Sexual Nihilism

Posted on | March 22, 2014 | 71 Comments

Three years ago, Matt Barber coined the term “Sexual Anarchy” to describe the mentality of those who seek to normalize pedophilia. Now, at his new site BarbWire, Matt introduces us to a new weirdness, a divorced mother’s advocacy of “friends with benefits” for divorceés:

Do you believe that “friends with benefits” is purely no-strings sex? Do you consider it a phase that some women go through when they’re young, purposely avoiding a committed relationship?
Some of us believe that friends with benefits can be mutually enjoyable and perfectly suited to our needs — not just when we’re very young, and not as a matter of explicitly avoiding commitment.
In fact, it seems to me that friends with benefits gets a bad rap, as if women aren’t supposed to feel desire (in general) or lust (in particular) — especially once they become mothers, or if they’re “of a certain age.”

You can read more — and Matt’s reaction — at BarbWire, but it’s not hard to think of reasons why drifting along in the meaningless ambiguity of “friends with benefits” is an even worse idea for divorced mothers than it is for the unmarried young. The effect on children whose parents engage in such behavior is to teach them by example that “no-strings sex” is acceptable. And what is the practical result of this “sexual recreation”? At the end of her Huffington Post column, divorced mom D.A. Wolf unwittingly gives the game away:

I admit that I was a fan of the friends with benefits model from an early age. . . . Friends with benefits — in my life — was just right, several times.

Hmmm. So “no-strings sex” was an experience repeated “several times” and now, in middle age, you’re divorced? How unsurprising.

Category: Marriage, Sex

Comments

71 Responses to “Sexual Nihilism”

Evi L. Bloggerlady
March 22nd, 2014 @ 9:32 am

Do they give out phone numbers and emails at that site? It is great thing for guys on the scam (ever see About a Boy where Hugh Grant’s character sought out moms because they were great for hook ups). I find it hard to see how this is empowering or a good thing for anyone trying to find something meaningful in a relationship or how this is generally a good thing for women.
Cube
March 22nd, 2014 @ 9:38 am

So this chick who can’t figure out cause and effect wants to tell us how dumb we are for not buying into this crazy idea? Who’s the idiot here?
robertstacymccain
March 22nd, 2014 @ 9:58 am

Oh, back in the day …

Perhaps it is best not to recount old “war stories” from the Sexual Revolution. Suffice to say, however, that the lonely divorceé was a known commodity to vigorous young fellows long before anyone coined the phrase “cougar bait.”

Disclaimer: I was a Democrat at the time.
rodander
March 22nd, 2014 @ 9:59 am

The sexual nihilists treat sexual activity as all-important and defining-of-self, yet they engage in the activity so casually. (See Miriam Weeks.)

This incoherence can only lead to instability and unhappiness.
The Daley Gator | The idiocy of Friends with Benefits
March 22nd, 2014 @ 10:00 am

[…] The Other McCain has a post up about divorced mothers who embrace “Friends With benefits” […]
robertstacymccain
March 22nd, 2014 @ 10:19 am

There is an observable correlation between sexual perversion and mental illness. It has become fashionable among the intelligentsia to believe that sex can be “compartmentalized” so that a person can, on the one hand, engage in all manner of deviant and promiscuous sexual behavior while, on the other hand, maintaining a life of sane normality in every other aspect. Yet we could cite many prominent examples to demonstrate that a crazy sex life is symptomatic generally of bad mental health, e.g., Hugo Schwyzer and Anthony Weiner. One might likewise examine the cases of notorious criminal madmen — Charles Manson, for example — to show how deviant sexuality is correlated with violence.
Cube
March 22nd, 2014 @ 10:34 am

There you go again – using facts to demonstrate your position. No wonder the perjuring bomber doesn’t like you.
Evi L. Bloggerlady
March 22nd, 2014 @ 10:57 am

Does the sexual deviance cause the mental illness or is it a symptom of it? An interesting question. I suspect both. It is a feed back loop that amplifies problems (just like self medicating does with mental illness).
Anamika
March 22nd, 2014 @ 11:49 am

It caught me completely off guard at a recent conference when after listening to a shocking tale of horrific childhood sexual abuse someone at the back uttered in an oily unctuous voice that we all had to realize that all sexual abuse was in actual fact, a cry for help from the perpetrator.

Gimme a break!!
robertstacymccain
March 22nd, 2014 @ 11:58 am

Sympathy for criminal perpetrators has been a theme of the Left since at least the 1950s, but especially in the 1960s and ’70s, the so-called “prison movement” sought to mobilize inmates as foot soldiers of revolution. Being old enough to remember those days, and what came to be known as the “radical defense” — in the trials of the Chicago Seven and other criminal heroes of the anti-war movement — I’m not really surprised that some people see even child molesters as “victims of society.” What is surprising is that more Americans aren’t angry about this trend.
marew
March 22nd, 2014 @ 12:03 pm

“Disclaimer: I was a Democrat at the time.”

HA! All is forgiven. (?)
Quartermaster
March 22nd, 2014 @ 12:09 pm

People engaging in sex “NSA” are asking for trouble later. It’s hard to after habits of infidelity are set to then enter into a relationship that requires fidelity to work, and make it work. It’s not a surprise that divorce is the scourge it is today.
Mm
March 22nd, 2014 @ 12:52 pm

Guess what? Gay anthropologists say that nobody is “born this way”: http://dailycaller.com/2014/03/19/nobody-is-born-that-way-gay-historians-say/#ixzz2wbGMNHJP
RKae
March 22nd, 2014 @ 1:23 pm

To me, it’s a simple question: If you keep having sex with casual acquaintances, what is it you’re not getting that you have to keep chasing this mirage?

It’s like bulimics: Eating food and throwing up, eating food and throwing up. Sexual deviants are basically starving to death emotionally.
NeoWayland
March 22nd, 2014 @ 1:55 pm

I can think of several things that would be much more destructive towards kids than a divorced parent’s sexual activity.

Not paying your debts, not keeping your word, consistently lying, chemical addiction, not keeping a clean home, not providing healthy food, living in an unsafe home, environmental exposure, these are just some of the things.

I don’t think sex makes the top twenty.
Zohydro
March 22nd, 2014 @ 2:01 pm

I believe, that were the real truth known, the children of divorce would wish little more than for the family to be intact again!
Zohydro
March 22nd, 2014 @ 2:02 pm

BarbWire… Bookmarked!
Bob Belvedere
March 22nd, 2014 @ 2:12 pm

THIS.
Bob Belvedere
March 22nd, 2014 @ 2:14 pm

Those who ‘see even child molesters as “victims of society”‘ are merely taking the Logic of sympathy for criminals to it’s ultimate conclusion – something that Logic, unrestrained by Right Reason, always does.
Bob Belvedere
March 22nd, 2014 @ 2:16 pm

Well…Stacy’s a Protestant, so I suppose all is, indeed, forgiven. If he was Catholic, he would be forgiven, as well, but the guilt would remain forever.
NeoWayland
March 22nd, 2014 @ 2:29 pm

As always, it depends.

I don’t remember my “natural” father. But I do know it was a really bad situation. And with my stepfather, I got two older brothers and an older sister.
Bob Belvedere
March 22nd, 2014 @ 2:30 pm

Interesting read, but be careful as he is approaching a very complicated issue as a Utilitarian and Deconstructionist.
RS
March 22nd, 2014 @ 2:50 pm

I speak from over 25 years of experience dealing with divorced parents and their children. There is no question that parental infidelity followed by parental serial “monogamy” in the form of numerous new flings is emotionally devastating to children. The author of Huffpo piece, as well as Sandra Loh mentioned several posts ago attempt to minimize these known effects. It is a byproduct of the destruction of marriage wrought by the “Sexual Revolution.” That the known effects run counter to the “me first, my self-actualization and fulfillment in all things” mentality of those who’ve come of age since the Summer of Love means that they are ignored. Is it any wonder we have had several generations of people who incapable of enjoying stable, long loving relationships?
M. Thompson
March 22nd, 2014 @ 2:51 pm

Young men do a lot of foolish thimgs, like vote for the evil Party.
RS
March 22nd, 2014 @ 2:54 pm

The proponents of such relationships, which are predicated solely upon one’s slavery to one’s glands, sound very much like the alcoholic or drug addict protesting that “I’m fine. No, really.” That they proselytize for new converts to their dysfunction is morally bankrupt. That they willingly try to lure others into the dystopia which is their own existence.
Mm
March 22nd, 2014 @ 3:01 pm

Yes, thanks for pointing that out.
Mm
March 22nd, 2014 @ 3:03 pm

Alice von Hildebrand touches on that, in the context of feminism, here:
http://tinyurl.com/ln55q48
NeoWayland
March 22nd, 2014 @ 3:20 pm

You’re assuming that infidelity led to the divorce in the first place.

If you want to blame everything on promiscuity, you need to go much further back than the ‘Sexual Revolution.”

I do think that emphasizing marriage as “all or nothing” has done some terrible things to people.
RS
March 22nd, 2014 @ 3:34 pm

I meant that in the conjunctive/disjunctive. And your third paragraph is meaningless. Have there been “bad” marriages throughout the history of mankind? Of course. So stipulated. So what?

The fact of the matter remains, the vast, vast majority of divorces which occur are not because of horrific abuse or even adultery. They occur because people hit a rough patch but instead of working on their problems together, they divorce. Why? Because, since the 1960s the idea of Self-fulfillment above all has made divorce the default means of dealing with what were before mere marital difficulties.

Young people don’t see it, because they are not familiar with the history of marriage and divorce in this country. It used to be very difficult, if not impossible in most circumstances, i.e. “I bored; I want to be free to marry my secretary.”

And before you say I don’t know what I’m talking about, both my wife and I came from broken homes where divorces occurred in the 1930s, when they were granted for things which were truly horrific.
Adobe_Walls
March 22nd, 2014 @ 3:37 pm

And are undoubtedly Democrats or leftierists.
NeoWayland
March 22nd, 2014 @ 3:54 pm

No, not meaningless.

But you’re on a rant and not willing to hear anything else just yet.
rodander
March 22nd, 2014 @ 4:06 pm

Funny how those silly old-fashioned rules on those tablets that Moses brought down from the mountain turn out to be for our own good.

What a coincidence.
Quartermaster
March 22nd, 2014 @ 4:44 pm

To your feeble mind anything that doesn’t agree with your warped narrative is a rant. The facts simply don’t matter to you.
Quartermaster
March 22nd, 2014 @ 4:45 pm

No, it doesn’t “depend.” You’re an outlier if you’re telling the truth.
K-Bob
March 22nd, 2014 @ 5:22 pm

Hey, I can quit anytime I want.
K-Bob
March 22nd, 2014 @ 5:24 pm

I do think that emphasizing marriage as “all or nothing” has done some terrible things to people

Well, admitting you have a problem is a good first step to getting help.
K-Bob
March 22nd, 2014 @ 5:28 pm

Yep. It’s like people who dropped out of school at age 16 because it was “not for them”, who go on to pass up every chance in life to learn something.

…All because they simply believe that’s not what works for them. Then they go on to blame society for their problems (and become drones for barack).
Norman Invasion
March 22nd, 2014 @ 6:05 pm

“Benefits” including access to children by sexual predators.
RS
March 22nd, 2014 @ 6:06 pm

Of course it’s meaningless. Let’s look at it:

“I do think that emphasizing marriage as “all or nothing” has done some terrible things to people.”

What do you mean “emphasizing marriage as ‘all or nothing?'” Marriage is a commitment to another person for life and to rear children together and guide them to productive adulthoods. As I said, the fact that some marriages are bad because of horrific abuse or chronic infidelity does not mean that the institution of marriage is to blame. It means that the individuals involved are flawed.

The fact further remains that vast, vast majority of marriages that end in divorce end because one or both of the parties are selfish. One or both of the parties are more concerned about finding some mythical state of “self-actualization,” whether they call it that or not. And so, kids be damned, they decide to see a lawyer, instead of setting aside Self in favor of protecting and safeguarding their children, and yes, even their own true well-being.

You have bought into that lie. Modern American jurisprudence as facilitated it. And we as a nation are the worse for it.
RS
March 22nd, 2014 @ 6:27 pm

Absolutely correct. For years, we’ve heard that the greatest threat of sexual abuse of a child is in the home. It is inferred that such a threat is posed by fathers. That is false. The threat comes from Mother’s new boyfriend. Unfortunately, most courts grant Moms primary physical custody of children without restrictions on who she brings into her house as a lover. Indeed, appellate courts frown on placing such restrictions on parents. As a result, newly divorced mothers are easy prey for perverts who wish to abuse their children. The statistics are astounding, when you actually look at them.
Kirby McCain
March 22nd, 2014 @ 6:52 pm

Of course, because look who mom is bringing home, FWB.
Kirby McCain
March 22nd, 2014 @ 6:59 pm

If, as he says, sexual activity doesn’t make the top 20 in threats to children then what would you suppose is behind the tens of thousands of missing and exploited children in this country?
Kirby McCain
March 22nd, 2014 @ 7:01 pm

Well, after 2 years a woman can dispossess a man. I’m not sure that these women ever really want a lifetime commitment.
Kirby McCain
March 22nd, 2014 @ 7:13 pm

For the record I was voting Republican back then. And I had a different approach to picking up girls. Generally, I went to a bar saw a girl I liked and kicked her boyfriend’s ass.
Kirby McCain
March 22nd, 2014 @ 11:10 pm

http://m.livescience.com/44271-new-journal-porn-studies.html
Bob Belvedere
March 22nd, 2014 @ 11:50 pm

I would include any Ideologues, including the Libertarians.
Bob Belvedere
March 22nd, 2014 @ 11:51 pm

‘Gonzo, trannys, and teens – current trends in U.S. adult content production, distribution and consumption’ – oh my!
Bob Belvedere
March 22nd, 2014 @ 11:55 pm

Neo smells like a Libertarian to me, which means he or she is an Ideologue.
Bob Belvedere
March 22nd, 2014 @ 11:58 pm

I am not surprised that the stats back-up a close reading of news reports on child abuse cases.
K-Bob
March 23rd, 2014 @ 4:10 am

Or even the ordinary abuse of not caring.