B
Many here seem to prefer a sexually oppressive regime, like Saudi Arabia, among Amish people or like Gilead from Handmaid's Tale. Understandable reason is that sexual freedom brought great improvements in sex life for a few, a bit for many, while we are excluded.
Probably most people have read Brave New World by Aldous Huxley, at school or home, seen as a film, or at least heard about it. It is a world that is supposed to bring happiness for everyone, even the dumb, ugly delta and epsilon castes. Sexual life is promiscuous:
- Sex orgies are a regular social activity
- Everybody gets partners over time
- Relationships and marriages are considered antisocial
- Women permanently use reliable contraceptives
- No pregnancies, since babies are raised in machines.
- No really ugly people, who don't find mates (breeding, plastic surgery)
This would indeed be a good version of sexual freedom, guaranteed everybody gets laid. The actual sexual freedom is in fact a profit for most, the problem is some are permanently excluded from it. A western Saudi Arabia, Gilead or just Europe and America 120 years ago, would be hell for everyone. It is by far not guaranteed, that everybody who starves from lack of sex now, will get a woman there, selected by his parents, by the state, or be able to buy one for a material bride price. And when they start to take away fundamental rights from women, is there any guarantee they'll not do so with some retarded losers and socially crippled jerks, who are unfit for breeding?
Brave New World shows a liberal sex life, as it should be. Maybe the society in the book is a bit dumb, but should we really idolize the "savage", who is rejected in the Indian reservation where he grew up, who constantly quotes Shakespeare and assaults a woman who wants to sleep with him, instead of banging her? Everybody can get what he needs there.
Probably most people have read Brave New World by Aldous Huxley, at school or home, seen as a film, or at least heard about it. It is a world that is supposed to bring happiness for everyone, even the dumb, ugly delta and epsilon castes. Sexual life is promiscuous:
- Sex orgies are a regular social activity
- Everybody gets partners over time
- Relationships and marriages are considered antisocial
- Women permanently use reliable contraceptives
- No pregnancies, since babies are raised in machines.
- No really ugly people, who don't find mates (breeding, plastic surgery)
This would indeed be a good version of sexual freedom, guaranteed everybody gets laid. The actual sexual freedom is in fact a profit for most, the problem is some are permanently excluded from it. A western Saudi Arabia, Gilead or just Europe and America 120 years ago, would be hell for everyone. It is by far not guaranteed, that everybody who starves from lack of sex now, will get a woman there, selected by his parents, by the state, or be able to buy one for a material bride price. And when they start to take away fundamental rights from women, is there any guarantee they'll not do so with some retarded losers and socially crippled jerks, who are unfit for breeding?
Brave New World shows a liberal sex life, as it should be. Maybe the society in the book is a bit dumb, but should we really idolize the "savage", who is rejected in the Indian reservation where he grew up, who constantly quotes Shakespeare and assaults a woman who wants to sleep with him, instead of banging her? Everybody can get what he needs there.
