All Episodes
Previous Next
June 16, 2020 - Davis Aurini
21:47
Sex-Positive Vs Sex-Negative Feminism: Both Are Anti-Sex

YouTube Re-up.

| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
The inspiration for this video was something Zerce posted right there about how sex positive feminism isn't all that it's cracked up to be.
And you know, this reflects something I've been thinking a lot about lately, partly inspired by something the author John C. Wright said.
He observed that heresies usually tend to come in pairs.
Two equal and opposite heresies, both of them aberrations of the truth.
And what we see in feminism with sex positive and sex negative is a perfect example of this, because even though they're both completely opposite to each other, they're also, both of them, completely anti-sex.
Now to explain what I mean by this, we're going to need to discuss teleology, the telos of things, and what the telos of sex is.
But before we get to that, let's talk about teleology in general.
Teleology is the understanding that humans have a being within themselves.
They have a purpose, a direction, and that the objects we create similarly have their own teleologies to them, their own purposes innate to the device.
And so I'd like to give a couple of examples of that so that we're on the same page here.
Take a gun, for example.
A pistol in particular.
The telos of a pistol is killing other human beings.
That's it.
That is why the device was built.
Not for the shooting range, not to look cool, not to have fun.
It was built to kill other human beings.
Now, this is something that I think the left innately senses.
And they're terrified of it because of that.
Because the idea of killing another person, not murdering, but killing another person, because to murder somebody you can use anything.
The gun makes everybody equally capable of killing.
It's the great equalizer of man.
And to talk about death is to talk about judgment, because death is something you can't argue with.
It's not a matter of opinion, and it really upsets their entire worldview of relativism, of subjectivism, of your opinion's just as good as my opinion.
When a gun fires, it makes a decision.
And so I've seen some liberal writers say that something like a gun can't be beautiful.
And yet, they are beautiful, aren't they?
Why is that?
Well, I would say it's beautiful in the same way that a well-constructed and just courthouse can be beautiful.
When guns are used not just for their intended purpose, but their intended purpose combined with man's moral nature, when they are used as tools to ultimately preserve human life, they are absolutely beautiful.
And that's something Jaeger said, is that you should only ever fire your gun at another human being to protect life.
Never property, never to win an argument.
You fire your gun only to preserve life.
And that is beautiful.
And that is.
That is the teleology of the pistol.
Now that said, it's very interesting to note how seldom pistols are actually used to do precisely that, to shoot another human being.
On the one hand, the fact is that the vast majority of bullets created are used for target shooting, are used for practice or for fun.
And yet that's not the purpose of the gun.
A pistol doesn't exist so you can win a pistol competition.
It exists to shoot other human beings.
And yet even in cases where a righteous citizen wielding a pistol prevents an assault, prevents a murder from happening, in 99% of those cases, not a single round is fired.
And so you have this very interesting example of a device that is designed and intended to kill other people that almost never does that.
Another example of a device with the teleology to it is the automobile.
The automobile, its teleology is merely transport to get you from A to B, to be a personal transport mechanism.
Now with cars, very occasionally, it's very seldom, but it happens.
There are people that like to race them.
You know, the Indy 500, you know, whatever.
Or even people that like to customize their own cars, people that like to drive sports cars.
And yet, we see with these, we see with sports cars in general, that nonetheless, even though they are designed to be very fast and look cool, their primary function, their true teleology, is still moving you from A to B.
See, if you are building an actual race car to be used at the Indy 500, an actual race car is not something you would ever want to drive.
The suspension is so stiff that your butt is going to be numb by within 20 minutes of driving it because you're going to feel every bump on the road.
There's not going to be any wasted space on a radio or on an air conditioning unit.
The car is going to be absolutely bare bones and designed exclusively for speed.
Actual sports cars, actual race cars, are not something you ever want to drive.
And so the personal sports car, even if you're showing out 200K on a Lamborghini, it Is far too compromised to actually be a racetrack car.
It is primarily a device to go from A to B while pretending you're on a racetrack, but at the same time surrounded by creature comforts.
You can see it in the nature of things.
How is this thing designed?
What is its purpose?
And even a very fast Lamborghini, its primary purpose is to move you from A to B in comfort, in luxury, and to do so as efficiently as they can get away with.
So this finally brings us to sex.
What is the teleology of sex?
Well, I suggest we consider a few things when it comes to sex to ultimately discover its purpose.
And the first thing I'd like to talk about is the attraction triggers that men and women have.
They're unique attraction triggers to the other sex.
Now, with men, men are primarily attracted to youth and signs of fertility.
High-heel shoes mimic an aroused woman.
The makeup makes a woman look younger, accentuates her secondary sexual features, etc.
Women, meanwhile, are primarily attracted to accomplishment.
Men that have demonstrated that they have good genes.
And so, although they also will be more attracted to younger men, all else equal, they'll want a younger guy rather than an older guy, but the accomplishment is far, far more important for what women are attracted to.
And so, this right here, the very nature of sexual attraction, is oriented towards producing the optimum offspring.
An offspring that has good, healthy genes from the father, and who has a mother who is fertile and young enough to have a child.
The next point worth considering is romance and relationships.
The sexual act has a very strong pair bonding mechanism connected to it.
The entire mating dance, the entire aspect of romance, is about finding intimacy with another person.
It's about finding somebody you can be completely open and honest with, somebody that you can truly trust.
The act itself leads towards a long-term relationship, suggesting that sex is about a little bit more than just reproducing.
And finally, let's consider the fact that fatherhood exists.
That men in our species, when a woman is pregnant, when a woman gives birth, we have very, very strong protective instincts towards her and towards the child.
All of these three things considered leads me to conclude that the purpose of sex, it's not merely reproduction, It's creating families.
The man, woman, and the child.
That is the purpose of sex.
To balance the masculine and feminine in love and trust and creating an institution which can raise children.
And that this institution is the building block of society.
Not just making babies and not just having fun.
But to build a life together.
Because without married couples, you have no civilization.
Now, a couple of critiques to all of this, of course.
You know, one of the critiques people will point out is that most sex is infertile.
You know, not just, sometimes we'll bring up married couples where one of them or both of them are infertile, but the fact that the majority of sex that we have as a species is not productive.
It is not fertile.
A woman's only fertile for a few days every month, and yet sexual attraction exists throughout the month.
Well, I refer you again to the pistol I was talking about earlier.
See, a car, its teleology, is transporting you A to B. Not moving fast.
You get a jet engine if you want to move fast.
It's to move you from A and B efficiently.
Whereas the pistol, it's designed to kill people, but they seldom ever do.
Well, the same thing goes for sex.
Yes, the ultimate purpose is producing children in a family, but that does not mean that sex is always going to produce children or that it always has to use, has to produce children.
There is nothing wrong with taking your pistol and going to the range to practice or even just going to the range to have fun, so long as you remember its ultimate purpose is killing people, and owning a pistol is a deep moral responsibility.
Same thing with sex.
Yes, it's a lot of fun.
Yes, most of the sex you have with your wife is not going to produce children.
And yet, that production of children, that production of a family, is the ultimate purpose.
Next, there will be the argument that there are all sorts of families.
There's the sultan with his mistresses, and there's the lesbian couple that's raising rainbow sunshine butterfly cup.
Except this argument right there only serves to support the idea that sex is about forming the family.
Because whatever sort of relationship that you point to, you know, you point to the gay couple or the lesbian couple that is raising children, it's always a sexual relationship.
Nowhere do you actually find that movie from the 80s, three men and a baby.
If family formation were completely arbitrary, then you would expect to find straight men who live together, who are roommates, wanting to raise a child together.
And they both go out on weekends, separate weekends, I guess, and sleep around with all the tramps.
You don't find that.
What you find is with any of these aberrant models is you still find this sexual union going on And only then does the desire to raise children together occur.
So, yeah, children in sexual unions, you know, they go together like love and marriage, as Sinatra would say.
And finally, you've got the issue of prophylactics.
Again, this completely misses the point.
Yes, you can take a car and never leave the garage with it.
You can buy a gun and stock up nothing but blanks.
That doesn't change what the intended purpose of it was.
To pair bond and create the family.
Similarly with sex, you could just masturbate all the time.
You're missing the point of it, if that's what you're doing.
And so with all that considered, now we can get to how feminism, both forms of it, sex positive and sex negative, how it's fundamentally anti-sex.
Now it's important to remember that both of these are kind of working in tandem with each other, encouraging higher extremes of both forms.
And see, if you try and argue against one, they'll say you're sex negative.
If you try and argue against sex negative, they'll just say you're sex positive when you're talking about the truth.
You're talking about the higher purpose behind all of this.
So with early feminism, you get the breakdown of the marriage.
So men are now less trustworthy or less willing to trust women.
And so men demand more and more from women before they'll commit.
They want easier access to sex.
And the women who give that easy access to sex wind up regretting it.
Because again, sex positive, it's lots of fun when you're young and beautiful and you're in your 20s.
But just completely ignoring the fact that having multiple partners makes it more difficult for you to pair bond with somebody.
Completely ignoring that fact, if you spend your 20s just pursuing sex for fun, ultimately, you're going to be, when you're older and when you're a bit more burned out, that's when you're going to start looking for a real relationship.
You're going to have wasted your youth pursuing all this nonsense.
You know, imagine going to university and spending the first five years switching major each year.
Yeah, you can still major in something down the road, but you've just wasted all of that time because you got a few tingles.
You had a little bit of fun with the whole thing.
And so you get women that went through that.
Or women that see their sisters going through that.
And women that are less attractive than other women.
Who are now, again, that unattractive woman in a previous era where we didn't have these particular problems going on, these particular heresies, previous era, she could have found a guy.
But with all of this completely uncontrolled sex going on, she is now forever alone.
And so she gets embittered by the whole thing.
She gets angry at men.
She feels like she was exploited.
Because deep down, psychologically, women know that their womanhood, their womb, is worth more than a cheap Friday night fling.
They know that instinctively, deep down, deep subconscious.
They try and believe otherwise, because again, the sex-positive world of no responsibility sounds like an attractive place to live.
Deep down, they know it.
They get embittered, and so they start getting angry.
And rather than get angry at themselves, or rather than get angry at those who misled them, they get angry at all the men who they slept with, because instinctively, deep down, they know they're worth more than that.
That they should not be giving it up for free.
But rather than admit their own mistake, they decide to blame the men for all of that.
But whichever route you go down, if you go down the sex-negative route, then you are just so embittered, you can't give yourself to the sexual experience fully, you're so angry about it that you're never going to have good sex.
You just can't do it.
And with the sex-positive route, you'll have some really good orgasms, you'll have some really good individual sexual encounters, but none of it is ever going to go anywhere.
And none of us are getting younger, none of us are getting more attractive.
So you've put yourself on this slowly declining roller coaster.
Rather than a man and woman coming together, growing old together, becoming part of the community, and loving each other more deeply and intensely with each year that passes, you had some fun times in your 20s and 30s.
So both of these stances, when you come right down to it, are anti-sex.
They are anti-man, anti-woman, and anti-child, and anti-life.
Whether you're sex positive or sex negative, you're following the trail to dusty death.
▲
Export Selection