WATCH: Has the Sexual Revolution Failed? A Free Press Debate.
(Roger Kisby for The Free Press)
Anna Khachiyan, Louise Perry, Grimes, and Sarah Haider duke it out over porn, the pill, feminism, liberalism, and liberation.
We have the sexual revolution to thank for things like the pill, no-fault divorce, IVF, and women in the workforce. And yet revolutions are unpredictable, and new freedoms come with invisible costs.
With the hindsight that comes with half a century, we ask whether the movement that promised women sexual equality and liberation has fulfilled its promises—or whether it has failed women and men.
This sold-out debate was our first live event. We have big plans to bring The Free Press into the real world in the coming year. For now, we are so pleased to share a film of this debate for those who couldn’t be in the theater:
A few years ago after watching the Super Bowl half time show with my daughters, I complained on FB that we all could have done without the pole grinding crotch shots of J-LO. My daughters (both under 10 at the time) felt sad about how it made them feel as girls. They read it as objectifying. I was SLAUGHTERED by nearly everyone and slammed as a bigoted, backwards, pearl-clutcher. It was “cultural expression” a lot of them told me. (I asked them if they’d allow someone to prance on stage wearing the confederate flag as cultural expression- no reply.). Others said this was body shaming. My point was that if they were going to call this a family friendly event, make it so. If they want people grinding on poles, then fine but don’t call it that. No one could hear me through the din of outrage over my prudishness. It was breathtaking for me, and as a feminist (and at the time I was a liberal), I was so incredibly disappointed that as a woman, I wasn’t allowed to say - you know what, I don’t feel that staring eye level at J-Lo’s crotch is progress. Twisted.
The greatest delusion of mankind is that today we know things that a thousand generations before never figured out for themselves.
Human nature does not change. Neither do evolutionary adaptations. Women have a massive investment in propagating the species: they contribute all the nutritional resources to the developing child; they are vulnerable during pregnancy and for many years thereafter, and this investment is repeated for each and every child. Men's investment is contributing a few cc's of seed to start the process. A woman is 100% certain the child's DNA is hers; the man can never be certain, which is why men whose wives cheat are concerned with, "Did you f**k him?" and women with, "Are you in love with her?" These disparities also explain why it is men's nature to spread their DNA far and wide and women's to first and foremost secure a man's resources. It also explains why a prospective partner's body-count matters to men far more than it does to women: a promiscuous woman is more likely to cheat and less likely to pair-bond for a lifetime - and in today's world, to take his resources and run to the next Chad or Tyrone.
Has the sexual revolution failed? The damage to humanity's only priority - propagating the species - can never be fully known. And as a warrior who got off more than a few shots during that revolution, I have to say unequivocally, yes.