The Real Reason the Media Pushes “Sexual Liberation”
By Joe Jarvis - November 20, 2017

Individual freedom terrifies those in power. But it is an innate desire that cannot be suppressed. Therefore the media attempts to replace the drive for personal liberation with sexual liberation.

It is a carnal animalistic type of “freedom” that those in power want you to focus on. They promote a temporary feeling, a fleeting pleasure. Individual freedom is about building your future. Sexual freedom is about living in the moment.

Living in the moment is not always a bad thing. But doing something in the moment that puts your future at risk is problematic. What the media calls sexual freedom really means sluttiness. And that is a threat to your health, your emotional well-being, and your future happiness.

I talked about this before, when analyzing an article which claimed women under the Socialist Soviet regime had better sex lives. Living in a socialist hell, I’m not surprised sex was the only outlet for freedom, the only escape from the dreariness of daily poverty and oppression. That was the only type of “freedom” women could enjoy. It was crumbs of freedom thrown out to distract from the true loss of every other type of liberty.

And now, Vice published an article called The Beauty and Splendor of Being a Slut. In it, the author estimates that he has had sex with somewhere between 1,200 and 3,500 men in his life. I don’t even want to repeat most of the things he says in his article. But it is full of him claiming that meaningless sex can fill some void in your life. He says the momentary connection is real and worth it, even if the stranger “zips up, and leaves,” just after. He claims that sex with strangers and one time encounters in bathroom stalls can be liberating. He says you can share something deep in those moments.

The author complains that another writer who confessed his high number of sexual partners was met with comments:

…attributing his number to low standards and self-esteem, even supposed “mental health issues,”… Sex-positive commenters emerged as well, praising his honesty while dismissing the puritans. But I can only imagine what those closed-minded moralists would say to me.

But this is not about morals or a Puritan stance. It is about seeing the folly in major publications encouraging behavior which is very likely to lead to disease, depression, and future relationship problems. The negative effect of the type of behavior he talks about has less to do with the philosophy or morals behind the behavior, and more to do with the real world tangible negative effects of behaving that way.

When you open up the article, a box pops up to make sure you are 18, in order to continue. This can actually have the reverse effect of keeping young eyes from the article. Advertisers commonly use the “forbidden fruit” tactic. Saying something if not suitable for people under 18 virtually guarantees people under 18 will look.

And in the midst of this trashy article, the author tells readers his sluttiness started when he was 14 years old. Vice draws a young crowd anyway, being popular among millennials. This piece is propaganda to make people feel good about plunging into a carnal cesspool of fleeting and meaningless sex.

The author is convincing readers to make risky and unhealthy decisions starting at a young age.

And what the author recounts from his own youth is sad and depressing. He was searching for connections, for friends, and for meaning. All he found was sex. So he decided that he could get those deeply desired feelings of connection from sex.

He tries to frame his story as one of redemption. He says that he has had sex for drugs and was a heroin addict for years. Does that sound like someone to emulate?

This is clearly a deeply troubled and unhealthy man given a platform to promote his distorted worldview. And it is this sick worldview that the elites are only too happy to promote. People behave like animals, and animals can be herded and corralled.

History helps the media promote sex as liberation. They can point to actual sexual repression in the past. In America, women have long battled the “good housewife” stereotypes. Women were arrested in the early 1900’s for bathing suits which showed too much skin. Women in parts of the Muslim world are still seen as property. The first American settlers exiled teenage boys for masturbating. It was illegal in Great Britain to be homosexual until 1967!

So yes, there was and still is some need for sexual liberation. Everyone should have the freedom to behave in whatever consensual sexual way they desire.

Everyone should also have the freedom to ruin their lives on hard drugs. But that doesn’t mean doing the drugs is an expression of freedom. Having the choice is the freedom.

My complaints about the author and the article are not to say he shouldn’t be allowed to do or say what he wants. Rather I want to point out the reasons beyond sensationalism that the media would promote that type of behavior.

He’s another voice trying to drag the bar lower and undermine a society based on true freedom. He offers an easy shortcut to “liberation.” Real freedom requires hard work, determination, and self-improvement.

And you might be thinking, “What do you expect from Vice?” Fair enough. But they are never-the-less a loud voice of influence.

People should think for themselves and decide based on their own personal morality what kind of role they want sex to play in their lives.

When you pursue personal liberation, individual freedom, your life will only improve, right up until your last moments on this Earth. When you pursue so-called sexual liberation, your prospects of happiness decay day by day. Every wrinkle and gray hair shows the deterioration of your “liberty.”

Placing such importance on sex is reducing humans to animals. By this logic, rabbits must be the happiest most liberated animals of them all!

Animals base their lives on instinct and survival. Animals can be tamed. Animals can be controlled. The powerful elite do not fear animals. They have cages and zoos and guns and nets for animals.

But what those in power do fear is a truly liberated people. A people who cannot be distracted by carnal desires to abandon the true purpose of this life.

Sex is all well and good, but it should not replace deeper desires to live a meaningful life. You can even have very meaningful sex, but that is certainly not what this Vice writer is describing. He is describing cheap and risky thrills. He assigns them meaning, but that is likely a way to cope based on his troubled past. When you read between the lines, you see a man who is lost.

He talks about connecting with other people on a deep level, even if it is only for a few minutes.

But sex has retained meaning to me. With some guys, it still feels magical, like something truly important is happening.

What important thing could be happening if there is no deeper relationship to nurture? Where does that magical feeling get him? Absolutely nowhere. When it is gone, it is gone. He has built nothing, and has nothing to show for it. It has no positive impact on his future. But he has once again spun the wheel of risky behavior that could very well have a negative impact on his life.

Sex can be a tool for connecting with a person on a deeper level. Sex with a committed partner can help build a relationship and a future. But sex itself does not create the connection.

The way this author talks about sex, it is only a distraction to productive endeavors. Don’t expect to find long-term happiness with the types of sexual habits he promotes. His behavior is still that of a drug addict. He will always require more and more in order to satisfy his dependence on that feeling.

Don’t let the media sell you a false liberation. Keep striving for true freedom.

Tagged with: , , , ,
Share via
Copy link
Powered by Social Snap