Once again I excerpt from the book, Life at the Bottom,
All of these enthusiasts believed that if sexual relations could be liberated from artificial social inhibitions and legal restrictions, something beautiful would emerge: a life in which no desire need be frustrated, a life in which human pettiness would melt away like snow in spring.
The programme of the sexual revolutionaries has more or less been carried out, especially in the lower reaches of society, but the results have been vastly different from those so foolishly anticipated. The revolution foundered on the rock of unacknowledged reality:that women are more vulnerable to abuse than men by virtue of their biology alone, and that the desire for the exclusive sexual possession has remained just as strong as ever. This desire is incompatible, of course, with the equally powerful desire — eternal in the human breast, but hitherto controlled by social and legal inhibitions — for complete sexual freedom. Because of these biological and psychological realities, the harvest of the sexual revolution has not been a brave new world of human happiness but rate an enormous increase in violence between the sexes, for readily understandable reasons.
Of course, even before any explanation, the reality of this increase meets angry denial from those with a vested idealogical interest in concealing the results of changes that they helped bring about and heartily welcome.
In the past five years I have treated at least 2000 men who have been violent to their wives, girlfriends, lovers and concubines. It seems to me that violence on such a vast scale could not easily have ben overlooked in the past — including by me. And there is a very good reason why such violence should have increased under the new sexual dispensation. If people demand sexual liberty for themselves, but sexual fidelity from others, the result is an inflammation of jealousy, for it is natural to suppose that one is being done by as one is doing to others — and jealousy is the most frequent precipitant of violence between the sexes.
So it would seem that the “mixed” model that society has chosen does not work so well. The choice is mixed in the sense that one gets to pursue sexual license if one so desires, and is effectively allowed to enforce the lack of on their partner if they are able. And naturally there is tension between the two ends, and the means of resolving this tension is often local enforcement. Which does not work out well for anybody (especially children). However, as made clear in the book, women do get ample tingles in such an environment (a future post).
So the mixed model does not work, and only survives total chaos because it is subsidized from the outside. What about a “total sexual license model” (just say no to jealousy)? Probably many people might think that this would be awesomely fun, but jealousy is inevitable. And it will come on strongly. Especially in an environment where other inhibitions are relaxed. So this appears to not be do-able. After all, did any of the 1960’s hippies free love communes ever last more than a week? Or a day?
What does that leave? Well it would appear that the only stable model (and it can be truly stable– no outside subsidies) is committed relationships.
What is next?