Good morning, Clown World!
What’s going on today in liberal democracy which we all know is the greatest and most glorious form of government ever devised by the genius of man?
Today NPR has a book review on UNIVERSAL FEMALENESS:
“Simone de Beauvoir famously wrote that “one is not born, but rather becomes, a woman,” a claim I could imagine making writer and critic Andrea Long Chu roll her eyes.
At the very least, Chu has an update: “Everyone is female,” she writes in the appropriately titled Females, her first book, “and everyone hates it.” …
In Females — part memoir, part theoretical intervention — Chu explores and defends this claim about universal femaleness, perhaps as much to herself as to anyone else.
Of course, the “female” identity on which the book is based is admittedly less a biological condition than an existential one. … In other words, to be female — which, remember, we all are — is to not express your own desires, identity, personality but rather those of others, impressed upon you. And gender, it follows for Chu, is what people do to deal with the terrible fact of being female. …
Chu asks: Instead of something stable and inherent — known and knowable, and inescapable right down to our very souls — what if gender is an extension of who we want to be? What if this quality of wanting didn’t separate transgender people from cisgender people, but were instead a universal condition of gender itself? …
But no one is so close to Chu’s heart in Females as Valerie Solanas, the author and artist famous for writing the SCUM Manifesto, a radical text bent on eliminating the male sex (and for shooting and nearly killing Andy Warhol in 1968).”
As we saw yesterday, there is nothing that science can tell us about being male or female. There are hard limits to what it can say about that question. The truth is that there is no such thing as maleness or masculinity. In fact, we are all female because desire is feminine. Also, if we wish upon a star, then we can be whatever gender we want to be.
Today the Intellectual Dork Web site Quillette is PUSHING POLYAMORY:
“We need to talk about polyamory. It’s the biggest sexual revolution since the 1960s. It’s surprisingly common among Millennials and Gen Z. It’s often misunderstood and stigmatized by mainstream monogamist culture. Some people think polyamory is the best way to integrate sexual freedom, honesty, openness, and commitment. Others think it’s an existential threat to Western Civilization. …
The keywords here are “openness” and “sexual freedom.”
After the mainstreaming of transgenderism and gender fluidity, polyamory is the next logical step of the Open Society in throwing off all restraints on human sexuality in the name of the pursuit of individual freedom. Why can’t you choose to have multiple partners? If it feels good and makes you happy, why shouldn’t you be allowed to do it? Nothing else matters because there is nothing higher than your basest impulses anyway.
“Polyamorous or open relationships are usually based on “consensual non-monogamy“—the idea that relationships can be loving, committed, and serious, without being sexually exclusive. It’s a more libertarian approach to sexuality, in which people can negotiate custom relationships, like contracts between firms or treaties between countries,while still retaining some sexual sovereignty and freedom of mate choice. Polyamory takes freedom of association seriously—not just in social and political life, but in the sexual realm. If you can choose to have more than one child, more than one friend, and more than one work colleague, you should be free to choose more than one sexual partner. …
When I taught my university course on “Polyamory and Open Sexuality” in 2017, my undergrads were astonished that being poly was more common than being gay—even though most of them personally had more poly friends than gay friends.
Poly relationships can work very well for some people. I’ve been in a successful open relationship for five years, and we’re getting married next month. Poly people report relationship satisfaction as high as or higher than monogamous people, often with different partners fulfilling different needs. But poly relationships are hard for several reasons. …
Poly doesn’t have a civilizational support system yet. We’re not brought up to know how it could work. It’s tough to be gay in a straight world; it’s tough to be a sex-positive woman in a slut-shaming world; it’s tough to be polyamorous in a monogamist world. Imagine if your culture’s norm was polyamory, and you were trying to invent monogamy from scratch, without any of monogamy’s religious, legal, cultural, or media infrastructure. You would probably have a high failure rate too. …
Monogamous exclusivity reduces those incentives. As mating effort gives way to parenting effort, traditional married couples often get lazy about their intellectual, social, and political lives. By contrast, open relationships incentivize people to stay healthy, fit, creative, and funny, because they’re always in the mating market.”
Polyamory is not just satisfying,
It is better than heterosexual monogamy. Polyamorous people are always in the mating market rather than in the “parenting effort.” Notice how thoroughly the language of liberalism and capitalism has penetrated the mindset of these people.
“Polyamory is going mainstream, like it or not. You already have poly neighbors and coworkers, whether you know it or not. Many of your own kids are likely to end up in poly relationships. Many of you might end up in poly relationships, sooner or later. …”
I agree that polyamory is going “mainstream.”
There are absolutely no limits to liberalism. We laugh now at Piers Morgan identifying as a two-spirit penguin, but if Andrea Chua is right that gender is an expression of what we desire to be rather than some kind of nature grounded in our biology and everyone is female because men do not exist, then why can’t Piers be a two-spirit penguin?
Polyamory is a logical consequence of the Open Society like every step of the Sexual Revolution before it. It is another weakening of traditional Christian norms. It is yet another rejection of tradition and authority in favor of an expansion of individual freedom and pleasure and novelty seeking. You can find Geoffrey Miller at his website www.primalpoly.com and on Twitter at @primalpoly where he spends his time as an evangelist for polyamory. Everyone it seems has to believe in something in life and this is what he has chosen to fill the void.