What caused the 'sexual revolution?'

[SgtSchultz]

Hello Ed,

As I mentioned in response to an earlier post, the origins and causes of the Sexual Revolution cannot be US-specific, as it is something that affects cultures in developed countries all over the world. Your supreme court’s decisions, your health and welfare regulators, etc., have no impact on the rest of the world in this regard.

Instead, I’d encourage you to focus on the destructive ideologies and misinformation that led to the perversion of culture which enabled itself to manifest in your country through the venues you’ve mentioned. You’re confusing cause and effect. (This doesn’t mean that your overall theme is incorrect, just that it needs to realise that you don’t live in a vacuum. What your courts do does not affect me.)

Again, since the Sexual Revolution was not something unique to the US, nor was it something specific to that geographic location, things that the US government decided to do domestically is not a valid explanation for why the Sexual Revolution happened.

 

[edwest2]

The cause was the repression of womens sexuality. Men were being dirtbags in the area of fidelity and women on some level found freedom and liberation in being promiscuous. It backfired for the women and further for the men. We are now left to pick up the pieces.

Do you have any credible reference to back up that claim - especially about “repression”?

Peace,
Ed

 

[edwest2]

The “sexual revolution” came about due to easy access to the birth control pill in the '60’s.

That is not accurate.

Peace,
Ed

 

[edwest2]

It’s amazing to me because sex is not really that exciting. To me, the sexual revolution was planned by increases in the libido and the availability of contraceptions. Without the increase in the libido, the sex revolution may never have happened.

“increases in the libido”? How?

Peace,
Ed

 

[edwest2]

(shortened by Tomarin)

Then why was the soundtrack so good?

You’re joking, right? I heard all that stuff and saw where it was going. That’s why I can’t understand Strawberry Fields or Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds. The Beatles went from She Loves You to songs about illegal drugs. Looking back, I’m glad they broke up, and the filth and even lies John Lennon did and sung about later. I would ask: John? What happened to you?

Peace,
Ed

 

[Robert_Sock]

Planned? By whom, God? God doesn’t plan evil. He can bring good out of it…and that’s your question: Where’s the good?

If you believe that society is evolving on it’s own, you should have another thought coming. Look at Western culture over the past 150 years and try telling me it too all evolved by chance. Nothing affecting our culture is by chance.

 

[edwest2]

Hello Ed,

As I mentioned in response to an earlier post, the origins and causes of the Sexual Revolution cannot be US-specific, as it is something that affects cultures in developed countries all over the world. Your supreme court’s decisions, your health and welfare regulators, etc., have no impact on the rest of the world in this regard.

Instead, I’d encourage you to focus on the destructive ideologies and misinformation that led to the perversion of culture which enabled itself to manifest in your country through the venues you’ve mentioned. You’re confusing cause and effect. (This doesn’t mean that your overall theme is incorrect, just that it needs to realise that you don’t live in a vacuum. What your courts do does not affect me.)

Again, since the Sexual Revolution was not something unique to the US, nor was it something specific to that geographic location, things that the US government decided to do domestically is not a valid explanation for why the Sexual Revolution happened.

I have no idea what you are talking about, In the late 1960s and the years to come, there were two - only two - superpowers willing to destroy the planet. All the other countries were just ‘bit players.’

I have the global view as well. The entire West was poisoned.

Peace,
Ed

 

[manualman]

I have no idea what you are talking about, In the late 1960s and the years to come, there were two - only two - superpowers willing to destroy the planet. All the other countries were just ‘bit players.’

I have the global view as well. The entire West was poisoned.

I may not agree with Ed that the rest of the world were ‘bit players’ but I will agree that what happened in the US was in lockstep with what was happening throughout western civilization.

I also don’t think there was an organized cabal that put this whole thing together. As I showed in my timeline, the entire thing follows, one from the other. No central planning necessary.

 

[Robert_Sock]

“increases in the libido”? How?

Peace,
Ed

In the foods we eat. In the music we listen to. In the media we gape at. There are structures in the brain that function to facilitate the libido. Whoever has control over these structures can easily control the libido.

 

[kompaz]

1938-1945: A generation of men and women traumatized by war fall for the promise of ‘protection from VD’ as condoms first become widely available. Thus starts the first wave of the false assertion that marriage, sex and babies can be separate subjects.

That ignores one important factor, which is economic independence of women.

The so-called traditional family model was based on keeping women out of labor marker and dependent on their husband to provide for them. Young women had practically two options, which were (1) get married or (2) join a convent. Hence high marriage rate and low divorce rate: a married woman would put up with a lot, because the alternative was poverty. (For a contemporary example, look at Islamic countries.)

Then WW2 forced men to the from and women into factories. The result was that women suddenly became able to provide for themselves, and the economic incentive for marriage disappeared. At the societal level, it took women one generation to realize that fact, but the daughters of WW2 women largely rejected the traditional marriage model… and so, in the West, the traditional family went boom about 1970.

2000-present: Rebellious clergy slowly weeded out of the church either through their own failure to spiritually reproduce or the weight of their own sexual failings/scandals. JPII generation of priests FAR more faithful to Tradition and orthodox doctrine.

That will not work. Sorry.

The Catholic Church is still fighting with the 1968 revolution, probably because its leadership was shaped by it. This is best evidenced by the Traditionalist / SSPX faction, who believes that if they go back to pre-Vaticanum II rites, everything will come back to how it was in 1950s. The 80-year-old leadership wants to go back to 1950s, because that’s when they were 20 years old, and the world is perfect when you are 20 years old, while the 20-year-old seminarians want to go back to 1950s, because the 80-year-old leadership has sold them the idealized vision of 1950s.

Except you cannot go back to 1950s, because the world of 1950s is no more. Women have economic independence, and they are not giving it back. Heavy industry has gone the way of the dodo and it’s not going back either, so no hope the social structure of 1950s could be revived; it’s dead and buried. Economic pressures to not have children are not going to lessen, they are only going to get worse. Contraceptives cannot be un-invented, and War on Drugs has demonstrated that attempts to restrict circulation of chemicals are futile at best and counterproductive at worst. Attempts to outlaw abortion are laughable when abortifacient drugs can be fedexed from Holland over night.

Catholic Church alone appears determined to completely undo the causes of the sexual collapse of Western civilization.

Spare me. The Western fertility has not been ruined by contraceptives (it’s a tool, nothing more), but by economic policy which has made it unbearable for common people to have children.

Do you understand that a child born in 2000s in the US is facing a lifetime debt slavery?

Do you understand that a child born in 2000s in Europe will work all of its life paying high taxes and getting nothing in return?

Do you understand that a child born in 2000s in East Asia will probably die in a war over access to fresh water by the age of 40?

Do you understand that in conditions like these it is objectively immoral to have children?

Do you understand that the Vatican fails to offer the faithful guidance concerning the real problems of the future, and instead obsesses for the last 40 years over theological implications of cervical mucus? [1]

[1] forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?p=9481374

 

[SgtSchultz]

Spare me. The Western fertility has not been ruined by contraceptives (it’s a tool, nothing more), but by economic policy which has made it unbearable for common people to have children.

Do you understand that a child born in 2000s in the US is facing a lifetime debt slavery?

Do you understand that a child born in 2000s in Europe will work all of its life paying high taxes and getting nothing in return?

Do you understand that a child born in 2000s in East Asia will probably die in a war over access to fresh water by the age of 40?

I disagree with your claim that the contraceptive culture has not caused a decline in the fertility rate and a general cheapening of our culture, an increase in the sexualisation of anything and everything, destruction of marriage, etc. However, your comments on the economic problems of our day are spot-on.

This is why I have problems with those who associate with the label of “left” as well as “right”. Both have been responsible for making all of the world’s problems worse.

EDIT:

As for the teachings against abortion, these stem from the idea that if you cheapen one life, you cheapen them all. If one is allowed to arbitrarily decide who is a human and who is not, the outcome is truly evil. Look at all the great horrors of the 20th century that were caused by people who demeaned human life, regardless of whether they were born, unborn, old, young, handicapped, etc.

 

[tomarin]

You’re joking, right? I heard all that stuff and saw where it was going. That’s why I can’t understand Strawberry Fields or Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds. The Beatles went from She Loves You to songs about illegal drugs. Looking back, I’m glad they broke up, and the filth and even lies John Lennon did and sung about later. I would ask: John? What happened to you?

Peace,
Ed

I’m not joking. I think the popular music of the sixties was better than that of the decades before and after it; this is not something that most people would disagree with.

 

[tomarin]

You’re joking, right? I heard all that stuff and saw where it was going. That’s why I can’t understand Strawberry Fields or Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds. The Beatles went from She Loves You to songs about illegal drugs. Looking back, I’m glad they broke up, and the filth and even lies John Lennon did and sung about later. I would ask: John? What happened to you?

Peace,
Ed

I don’t think it’s all that controversial a statement.

 

[SgtSchultz]

This is why I have problems with those who associate with the label of “left” as well as “right”. Both have been responsible for making all of the world’s problems worse.

Since I can’t edit my post again, let me clarify. I am here referring to politicians, especially the ones who use thoughtless hyperbole. I’m not talking about everyday people, more ideologies.

 

[edwest2]

In the foods we eat. In the music we listen to. In the media we gape at. There are structures in the brain that function to facilitate the libido. Whoever has control over these structures can easily control the libido.

That is a somewhat bizarre comment, and suggests an organized effort. What is your solution?

Peace,
Ed

 

[TheRealJuliane]

You’re joking, right? I heard all that stuff and saw where it was going. That’s why I can’t understand Strawberry Fields or Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds. The Beatles went from She Loves You to songs about illegal drugs. Looking back, I’m glad they broke up, and the filth and even lies John Lennon did and sung about later. I would ask: John? What happened to you?

Peace,
Ed

LSD and Yoko Ono, for two things.

 

[SgtSchultz]

LSD and Yoko Ono, for two things.

Two things every man would be wise to avoid, amirite?

Also, I never cared for any of the songs that John Lennon wrote. The good songs were the ones by Paul McCartney.

 

[johnnyjones]

Do you have any credible reference to back up that claim - especially about “repression”?

Peace,
Ed

Prior decades. Unless you can show women speaking openly about their sexuality in print, media and home life in the 1940s and 50s. Squashing tends to lead to repression. Psychology 101.

 

[SgtSchultz]

Personally, I think we’d all be better off if no one spoke openly about their sexuality, especially in media. That kind of thing is something that should be private, maybe among your mates at the pub, but definitely in a setting no more public than that.

I’m tired of hearing about people feeling the need to announce their sexual proclivities to the world. They act like it’s their God given right to do so and to demand that others listen. It’s cheap, tawdry, and tasteless. Such people are not right in the head and feel the need to get confirmation of their self-worth from others. It’s quite sad.

 

[johnnyjones]

Personally, I think we’d all be better off if no one spoke openly about their sexuality, especially in media. That kind of thing is something that should be private, maybe among your mates at the pub, but definitely in a setting no more public than that.

I’m tired of hearing about people feeling the need to announce their sexual proclivities to the world. They act like it’s their God given right to do so and to demand that others listen. It’s cheap, tawdry, and tasteless. Such people are not right in the head and feel the need to get confirmation of their self-worth from others. It’s quite sad.

I agree, it is more often counterproductive.