The Abject Failure of the Left's Sexual Revolution

A few weeks ago, prior to Father's Day, William McGurn wrote a beautiful and politically incorrect article in the Wall Street Journal.  He discussed the fact that men and women continue to be different in their approach to sexual intimacy even during the modern era of "anything goes."  Being a therapist for over 30 years and hearing the same theme with men and women of all ages, I wrote the following letter to Mr. McGurn:

As a longtime WSJ reader and center-to-right psychotherapist, yes that is right, a minority in my profession, I could not agree with you more!  I have witnessed personally and professionally the post nineteen sixties' push to expel differences between men and women for my entire adult life.  You are correct.  I cannot tell you how many women echo what you stated.  We are different, and carefully, I reiterate your very sentiments over and over with both my female and male clients.  In the quiet and safety of my office, many agree with me. You are most courageous!  Sadly, I cannot state this too loudly, or I would be tarred and feathered!

Mr. McGurn was pleased and thanked me.  A few days later, I saw letters to the editor responding to his op-ed.  One was from a pediatrician who agrees that this so-called revolution has created more damage than good.

I grew up in the seventies and saw the residual harm from the sixties' "free love."  Like anything, other than ourselves, "free" is a Faustian fantasy.  Eventually, someone pays the price, and it is often the very people engaging in casual sex.  Many of us saw that society went from handing out the Scarlet Letter to women to awarding them a badge of honor for their newfound freedom.  If one did not acquiesce to sex on the infamous third date, there was something wrong with her.  Perhaps she was a prude, a religious fanatic, or gay.  Many women succumbed to behaviors that did not correspond with their values.  This increased in the eighties and nineties even though HIV, herpes, and chlamydia were lying in wake for its victims.  More people than ever engaged in at-risk behaviors with people they barely knew.  Fearlessly "Looking for Mr. Goodbar" was in full force.

Fast-forward to the 21st century.  There has been little abatement of this loose intimacy.  The college campuses are pressure cookers for this behavior.  In the privacy and safety of my office, young people inform me of the stress that comes with the way of life expected of them.  Now you read that people engage in consensual romps where they may not know each other's names.  Often, something goes awry, and accusations of rape may follow.  A young man's life can be ruined forever.

With greater anesthetizing on college campuses and society at large, young and older adults participate wantonly and consider the repercussions after the fact.  I have listened to bold young women who indicate that they are fine with this casual approach, but many express disappointment when they do not receive contact from the person with whom they exchanged bodily fluids.  I do not shame them, but I remind them that men and women are different not only on the outside, but the inside.

Twenty-first-century courtships, if you can refer to them as that, have confused both genders of all ages.  In addition, people across the adult life cycle often leave these encounters with hurt feelings and even more confusion.

The theme of frustration around dating is more pronounced than ever before, yet the left continues to support the behavior leading to the frustration.  Their mantra seems to be that the only nuisance is the possibility of unwanted pregnancies.  Otherwise, it seems that women can and should act like men.  They ignore some of the information that shows that boundaries and responsible behavior, not just birth control, ward off some of the crises occurring both on and off campus.  My question to them is, what is wrong with being equal but different?  They celebrate women's studies, yet they are frequently up in arms when excluded from male-only clubs or gatherings.  Instead of reveling in the uniqueness of women, they shove it down everyone's throats that men and women are the same.  Recently, John McEnroe was severely criticized after complimenting the great Serena Williams but indicating that she would have had a much lower rank if combined with male tennis players.  A few years ago, Ms. Williams expressed a similar sentiment regarding the game of tennis.

How about when women want to play in the same rink with men but cry when the man hits back?  Kathy Griffin defiantly held a disgusting replica of the severed head of the president of the United States.  Her response was tears and distress about being bullied by the pugnacious Mr. Trump.  Who was the bully?  Well, bullies are indeed cowards.  Now we have Mika Brzezinski, who, with her paramour Joe Scarborough, relentlessly attacked a man known for being loyal, who had them in his home.  Mika too cries like a little girl when POTUS crudely responds, with valiant men on the left and the right coming to her rescue.  These women act so tough and haughty and are not used to a man who treats them as an equal and pushes backLadies of the left, you need to make up your minds.  You cannot have it both ways.  Act like a man, expect one to retaliate. Mr. Trump is an equal-opportunity type of individual.  He does not take gender into account.  In fact, from all indications, he treats women extremely well and would have done the same for these two foolish women libs.

For some reason, the left has conflated the reputed sexual liberation with achievement and success.  In my opinion, it is a false message.  Women's success is based not on how many men they bed, nor do they have to feel pressured to engage in something they may view as intimate and sacred.  As a woman who continues to achieve and knows many who are doing the same, I believe that sensuality and sexuality are about the whole person, not just the physicality.  What tend to be most alluring are the freedom and success of being confident and positive and recognizing that we should celebrate our uniqueness of the sexes rather than blend them.

I return to William McGurn, who wrote another beautiful piece in Friday's Wall Street Journal.  The article, "A Woman for All Seasons," illustrates the accomplishments of Margaret More Roper, Saint Thomas More's daughter.  To many of us, she is an obscure figure, and I appreciate Mr. McGurn's bringing her story to life.  This courageous woman defied the restraints of an oppressive era.  Her will and successes had no bounds.  Truly, she was a tour de force and most ahead of her time.  Obviously, Ms. More Roper did this long before open sex was considered.  The left would never celebrate someone like this remarkable woman.  We on the right must continue to do so as a way to revere the true meaning of success – and, as appropriate, to help people escape the pressures of being intimate when it does not feel so intimate.  That is the true sexual revolution!

A few weeks ago, prior to Father's Day, William McGurn wrote a beautiful and politically incorrect article in the Wall Street Journal.  He discussed the fact that men and women continue to be different in their approach to sexual intimacy even during the modern era of "anything goes."  Being a therapist for over 30 years and hearing the same theme with men and women of all ages, I wrote the following letter to Mr. McGurn:

As a longtime WSJ reader and center-to-right psychotherapist, yes that is right, a minority in my profession, I could not agree with you more!  I have witnessed personally and professionally the post nineteen sixties' push to expel differences between men and women for my entire adult life.  You are correct.  I cannot tell you how many women echo what you stated.  We are different, and carefully, I reiterate your very sentiments over and over with both my female and male clients.  In the quiet and safety of my office, many agree with me. You are most courageous!  Sadly, I cannot state this too loudly, or I would be tarred and feathered!

Mr. McGurn was pleased and thanked me.  A few days later, I saw letters to the editor responding to his op-ed.  One was from a pediatrician who agrees that this so-called revolution has created more damage than good.

I grew up in the seventies and saw the residual harm from the sixties' "free love."  Like anything, other than ourselves, "free" is a Faustian fantasy.  Eventually, someone pays the price, and it is often the very people engaging in casual sex.  Many of us saw that society went from handing out the Scarlet Letter to women to awarding them a badge of honor for their newfound freedom.  If one did not acquiesce to sex on the infamous third date, there was something wrong with her.  Perhaps she was a prude, a religious fanatic, or gay.  Many women succumbed to behaviors that did not correspond with their values.  This increased in the eighties and nineties even though HIV, herpes, and chlamydia were lying in wake for its victims.  More people than ever engaged in at-risk behaviors with people they barely knew.  Fearlessly "Looking for Mr. Goodbar" was in full force.

Fast-forward to the 21st century.  There has been little abatement of this loose intimacy.  The college campuses are pressure cookers for this behavior.  In the privacy and safety of my office, young people inform me of the stress that comes with the way of life expected of them.  Now you read that people engage in consensual romps where they may not know each other's names.  Often, something goes awry, and accusations of rape may follow.  A young man's life can be ruined forever.

With greater anesthetizing on college campuses and society at large, young and older adults participate wantonly and consider the repercussions after the fact.  I have listened to bold young women who indicate that they are fine with this casual approach, but many express disappointment when they do not receive contact from the person with whom they exchanged bodily fluids.  I do not shame them, but I remind them that men and women are different not only on the outside, but the inside.

Twenty-first-century courtships, if you can refer to them as that, have confused both genders of all ages.  In addition, people across the adult life cycle often leave these encounters with hurt feelings and even more confusion.

The theme of frustration around dating is more pronounced than ever before, yet the left continues to support the behavior leading to the frustration.  Their mantra seems to be that the only nuisance is the possibility of unwanted pregnancies.  Otherwise, it seems that women can and should act like men.  They ignore some of the information that shows that boundaries and responsible behavior, not just birth control, ward off some of the crises occurring both on and off campus.  My question to them is, what is wrong with being equal but different?  They celebrate women's studies, yet they are frequently up in arms when excluded from male-only clubs or gatherings.  Instead of reveling in the uniqueness of women, they shove it down everyone's throats that men and women are the same.  Recently, John McEnroe was severely criticized after complimenting the great Serena Williams but indicating that she would have had a much lower rank if combined with male tennis players.  A few years ago, Ms. Williams expressed a similar sentiment regarding the game of tennis.

How about when women want to play in the same rink with men but cry when the man hits back?  Kathy Griffin defiantly held a disgusting replica of the severed head of the president of the United States.  Her response was tears and distress about being bullied by the pugnacious Mr. Trump.  Who was the bully?  Well, bullies are indeed cowards.  Now we have Mika Brzezinski, who, with her paramour Joe Scarborough, relentlessly attacked a man known for being loyal, who had them in his home.  Mika too cries like a little girl when POTUS crudely responds, with valiant men on the left and the right coming to her rescue.  These women act so tough and haughty and are not used to a man who treats them as an equal and pushes backLadies of the left, you need to make up your minds.  You cannot have it both ways.  Act like a man, expect one to retaliate. Mr. Trump is an equal-opportunity type of individual.  He does not take gender into account.  In fact, from all indications, he treats women extremely well and would have done the same for these two foolish women libs.

For some reason, the left has conflated the reputed sexual liberation with achievement and success.  In my opinion, it is a false message.  Women's success is based not on how many men they bed, nor do they have to feel pressured to engage in something they may view as intimate and sacred.  As a woman who continues to achieve and knows many who are doing the same, I believe that sensuality and sexuality are about the whole person, not just the physicality.  What tend to be most alluring are the freedom and success of being confident and positive and recognizing that we should celebrate our uniqueness of the sexes rather than blend them.

I return to William McGurn, who wrote another beautiful piece in Friday's Wall Street Journal.  The article, "A Woman for All Seasons," illustrates the accomplishments of Margaret More Roper, Saint Thomas More's daughter.  To many of us, she is an obscure figure, and I appreciate Mr. McGurn's bringing her story to life.  This courageous woman defied the restraints of an oppressive era.  Her will and successes had no bounds.  Truly, she was a tour de force and most ahead of her time.  Obviously, Ms. More Roper did this long before open sex was considered.  The left would never celebrate someone like this remarkable woman.  We on the right must continue to do so as a way to revere the true meaning of success – and, as appropriate, to help people escape the pressures of being intimate when it does not feel so intimate.  That is the true sexual revolution!