Since Americans have given up, more and more for the last century and a half, trying to be “decent God-fearing folks”, our cultures’ sexual morality has predictably suffered. And we needn’t invoke Old or New Testament teaching to say so, either. It can be measured in the level of care and caution and charity found in the arrangements around sex. Compared to, say, 1895, we are positively profligate.
A century ago, terms like boyfriend and girlfriend were not used to describe the romantic relations between the marriageable young among polite society. Parents knew what drove the young and social arrangements and rules protected against unwanted economic and social outcomes of uncoordinated coupling. Marriage attended sex, not because of some silly obsolete rule, but because sex is also attended by a host of consequences best handled by loving couples–pregnancy just being one. Many young couples found themselves given in to passionate moments and temptation, but on the whole, these “did the right thing” and made the commitments after that might’ve ideally come before their unions.
For reason beautifully explained here, mostly people responding to new artificial social incentives through the progressive era, arrangements that were previously matters of household division of labor (i.e. economic) now became political. Rather than counting a man’s success in the public sphere as standard of living and financial independence he achieved and brought home to wife and family, it became status achieved compared to others out in the public sphere. Men were now encouraged to enjoy praise, intimacy and approval he once married a and loved a woman to get… from hierarchies and secretaries. Women then wanted in on the illicit fun, and, not just equality with men (which they arguably had enjoyed in well-made homes) but specifically sexual freedom. They wanted to vote independently of their households, and they wanted to shag the secretary themselves.
Since then, given the “feminist” influence on the government instruction of America’s young, our mouths are trained to remain full of cliches about “autonomy”, “independence”, and “sexual freedom/equality”, and their undisciplined eyes never stop looking to greener pastures. It’s all about self, all about jobs (as opposed to entrepreneurship and financial autonomy), and it’s all about advantage.
The typical marriage either fails or at least overcomes years of strife–repentance, a constant necessity between spouses, being nearly completely out of vogue. Often couples kick each other to curb for the one demanding too much loyalty, too much time, too much attention, too much of everything they first entered the relationship initially to get and receive.
A healthy, happy marriage, by stark contrast, beholds a couple who are joyfully possessive of each other. There aren’t boundaries between them outside those defined by affection and respect. They are together to enjoy each other’s jealousy, so to speak. They were sad and cold and dull on their own… now they enjoy each other’s warmth and challenge. These are happy to pay the price of faithfulness, discipline, and humility; affording themselves/each-other the stability and wealth inherent to a free and loving household.
Recent pop-relationship-dynamics, however,exemplify what plagues all modern social attitude across the culture: folks now seem to want, instead, to play the whore, revel in private indulgence, clutching their privacy desperately, trying at every instance to get an unfair moral return on lives in which they’ve made no substantial moral investment.
…Then of course they bitch the louder when they find themselves dispossessed and unloved.
We revel in debt, then despise our obligations.
We prefer power to persuasion and leadership, then despise our tyrannies.
We want our “society” and our “community” without willing to undergo the discomforts of local loyalty and caring.
We are whores who want to be loved and respected like wives.
It was from a world-class whore that we’ve inherited the main trunk of our political economy: namely John Maynard Keynes. He was raised in British upper-crust private school where sexual victimization was a fact of a boy’s life, through his college years he traveled and a-whored through southern Italy and northern Africa. His hatred of the Christian morality, especially sexual morality, was well known.
His program of perpetual personal and government spending, and position against the responsible opposite, then, should come as little surprise. And he’s not the only whore to influence our public financial policy whorishly! Many a financially influential power-monger in Washington also a-whored about the world.
It would be tedious at this point in history to elaborate how whorish politics itself has become. But jumping ahead to present to examine our current financial situation reveals the exact opposite of the family saving to give their kids the inheritance sufficient to raise them a social class or two. Rather we’ve mortgaged, not just our children’s future productivity, but through our children’s children’s future productivity–all for present consumption.
We’re almost literally the whore who robbed our child for party-fare and drugs.
Soon enough, we’ll almost literally be the old, tired, unloved, drug-addled whore, sitting alone in the elder-asylum, with no family to love them; we simply didn’t raise one. Any offspring we had, we misused, morally neglected, and financially robbed.
But we still want our “freedom”. Our “positive freedoms”.
Even though we revel in debt, then despise our obligations.
We prefer power to persuasion and leadership, then despise our tyrannies.
We want our “society” and our “community” without willing to undergo the discomforts of local loyalty and caring.
We are whores who want to be loved and respected like wives.
Politguard 