger.
2) Don't just sit around passively waiting for the man to entertain you. Please have some interesting, relevant topics in mind (If he's a lawyer, perhaps talk about your time on jury duty.) If he likes fishing try to talk about that. By the same token, don't blab on about how much you hate some gal at work, etc.
3) Be interesting. Instead of watching TV or getting fat on free meals, maybe learn a musical instrument or foreign language, read some interesting books, etc.
4) Act like a lady. When someone does something nice for you, say thank you. Extend your hand to grab his arm. Smile as much as possible. Show concern for others. See 4A)
4A) When a man flubs and isn't a gentleman and forgets to hold the chair, etc. don't start a scene and act mean or embarrass him or others. Later say discreetly the way you'd like to be treated in a pleasant, warm tone and how much you appreciate it. Or better yet, drop it if it's something small and be forgiving. Men have been doing that for years. Learn how to disarm negative situations with tact and grace.
5) Be honest and tactful with a minimum of game playing.
PolishKnight| 6.12.12 @ 6:06PM
Observation 2) requiring a separate post due to the character limit.
While yes, a dowry was a financial investment, keep in mind that the financial investments were different for boys and girls. The boys needed to be highly educated, sent to an apprentice, etc. to make them marriageable. This is still largely the case. So if you think about it, the marriage expenses and dowry for a girl were probably were about the same cost as college tuition or it's equivalent of the time.
Also keep in mind that the dowries often didn't go to the man but rather were brought with the woman such as property to be SHARED between them (such as furniture, land, etc.) Like a wedding ring that's returned when an engagement is broken, the dowry would go back to the wife and her family.
Hmmm, this explains why many middle class, bourgeois families have fewer children: Expensive weddings and higher educations cost a lot of money in addition to the lower standard of living as wages were deflated by women entering the workforce.
Appleby| 6.12.12 @ 6:48AM
God bless the Squire and His Relations/And Keep Us All in our Proper Stations. Amen.
Admit it guys, sometimes in your lonely beds in the middle of your unkempt squat full of snoring frat boys, Sharia starts looking pretty darned good to you, doesn't it?
There are a large number of us Girls who never fell for the falsehood that equality with men meant that we had to have sex every day or we'd die, and that includes many successful women who discovered that independence could be combined with responsibility for our behaviour. And many of us looked at the sort of men offered for our approval and said "Thank you God, that I don't have to settle for That."
The author is correct: in your overeager rush to convince girls that indiscriminate sex with all comers was Equality, you crapped in your own bed, and now the Nice Girls you jeered at and mocked don't want you. But surprise: we didn't want you before women's lib either; we were just stuck settling for you.
Now we're not.
Sucks to be you, eh?
Von Mises Jr| 6.12.12 @ 8:23AM
Ms. Appleby, for society as a whole, the sexual revolution has been very destructive. But it is most destructive to women.
As a macho man, I will admit that in traditional relationships, it was always the woman that decided if she would allow the advances of the man. God designed it that way and it is a natural behavior for the hunter instinct of man to seek new prey. But the woman had to run the village and demanded that the men only hunt food and brings it home to the family. Barbarians brought home concubines, but not so much in recent times.
Now the woman has been tricked into being a rump roast for the block party. It is destructive to the family, but especially for the woman whom even if she doesn't get pregnant, loses self-respect and the respect of the men worth marrying.
Guys that will be good husbands and fathers avoid little sluts. You seem like a nice woman from the many post of yours that I have read. But the promiscuity that was sensationalized even hurts good, decent women since it sets the expectations so low for most men. It certainly has shrunken the number of men that are marrying material, and that can never be good.
Fast and Curious| 6.12.12 @ 12:00PM
If anyone is interested in examining the current state of women's sexuality (post sexual revolution) I invite you to research the blockbuster book 50 Shades of Gray. It is a smash hit with women and has been described in many reviews as "mommie porn." It's a phenomenon, and bookstores can't keep it on the shelves.
Briefly, it describes a dysfunctional relationship between a very wealthy man and a college-aged woman. He is dictatorial, even makes the woman sign a contract that enforces total submission to him, physically, emotionally, and in all other aspects of life. He then restrains and punishes her. This is what is turning on so many of today's women. I don't believe further comment is necessary.
THKrupp| 6.12.12 @ 8:30AM
I disagree that it was only men that wanted indiscriminate sex. It takes two to tango. Women like sex just as much as men generally. The authors reasoning that after birth control women lost an exuse not to have sex doesnt ring true at all. Most men have had more rejections than they care to admit. The woman runs the show in relationships, dating and sex.
PolishKnight| 6.12.12 @ 11:14AM
I have a friend whose 6 feet 3, wealthy and a basketball player and some of the stories he tells me are quite amusing. Women come up to him to just give him stuff sometimes or they goofily ask him for his phone number. He lives in a different world than common men.
So perhaps the reason why there's a disparity between the genders is that there's an imbalance of men that turn on women compared to vice versa.
THKrupp| 6.12.12 @ 11:30AM
LOL well I did say most men...Ive never lived in that world. Im not sure I would be able to handle it..lol
PolishKnight| 6.12.12 @ 3:43PM
One guy told me he went to Pittsburgh to go to a Bruce Springsteen concert and a gal came up to him at the hotel lobby and said she had two leftover tickets, front row, and her friends didn't show up so she sold them to him at face value.
Another time, the same guy was flying home and asked a stewardess for an alcoholic drink. She brought the whole bag over to him and for him to take as much as he wanted.
Different guy, the basketball player, goes to McD's at the airport and the gal at the counter says "No charge" and asks for his phone number. He gives her a fake one (to the disgust of his sister there at the time.)
Us normal guys don't experience this but it shows that women do have a "sex drive" like us but I guess it's harder to kick in. We can chow down on hamburgers but most women only get ravenously hungry when they see a plate of caviar, so to speak.
Occam's Tool| 6.12.12 @ 5:12PM
Women have a sex drive as intense as men but very, very focused. This being said, my wife finally caught me and now I have the world's two cutest children. Monogamy equals wealth in more than one way.
Bill84728| 6.12.12 @ 9:51AM
Now Women's Liberation is mens' fault? Men didn't engage in trying to tell women that indiscriminate sex with all comers was Equality; that was Germaine Greer, Gloria Steinem, and Cosmopolitan. We were OK with sex, all right, but as correctly pointed out, as a transient pleasant experience.
PolishKnight| 6.12.12 @ 11:42AM
Appleby, where to start? Sure, many successful women discovered true independence and responsibility but they are the exceptions rather than the rule. Let me know when they don't have the safety net of welfare, affirmative action, and "child" support and then I'll take your claims seriously. In reality, most women and men were more human and simply needed each other and that's not necessarily a bad thing. Unless you live in a cabin in the woods and grow your own vegetables, you're dependent upon your fellow humans just as I am.
I'm chuckling because I'm probably one of the guys you and your friends wouldn't want to "settle for" or "Approve" of. But then again, I'm largely the building block of a society you want to live in: I earn a decent living, I participate in church and social activities, a stable husband and provider, and not horrible looking. I'm not a monster but I'm no prince charming either.
But that's not good enough for the spoiled princesses who took their independence as the right to act like a b**** (fill that in.) They had three words: gimme gimme gimme and used sex as a treat to try to control me. It didn't work since On-Demand Video (or VHS back then) was far better (and charming) than they were. And they weren't getting younger. I didn't have to Settle for THEM and didn't. Or at least until I dated younger women. It didn't make the women any less imperfect but at least I got a second chance.
Bill Hussein O'Stalin| 6.12.12 @ 7:11AM
Menstrual?
Appleby| 6.12.12 @ 7:29AM
Huh?
R Martin| 6.12.12 @ 7:42AM
No, I think she’s past that. I have to admit I have somewhat of a soft spot for Appleby’s posts, because she is that rare breed of female, a serious petrolhead. And she writes well.
However, there certainly has been an edge of anti-male venom in some of her stuff which makes one wonder how the scars were created. Today I think she misses Mr. Bethell’s point that changed male/female dynamics are largely (perhaps exclusively) due to women and their liberation. I suspect little has changed over the years on the male side.
Particularly odd is Appleby’s assertion that males were “offered” and women had to “settle”. That’s not how I remember it. No one offered men to women; women attracted men based on the aura they cast and the reputation they created. And any woman who chose to settle probably had problems deeper than finding a suitable mate.
Still, I wouldn’t mind having a drink with Ms. Appleby and discussing historic motor racing.
THKrupp| 6.12.12 @ 8:22AM
Well perhaps men offered themselves to women. A woman didnt actively seek out mates...at least in the sense in how men go about it. It wasnt just the pill and abortion, society as a whole changed. There was a lot of pressure for women to get married because that was the main avenue open for them. Now theres a lot less pressure to get married. A woman can have a life without being married and nobody really thinks about it. I question all chatter about women not being able to find someone to marry or at least decent men to marry. Women are essentially in the drivers seat when it comes to relationships and sex. If they want to be married or in a relationship its well within their power to do so. Now that may mean they have to settle for less than what they want but thats life.
PolishKnight| 6.12.12 @ 12:10PM
HTKrupp, when I left the states and went to other cultures (including even Western Europe) I was shocked at how much more "mature" (in a good way) the women were and responsible about their sexuality. The states seems to have women who are either madonnas (prudes) or whores. And perhaps that's why we live in a messed up society today as a result of all that and feminism is merely a by-product.
THKrupp| 6.12.12 @ 12:21PM
Actually Ive spent some time overseas as well. Ive noticed that women are much different than they are here as well. The women that I met seemed to have a better understanding of innate power they have being women. Here women seem more confused about what they want and how they want to be treated.
THKrupp| 6.12.12 @ 12:23PM
Men are also different too. There seemed to be an accepted set of rules on how to interact.
PolishKnight| 6.12.12 @ 3:27PM
I don't think it's a matter of "understanding" their innate power so much as them being more responsible overall (the words responsible and understanding are similar, but there's a key distinction.)
Foreign women I know would frown upon women engaging in flirting games or "teasing" men and then getting all up in a huff over being "insulted" when the men act upon their flirtation. I rarely saw foreign women flirt or tease with men. They were either deadly serious OR when flirting, were careful to do so with men they knew could handle it.
Quite frankly, after having been to Western and Eastern Europe and coming back to the states, it's like women and men here were raised in a barn and that goes for so-called "old fashioned" Americans as well.
Part of the reason, of course, is due to man-hating feminists who demanded sexual harassment laws that made it a crime for a man to offend a woman in the workplace. Women in Victorian England were more sturdy than the crybabies such as Sandra Fluke who claim to be "equal" to men but easily insulted. On the other end, however, American men are often wimps and from what I heard, easily assimilate into Swedish culture. In that regard, we already have "Sweden" here, yes?
THKrupp| 6.12.12 @ 6:12PM
Yes I would agree. Men, especially in Eastern & Southern Europe are much more overtly "macho". Women expect them to act that way. Women are more feminine as well, but not in a teenage girl way. It seemed much easier to navigate interpersonal relationships as you know exactly where you stand and what is expected of you. I havent spent a lot of time in Sweden but Ive visited twice. It does seem like Americans would integrate there easier than many other places in Europe, but I dont think most Americans have the responsibility to live in a place like that.
Occam's Tool| 6.12.12 @ 5:14PM
THK: when my sister went to college it was the start of the gender shift (more women than men). It was simply amazing how that changed the dating power dynamic in favor of men. Not really a good thing.
THKrupp| 6.12.12 @ 5:34PM
Right, I think I read about a study which showed basically that when there are fewer men, women "compete" for them more. Usually by lowering their standards and inhibitions. I went to a University that had 3 women for every male student. I was fresh off the farm and had a lot of preconceived notions of things and didnt take advantage of the situation as I would have had I been more worldly. ehh its probably best that I didnt lol although some days I question that.
Joellen| 6.12.12 @ 9:01AM
Excellent article. Few more thoughts that I've stated for years - I believe the pill is the REAL reason for so many children born with Autism, etc. today. Also, before the pill I dont recall women having problems getting pregnant. I remember all my friends who were on the pill had such difficult getting pregnant - they all had to do invetro. Anyone over 50 remember the huge families back then, without any artificial help. Thoughts to ponder. Finally, let's be upfront about this all - we took all moralility out of our lifestyles and these are the consequences we must suffer.
THKrupp| 6.12.12 @ 9:43AM
In regards to couples that have trouble getting pregnant, you have to remember that reproductive traits are very easy passed from one generation to another. Previously women and men who had problems having children had one choice and that was to adopt. Now we have more offspring from these people consequently we have more people who have fertility problems. When I was farming and I had a female that didnt breed back easily I got rid of her and didnt keep any of her offspring for breeding stock. Once those genes get into your herd its impossible to get rid of them without depopulating and starting from scratch.
Although Im sure environmental factors do play a significant role as you say. We are ingesting numerous chemicals that previous generations never had exposure to. It can be hard to predict and track what these chemicals are doing to us as a population over the long term.
PolishKnight| 6.12.12 @ 11:44AM
THKrupp, think carefully about what you're accidentally endorsing. Hint: it's already been thought of: social darwinism or National Socialism.
THKrupp| 6.12.12 @ 11:50AM
LOL Im not advocating it for humans but its standard management practice for a livestock operation. The truth is that due to technology more people are having children that previously couldnt. Their genes are being spread so consequently we will have more people that have issues.
PolishKnight| 6.12.12 @ 12:06PM
Most of the people using such fertility technologies are wealthy, relatively, to the rest of the world. Keep in mind that a shortage of people in general isn't the problem but rather technologically advanced civilizations that are engaged in cultural suicide and an attempt to prop up pension schemes and cheap labor via immigration.
THKrupp| 6.12.12 @ 12:40PM
Yes this is true. Population isnt a problem world wide but I was speaking more in terms of the United States. It isnt even a problem here except for couples that have to use infertility treatments.
AllantheK| 6.12.12 @ 9:26AM
Women aren't the only ones who have had to settle. With such low morals inherent in a "free" lifestyle, some precious values have also been liberated.
Mimi | 6.12.12 @ 9:29AM
You guys are forgetting the many women and MEN who did not buy onto the "Sexual Revolution"! There are many who choose and have chosen the CHASTE life..Those married or not!
There is a lot of benefits too ! Women are a lot healthier...the wholeness and self respect are intact. As a Catholic I played by the rules even though, my husband used to say "THE POPE doesn't pay my bills", "Where are you gonna put this one Mimi?" ( the 6th) I said ...shut-up "Ill hang the basket on the chandelier"....She was the one he came to adore and at his funeral the 8 kids were the pall bearers...The 6th Melissa had injured her ankle at college and limped. I said Lis why didn't you let the boys do it...and she answered " He carried us, mom...we'll carry him"
R Martin| 6.12.12 @ 9:49AM
Nice.
Peppermint Tea | 6.12.12 @ 11:04AM
I agree Mimi, and wish we would have had 8 instead of merely 5. By the way, studies have shown that in marriage, the sex is better too.
PCC| 6.12.12 @ 9:45AM
A thought-provoking article by Mr. Bethell. Well done, sir.
irish19| 6.12.12 @ 7:07PM
Absolutely.
Bill84728| 6.12.12 @ 9:46AM
Thanks to Mr. Bethell for pointing out that the prohibitions on divorce, contraception, and abortion, worked to protect women, as did the social conventions surrounding courtship, proposal, and marriage.
Men still respond to the idea of the virtues of that sort of thing, as can be seen from the somewhat charming and now entirely outdated and silly chivalrous behaviors that men engage in when a man gets into a physical scuffle with a woman in public.
allanius | 6.12.12 @ 10:00AM
Thank you for the excellent article. I'm not sure whether it is any one thing that has changed the relations between the sexes as a change in worldview. Jane Austen's "cultural given" was Christianity. There were characters in her novels who were quite Modern in their outlook--for instance, Mary Crawford. The difference today is that Mary's outlook has metastasized. If God is dead, then why should we continue to believe that two can become "one flesh" or that happiness depends upon the will of God?
KyMouse| 6.12.12 @ 10:36AM
This very magazine, The American Spectator, ran a good article called "Anarchy in Eros," by Jennifer Grossman, in its June/July 2003 issue.
The article points out that shacking up offers a man the benefits of a wife without shouldering the reciprocal obligations of a husband. And unlike other forms of live-in help, she is sexually available and works for free.
"Traditional courtship has been replaced by a confusing series of relationships that form and break up...The attributes that mark men as 'good' marriage material -- fidelity, commitment, dependability -- are precisely those least likely to flourish in an atmosphere of open sexual competition," the article says.
I hope it's available online.
MK48| 6.12.12 @ 11:29AM
KyMouse........what does the "Book of Life" say about open sexual competion......Iam sure the article didn't have much to say about that.
Sexually available..... just means she is just an unpaid whore.
KyMouse| 6.12.12 @ 12:16PM
Through the insipration of the Holy Spirit, the writers of the New Testament warned that God forbids and punishes sexual immorality, including fornication; verses include Galatians 5:19-21, Hebrews 13:4, Revelation 21:8 and 22:15, and 1 Corinthians 6:9-11.
I believe they knew what they were talking about, but a lot of people disregard those warnings, and Biblical authority in general. A lot of folks claim that those warnings were for another time and place. Time will tell.
KyMouse| 6.12.12 @ 1:23PM
MK48, a word about your "unpaid whore" comment -- we must remember that the man who is having any kind of sexual relationship with her, or with anyone who is not his own wife, is equally in the wrong. The Bible has plenty of examples of sexual sins (as well as every other kind of sin) committed by men as well as by women, and God holds both sexes accountable.
That's where that John 3:16 stuff comes in, fortunately.
PolishKnight| 6.12.12 @ 11:19AM
In the post feminist world, it's clear that the pill and abortion choices are not oppressing women so much as a shortage of eligible men otherwise there wouldn't be so many unwed mothers living in poverty out there in addition to aging childless career women.
It some ways, the gender roles have reversed where smart, young men with decent incomes need not necessarily be sexually chaste but should at least be cautious. Use a spermicidal condom every time and avoid crazy spinsters with baby rabies.
In some ways, women did benefit as many conservative men (something I write here often) support their daughters having high income careers and pursuing their dreams. That's the silver lining to the cloud. Then they gripe that men aren't living up to 1950's standards anymore and holding open doors and giving up their seat on lifeboats for strange women. I personally wouldn't. Those days of men (voluntarily) living up to those standards are over.
Sadly, rather than inspiring women to be great it instead has resulted in a materialistic society of women encouraged to behave like golddiggers and men to act like bad boys.
cicero| 6.12.12 @ 11:51AM
Young families now seem to have one, or at the most, two children. I remember, as a boy, when all the kids in gradeschool felt sorry for the poor kids that did not have siblings.
Early in my adult life, I investged heavily in small children. Now, as I approach old age, my investments are paying huge dividends. In addition, I will never worry about not haveing a roof over my head, or a seat at the dinner table. See if your 401k can guarantee that.
Occam's Tool| 6.12.12 @ 5:17PM
Good on ya, Cicero.
irish19| 6.12.12 @ 7:10PM
"Early in my adult life, I investged heavily in small children."
I'm pretty sure I know what you mean and I approve. However, that phraseology is just a bit on the creepy side.
Slacker| 6.12.12 @ 12:19PM
Contraception and abortion did not power of the sexual revolution. Late marriage is the dilemma. There is no human tradition of remaining chaste until 30. If you want your daughter to go to grad school and start a career before getting married, well sorry, she is going to have a lot of sex along the way.
E B | 6.12.12 @ 12:40PM
I completely agree with these sentiments on the women's movement (and I am a woman) but for them to carry any weight they need facts and studies behind them. America lost something good when self-control was no longer an encouraged part of relationships, and I think I could argue that that lack of sexual accountability has spilled over into other areas. The irreligious in particular don't seem as concerned with helping other people, considerate behaviors, delayed gratification of any kind, etc. It shows up in our political discourse, public discourse, even private discourse. There are, however, plenty of religious Americans who have not lost these traits.
Petronius| 6.12.12 @ 1:34PM
This column is a direct reflection of a cause of Charles Murray's book. Jane Austen's Gothic fairy tales not with standing, the root of the rot is in the middle. It's the industrial revolution and the pedestrian working middle class who never gave any heed of religious and cultural stricture if they couldn't get jailed for it. My mother and grandmother were deserted by a grandfather, and when Grandma went to court in attempt to collect support, the Judge laughed at her. That was 1928 and my mother was only 5. 15 years earlier H.L. Mencken wrote, "Getting a living is too easy in this country. It gives rise to Inferior men." Those "inferior men" were horny street urchins with more money than brains who if you asked them about Jane Austen would want to know if she was from Texas and does she put out. Once the necessities of dependence the hardscrapple lifestyle inflicted upon most of the population was obviated by expansion and prosperity, Janie could no longer bar the door. Few of those men wanted a great country house with servants, a library, and tea at 4 o'clock. They wanted the bars open all hours and a piece of ass on Saturday night. And except for the fact that the DWI laws have put so many bars out of business, those same social attitudes now inhabit frat houses. Their descendants became the Deltas, and the feminists don't party with them. The herd lumbers on.
THKrupp| 6.12.12 @ 2:32PM
Petronius,
You have hit upon a good point. The scarcity of good men was obviously a problem in Jane Austins time or she wouldnt have had a subject to write about. In your personal history you cite another example. The temperence movement, which was a major precurser to the womans rights movement, was basically about trying to keep men from blowing their paychecks in bars before they got home. There has probably always been a shortage of good men otherwise why would we need to use an adjective to describe them.
PolishKnight| 6.12.12 @ 3:37PM
I think Senaca falls predates the temperance movement by a lot of time, but perhaps not. Anyways... that remark about the women wanting the "good men" to come straight home from work and deposit their paychecks got me to thinking...
Modern leftism here in the states and over in Europe ironically is mostly about punishing working men and providing them with temptations to not work. Extended unemployment, welfare baby mommas, and immigrant laborers (also going on welfare when they qualify) has resulted in the ironically proletariat left with the hammer and sickle emblem now despising working men. Then again, the temperance gals didn't exactly seem to understand WHY the guys were drinking, did they? They didn't come home with their face covered with tar and coal ash from a 12 hour day. Ok, some of them did (from the mills) but those women probably sympathized with the working men. I suspect it was the spoiled bourgeois women with a lot of time on their hands to gripe about the "lazy" men drinking their paycheck away or not caring enough about "women's equality."
THKrupp| 6.12.12 @ 4:12PM
I hadnt ever heard of Senaca Falls before, just looked it up. Thanks. I recently watched Ken Burns documentory on Prohibition. I hadnt realized it had been a long time in the making. It was pre Civil War. It was very interesting and in it he discussed how the temperance movement and the womens rights movement were connected. You are right, one of the driving factors was that men were drinking their paychecks while the children starved or at least that was the claim. It was an interesting documentary and worth watching. I dont know how accurate it was, I have never spent much time reading about that subject.
PolishKnight| 6.12.12 @ 4:29PM
Many leftist MRA's point out to me that there was a trifecta in the "conservative"/republican movement pre-civil war: Women's suffrage, Abolitionism, and temperance. If you think about it, it's rather socialist isn't it? High minded agendas and "it's for the children" and whatnot but the way it was implemented, it was a big government mess resulting in the civil war and a mess that still isn't cleaned up across the board.
Flash forward to today, and the conservatives largely are still the anti-drug warriors/temperance but the left has taken over, and warped, the suffragist and abolitionist (civil rights) movements into their precise opposites. Whenever a leftist whines about the evil big government taking away their joint, I chuckle that perhaps it's good that Ronald Reagan kept it up because that's the only reminder they have that big government is "bad" for them. In theory, of course, they would prefer that the stuff not only be legalized but SUBSIDIZED.
Petronius| 6.12.12 @ 4:19PM
Sad to say even the marines do not want those "good men" anymore. The perverts control the Pentagon so there's no part of this Government worthy of defense. The army has chaplains who are professed Wiccans.
The guy my favorite pizzaria was forced to hire can't read an analog clock or make change, though busing the tables is no problem for him as nothing is breakable. I asked him what his greatest ambition is. He said, "huh, what?'
I asked, "what do you really want to do?"
response: "work at NTB and change tires. $18 an hour to start."
The more They stay the same.
BackToBasics| 6.12.12 @ 6:13PM
from the article - "I have no statistics, but I have no doubt that over-whelmingly it was men who, in this way, launched the pill-enabled sexual revolution. "
It is easy to blame men for most of the ills that befall our society including the problems brought about by the sexual revolution, but I think the fault in general is shared more evenly by both men and women.
In my opinion and in my memory, the largest single event with immediate affects that took place for young people happened when the Beatles appeared on the Ed Sullivan show in February 1964. Where I lived many of the boys wanted to start growing long hair the following week. There seemed to be an increase in rebellion by many of the young overnight.
The effects and change of this as well as other cascading events seem true to many who are old enough to remember. Not every young person was taken in by the 1960's "revolution" but enough did so that everyone was affected by it. The biggest effect of this rebellion and change to me seems to be a lack of common sense that seemed to "mightily" and "quickly" grip enough of our nation's population in 1964, 1965 to change our direction and the fact that the older people did nothing to stop it. As of today, we have not recovered from this in the least and have replaced it in larger measure with confusion and rebellion in every successive year.
"Righteousness exalts a nation: but sin is a reproach to any people." Proverbs 14:34
BackToBasics| 6.13.12 @ 11:03PM
La justice grandit une nation, mais le péché est une honte pour tout peuple.