Monday, March 12, 2012

Sex Strike

I don’t want to claim to have godfathered the recent call for a “sex strike,” but I have long been recommended that women who want to enhance the value of their intimacy stop giving it away for free. Links here.

Just last week I offered a new feminist rallying cry: no condoms; no sex.

The ways of the internet are mysterious. Who knows what happens to an idea once it enters cyberspace. Still, it is gratifying to see that feminists have taken up my challenge, regardless of where they saw it first.

A few days ago Liberal Ladies Who Lunch, a group in Austin, Texas, called on women to withhold their sexual favors for one week: from April 28 to May 5. They dubbed it a: “No Access Sex Strike.”

In their words: “All women should withhold from having sex with their partners.”

I have quoted their announcement because it’s the fair thing to do, and because it is a grammatical hash. If you think that being liberal confers some level of intellectual superiority and if you believe that a superior liberal mind would, at the least, know how to formulate a grammatically correct sentence, think again.

The correct phrase should have been: All women should withhold sex from their partners. Or else, All women should refrain from having sex with their partners.

In brief, the group’s leader Annette Maxberry-Carrara  wants women across the nation to keep their legs crossed for one week. I recall the recent debate about the use of aspirin as a contraceptive; here’s a new politically correct method.

We do not know whether the event will be successful. Still, it is well worth marking.

Not too long ago women were exhorted by their feminist masters to go out and slut it up. They were told to drop to their knees and service their men. They were told to label themselves sluts and go on Slutwalks. They were told to get in touch with their inner slut.

Now, they are being told to abstain from sex. Either it's a welcome step in the right direction or they had nowhere else to go.

We are not surprised that the feminists who are now calling for a week’s worth of abstinence, have gotten it, dare I say, ass backwards.

They do not seem to recognize that the sex strike might be a good think for women who have been somewhat too casual about the distribution of their sexual favors.

Instead, they want to use the sex strike to promote their contraception rights agenda.

To my mind if a man cannot spring for the cost of a condom a woman should deny him sexual access.

If the Liberal Ladies Who Lunch are jumping on the Sandra Fluke train, they must be trying to advance the cause of free contraception.

Maxberry-Carrara declared that feminists have already offered young men “the advantage of free, easy access sex with young women of child-bearing age.” Most men are very grateful, indeed.

Yet, now Maxberry-Carrara and her fellow liberal ladies are rallying for a new cause: spare men the cost of the condom. They want the government to pay for it.

Never was so much given to so many for so little. If women are happy to offer their sexual favors to a man who cannot even chip in on the birth control, clearly something is wrong.

I don’t want to quibble too much. It’s possible to do the right thing for the wrong reasons. For many months now I have recommended that young women emulate Lysistrata and call a sex strike because I  believe that that would be the best way for them to overcome the hookup culture and return to dating and courtship… something that most young woman largely prefer.

Clearly, the Liberal Ladies Who Lunch are not thinking along those lines. They have nothing against the hookup culture or the damage that it does to young women.

They want to have a sex strike to advance their ideological agenda.

But then, something strange happened. No sooner had Maxberry-Carrara called for the sex strike that aggrieved young women started writing to her complaining that they refused to withhold their sexual favors from their men because their men were fully supportive of women’s reproductive rights.

The complaint gives us a rather unflattering picture of the feminist mindset. Feminists use sex to enforce ideological conformity, to recruit men to their cause and to keep their male minds under strict control?

Now, who is it who is cheapening the value of feminine sexuality?

Again, I am not so concerned about the ass backwards way that feminists have found a virtue in abstinence. I am happy to see them offering women a reason to change a bad habit, even to replace it with a good one.

When you are trying to overcome a bad habit it does not matter why you are stopping it. The trick is to have the perseverance to continue to refrain from it and to give yourself the time to develop a good habit to replace it.


Dennis said...

I have to admit I just love what this makes "feminists" and the men who associate with them. What better example.

n.n said...

May I presume these are "feminists" of the class which embraced the sexual revolution?

They should not mix sex and soliciting funds to support their promiscuous behavior. It's bad enough when they offer public testimony and define themselves as sluts, but the next step is a slippery slope indeed.

if a man cannot spring for the cost of a condom...

The concept of redistributive change seems to be an endemic... nay, a defining feature of individuals who adhere to left-wing ideologies. Unfortunately, the socialization of the consequences of their behavior did not start with condoms. Society has already witnessed the burden of increased STDs, including HIV, delayed procreation (and its attendant consequences), etc. that follows from deviant behaviors, including promiscuity.

their men were fully supportive of women’s reproductive rights

Of course they are. Especially when the costs can be shifted to the taxpayer or another unwitting participant to their lifestyle. And what "man" would want a friend with "benefits" who may harsh his mellow with the responsibilities of procreation. At least without the comfort afforded by the abortion safety net.

They move from one extreme to another. The concept of moderation is, ostensibly, incomprehensible to them. They delude themselves when they believe the human condition has materially changed and that traditional wisdom is passe. They will use "science" or something resembling it to rationalize new concepts, but they cannot escape that while their dignity is individual, their humanity is neither unique nor exclusive.

What a mess. It would appear that we are destined to repeat sins of the past.

Dennis said...

I maybe a little strange, but I cannot stop laughing out loud at this rather poorly thought out strategy. Just what men are suffering the lax of sex provided by these feminists? I would suspect that not very many are Conservatives. Just who is going to make sure all of these feminists keep with the program of using sex as a commodity? One wonders if liberal/leftist men might be asking the question why they seem to pay every time a feminists gets a political idea?
This is truly hilarious. No wonder that conservatives have more and better sex than Liberals/Leftists. Sex is for love and not a commodity to be traded for sexual politics. Ah, the modern day "welfare queen" ever striving to have others pay for their foibles.
Ever notice that is strength lies weakness and this just demonstrates that weakness. I cannot tell you how much I really enjoy this. The possibilities are endless.