NB: I began this post just over a week ago. The second half is coming soon to a blog near you. This one.
There is an awkward consensus seeping from the outside world into the manosphere that so how the dearth of marriage leads to the end of society; all civilization comes to a halt when a certain number of men bang sluts, or when a certain number of women are ex-carosellers syphoning green bills from half-wit, half-men. Splat wrote a little bit about this. His timing for my purposes could not have been better as these same thoughts have been working their way around my gray matter for the last few days, and though it is moving day tomorrow I am compelled to flesh this out.
There is indubitable decline permeating all facets of society; one would be foolish to expect that twenty years will see no marked charge, or that the change coming will necessarily be for the better; however, to blame feminism, or failing marriage, or neglect of biblical principals, or any other rancid philosophical position in toto is patently silly–silly to a degree beyond a pet shop selling dead parrots. Banging sluts is not the problem. That is what all those philosophies come down to. Feminism::All Women Should Be Land Hogs And Sluts (Praise God that some women weren’t paying attention and just heard, All Women . . .Be. . .Sluts); Failing Marriage::All Women Want A Better Mate (i.e. be sluts); Neglect of biblical principals::Chaste Women Are Antiques (i.e. be current, be sluts).
Promiscuity is not a bad thing in itself. That is to say, banging sluts doesn’t break the world or ruin it.
Universal suffrage ruins the world. Not everyone should be entitled to a vote. Like most of their decisions women vote with their emotions; ask a women who she is voting for and then why. Try to convince her with a solid argument to vote for someone else. I guarantee within five minutes of your first point of disagreement she will reveal her stripes. Someone make her happy (tingles), someone makes her unhappy. There are two things that make a woman happier than anything else: masculinity and security–note when I use the word security here it should be taken loosely; this is not the security that masculinity in her mate provides but security from responsibility. She wishes to unleash hypergamously with security. Security is the ticket for upping the ante on her mustache rides.
For as bad as all that sounds, for all the doom and gloom that might come from it. The falling and failing have little to do with the promiscuity itself, rather sluts are a bonus, a gift really that seeks equilibrium in the arms of the Alpha. The fail comes from syphoning resources. A task that by its nature must fail eventually. But failing to have resources to syphon spells the end of the syphoner, and when the syphoner is the feminist demi-god state the default position, that is the point at which post-fail society resets to, is patriarchy.
Feminism is not a society stopper anymore than women are independent.
Instead of writing these two paragraphs again and changing feminism to divorce let’s just say the results of an incentivized divorce culture is the same as a feminist culture.
Biblical failure results in a situation nearly identical to feminism and divorce culture; or to put it another way, biblical failure and divorce culture exist naturally with feminist culture. Upholding a biblical standard can come only in a patriarchal society not only because of the assumed male headship, but also because of the bibles take on sex.
Western cultures have until recently assigned ownership of children to their fathers. This was part of the marriage contract: I support you financially, you give it up and produce me an heir. In a nutshell. The implications for such familial standing for the biblical take on sexual morality are far reaching. Consider the Old Testament and its numerous laws on adultery pointed toward women and contrast this with the laws concerning a man who sleeps with a virgin without the permission of her father: the man must pay the father the dowery price for a virgin whether or not he marries the woman is left to be decided. Or consider the many wives of David who is chastised for his lusts only after he murders Uriah that he may take his wife, Bathsheba; here when God reveals his anger through Nathan it is not the promiscuity but the theft that is to his detriment going so far as to have God inform David that had he wished for another wife it would have been granted.
Moving to the New Testament, Frost AKA Elihu pointed out the Greek Porneia, the word usually translated fornication. However it would appear after a short word study that the equivalent of fornication does not exist in Greek. The word is better seen as sexual immorality (or outside of Biblical Greek often describing brothels and unspeakable acts). This word comes in opposition to adultery for which the Greek uses Moicheia. Often porneia is used in conjunction with temple prostitutes (that is fertility worship) and homosexuality and incest.
The moral issue behind banging sluts is whether or not they have a right to give it up in the first place. Are they dependents, or married? No. Well grab the Song of Song and get to it. Or to put it otherwise does she have the right to give it up? Does her Father? Does the man who gained her virginity? Or if a virgin is banged but then the man refused to marry her can someone else bang her without the sin of adultery?
More next week. . .