The sexual revolution is over. Marriage won. The revolutionaries lost.

[^_^ 5,021]

In some sense, it doesn't really matter how the Supreme Court rules on the gay marriage case it's hearing today. The culture war is over on this front, and gay marriage has won. Even if it loses at the Supreme Court this term, it will win in the legislatures . . . because it is already winning in popular opinion. Few people much under the age of sixty see a compelling reason that straights should marry and gays should not.

...

This is a landmark victory for the forces of staid, bourgeois sexual morality. Once gays can marry, they'll be expected to marry. And to buy sensible, boring cars that are good for car seats. I believe we're witnessing the high water mark for "People should be able to do whatever they want, and it's none of my business." You thought the fifties were conformist? Wait until all those fabulous "confirmed bachelors" and maiden schoolteachers are expected to ditch their cute little one-bedrooms and join the rest of America in whining about crab grass, HOA restrictions, and the outrageous fees that schools want to charge for overnight soccer trips.

I know, it feels like we're riding an exciting wave away from the moral dark ages and into the bright, judgement free future. But moral history is not a long road down which we're all marching; it's more like a track ... But you're still going in circles. Victorian morality was an overreaction to the rather freewheeling period which proceeded it, which was itself an overreaction to Oliver Cromwell's puritanism.

...

We've been moving away from the Victorian view of marriage for a long time, which means that we're probably due to circle back around the prudish front that drove Charles Dickens to lie when he left his wife for another woman.

The 1970s were an open revolt against the idea of the dutiful pair bond, in favor of a life of perpetual infatuation. The elites led the way--and now they're leading it back. Compare Newt Gingrich or John McCain to the new generation of Republican hopefuls. Jindal, Ryan, Christie, Rubio . . . all of them are married to their first wives. Jindal met his wife in high school, Christie in college. By their age, McCain was preparing for his first divorce, and Gingrich was just a few years from his second.

Meanwhile, it's becoming increasingly impossible to ignore the disastrous collapse of marriage outside the elite. It turns out that there aren't a diverse array of good ways to raise a child, as the progressive academics of the 1970s had suggested. Or at least, if there are, they don't include having children with an array of men you're not willing to marry, and who will subsequently drift in and out of your life. And that, in post-sexual revolution America, is increasingly the norm in many areas.

...

Affluent urbanites are now quite conservative in their personal marital habits. They've just been reluctant to shame those who don't follow suit. But with marriage freed from the culture-war baggage, we now have an opening for change. Think it can't happen? Consider the cigarette. It was shocking for a woman to smoke on in public in 1880, nearly mandatory in 1940, and increasingly shocking in 2013 (for either gender). I wouldn't be surprised to see out-of-wedlock childbearing follow a similar course.

The neo-Victorian morality will protect who you want to marry--male or female, or maybe even something in between. But the wider open marriage is, the less necessary it becomes to defend the right to carefree sex--or children--outside of marriage. One can imagine a Republican politician fifty years hence ruining his career when he throws over his husband and children for a younger man.

If I had to guess, I'd also put late marriage on the endangered list. I married at 37 myself, so I'm not judging, here. But if we want childbearing to take place inside marriage (and I think we do), then the average age of first marriage can't get higher; it probably shouldn't even stay so high. As that average age rises, you get two unwanted phenomenon on the tails of the distribution: babies born to unmarried parents at the low end, and couples who want children but can't have them on the high side. So the current upper-middle-class tendency to push marriage later and later while people finish their educations and get settled doesn't seem very stable to me--even before we consider the difficulty of finding a mate to match your settled life.

...

Of course, predictions are hard, especially about the future. Nonetheless, here is mine: whatever the Supreme Court decides, gay marriage will soon be legal throughout the land. But this will not mean that we drive ever onwards towards greater sexual freedom--rather, it will mean quite the reverse. The sexual revolution is over. And the revolutionaries lost.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/03/26/why-gay-marriage-will-win-and-sexual-freedom-will-lose.html

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

I don't know. I wouldn't recommend marriage to anyone.

[^_^ 5,021]

I don't know. I wouldn't recommend marriage to anyone.

The 1970s were an open revolt against the idea of the dutiful pair bond, in favor of a life of perpetual infatuation. The elites led the way--and now they're leading it back. Compare Newt Gingrich or John McCain to the new generation of Republican hopefuls. Jindal, Ryan, Christie, Rubio . . . all of them are married to their first wives. Jindal met his wife in high school, Christie in college. By their age, McCain was preparing for his first divorce, and Gingrich was just a few years from his second.

Who's contemporary would you say you are, Gingrich's or Christie's?

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

[quote name=' timestamp='1364324304' post='6082083]

The 1970s were an open revolt against the idea of the dutiful pair bond, in favor of a life of perpetual infatuation. The elites led the way--and now they're leading it back. Compare Newt Gingrich or John McCain to the new generation of Republican hopefuls. Jindal, Ryan, Christie, Rubio . . . all of them are married to their first wives. Jindal met his wife in high school, Christie in college. By their age, McCain was preparing for his first divorce, and Gingrich was just a few years from his second.

Who's contemporary would you say you are, Gingrich's or Christie's?

I am still on my first marriage.

[Darnell 8,478]

It turns out that there aren't a diverse array of good ways to raise a child

Cool ! Stop the diversionary tactics, the truth prevailed already !

Yay !

[Danno 1,228]

Actually the whole premise of this story and title is azz backward.

The revolutionaries (cultural=Marxism ) have as a goal -to destroy not just marriage but all Western institutions.

This Atheists explains it rather well.

It is valuable for peeps at least listen and educate yourself what is is... so your conversations will have more foundation during such discussions.

[decocker 7,198]

Actually the whole premise of this story and title is azz backward.

The revolutionaries (cultural=Marxism ) have as a goal -to destroy not just marriage but all Western institutions.

This Atheists explains it rather well.

It is valuable for peeps at least listen and educate yourself what is is... so your conversations will have more foundation during such discussions.

do you generally get your 'education' from random arseholes on youtube?

[Penny Lane 8,159]

do you generally get your 'education' from random arseholes on youtube?

You know he does. He doesn't even care if the material is accurate. As long as he agrees with it.

[Darnell 8,478]

Danno - I invite you to study 'Feminine Divine' on youtube today.

[Danno 1,228]

do you generally get your 'education' from random arseholes on youtube?

Sometimes I use VJ too, still waiting for your first post with content.

[decocker 7,198]

Sometimes I use VJ too, still waiting for your first post with content.

here, try this.

go to youtube and search "don't tread on me"

refine your search to posts in the past, say, week.

disregard all the metallica videos.

now you should be left with an array of rants from folks such as yourself to choose from.

viola. you're witty comeback posts are all lined up for the week!

[^_^ 5,021]

And if that material is too heavy for you, and you find yourself in need of something lighter, youtube surra de bunda.

[decocker 7,198]

[quote name=' timestamp='1364401456' post='6085696]

And if that material is too heavy for you, and you find yourself in need of something lighter, youtube surra de bunda.

[Darnell 8,478]

I am sad the sexual revolution is over, as there's some new positions we want to try next week.

D@MN!

[Danno 1,228]

I am sad the sexual revolution is over, as there's some new positions we want to try next week.

D@MN!

New"? What is taking you so long... are you working your way through a book or something?