this is the drama reborn
kiwifarms.net
- Registrado
- 24 de Ene, 2023
The paradox of the sexual revolution bugs me. The right likes to paint the left as sexual deviants. While some of the left promote sexual deviant behavior, most of it is optics. You also have people on the left who think that they can bring about a queer revolution. But I doubt that they will succeed due to human nature. While FTM had an increase in population, most of them tend to have very "heteronormative" relationship. I know one FTM in a relationship with a non-binary male. The FTM cooks and cleans. Millennials and Gen Z are having less sex. About 20% of heterosexual men have more of an opportunity to get laid than the bottom. Leading to some men becoming bisexual or transexual. On the flipside, marriage for the upper classes in most of the developed world is going strong. The only losers in this situation is the bottom 50%. Despite everything, marriage and children is ideal for the majority of people.
ETA:
I guess my thesis would be that the sexual revolution failed in the sense that sex is still messy and carries meaning. Sex is probably more messy along with being bureaucratic. The sexual revolution sought to liberate men and women from a repressive society. However, it had the opposite effect where it revealed how shackled people are by human nature. In fact, the sexual revolution reveals that men and women are fundamentally different. I would also argue that the whole queer liberation was also a failure.
The result was not free love or even universal love. Only the top 20% of males tend to get the type of sex that they dream of. The rest tend to struggle just to get one woman to look there way. Marriage for economic reasons has become a status symbol. As only those with the education and income are more likely to get married.
People in the queer movement want to argue that sex can transcends one's sex and sexual preference. But that files in the face of everyday people with real world concerns. The majority of women will never date a bisexual man or man who had sex with other men. While bisexuality does exist, I noticed that bisexual activist routinely ignore the reason why heterosexual women discount them as gay is because they carry a risk. Bisexuality even among homosexuals is a land mine. The majority of homosexuals tend to view bisexuals with suspicion.
ETA:
I guess my thesis would be that the sexual revolution failed in the sense that sex is still messy and carries meaning. Sex is probably more messy along with being bureaucratic. The sexual revolution sought to liberate men and women from a repressive society. However, it had the opposite effect where it revealed how shackled people are by human nature. In fact, the sexual revolution reveals that men and women are fundamentally different. I would also argue that the whole queer liberation was also a failure.
The result was not free love or even universal love. Only the top 20% of males tend to get the type of sex that they dream of. The rest tend to struggle just to get one woman to look there way. Marriage for economic reasons has become a status symbol. As only those with the education and income are more likely to get married.
People in the queer movement want to argue that sex can transcends one's sex and sexual preference. But that files in the face of everyday people with real world concerns. The majority of women will never date a bisexual man or man who had sex with other men. While bisexuality does exist, I noticed that bisexual activist routinely ignore the reason why heterosexual women discount them as gay is because they carry a risk. Bisexuality even among homosexuals is a land mine. The majority of homosexuals tend to view bisexuals with suspicion.
Última edición:
