Traditional Sexual Norms Are Oppressive Patriarchy Maaaannnnnn

Falling into the Cultural Marxist trap, left-libertarians like Ian Freeman Cuckman and his degenerate team of hipster betas, admitted communists, and wrist-slitting teenie boppers in Keene, NH celebrate their opposition to traditional sexual norms.

libertarians then and now

Doing the state’s work for them, the Keene polyamory cult opposes everything good and wholesome, rationalizing that “as long as it’s voluntary maaaannnn,” its not anybody’s business. I agree, what people choose to do in their own personal associations does not really concern me. What does however, is the promotion of degeneracy as a virtue.

Social norms are in place for a reason. They aren’t something that are just arbitrarily implemented by an oppressive patriarchy or something – and when you are talking about dating and sex – these aren’t things that solely exist for our hedonistic pleasure. They mean something. They have a function. Primarily, the function of creating more people – and that’s why there is an evolutionary imperative to make orgasms feel so good, to propagate the species.

This is one of the things I have odds with most when it comes to those calling themselves libertarians in New Hampshire. It seems like for the most part, many associated with Free Keene, the Free State Project, and Liberty Radio Network think liberty is synonymous with dragging your pussy and balls all over the place. Additionally, they seem to believe that such behavior should be celebrated. How progressive…

Polyamory is just an objectively unhealthy thing to promote. Like I said, western social norms surrounding sexual behavior are in place for a reason. They have been evolutionarily selected for to reduce social costs. There are many group beneficial-effects of monogamy. For one, by limiting intrasexual competition and reducing the number of married men, monogamy reduces crime – primarily violent crime like rape, murder, assault, robbery – and decreases personal abuses, fostering a more healthy society.

This brings up an interesting observation. There seems to be a thread within most polyamorous communities, and certainly the one in Keene. They are populated by damaged people. People that have came from broken homes, have experienced child sexual or physical abuse, or are emotionally insecure and need to be reinforced by multiple sexual partners.

The resulting sexual behavior they exhibit, in turn, creates a cycle that results in more and more abuse – especially when children come into the picture. The data is indisputable. Children are much more likely to be abused in polyamorous sexual arrangements, have less stability, and are more likely to become criminals.

According to a study put together by Dr. Joesph Henrich, Dept of Economics, University of British Columbia, Canada, Dr. Robert Byrd, Dept of Anthropology, University of California, Los Angeles, and Dr. Peter J. Richersen, Dept of Environmental Science and Policy, University of California, Davis called The Puzzle of Monogamous Marriage: by shifting male efforts from seeking sexual partners to parental investment, monogamy increases savings, child investment, and economic productivity. By increasing the relatedness within households, monogamy reduces intra-household conflict, leading to lower rates of child neglect, abuse, accidental death and homicide.

To reassert, monogamy has been culturally selected for in the west because it reduces social costs and provides aggregate social benefits. Sexual norms are correlated with the level of civilization a society experiences. When looking around the world, heavily polyamorous societies exist primarily in the least successful countries – mostly in sub-Saharan Africa.

50s family

Something often brought up within the context of this conversation is the work of J.D. Unwin. Unwin was a British ethnologist and social anthropologist at Oxford and Cambridge Universities. In his work Sex and Culture, which is considered one of the most comprehensive studies on civilizational decline, Unwin looked at 86 civilizations through 5,000 years of history and found a positive correlation between the achievement of a people and the sexual restraint they observed.

Unwin was testing the hypothesis of Sigmund Freud, who postulated that the progress of a civilization was a product of repressed sexuality. In short, Unwin’s work found that sexual discipline appropriated social energy toward ends that were more conducive to building and maintaining civilizations – and that heterosexual monogamy was the optimal arrangement for the planning, nurturing, and maintaining of the family.

Unwin found that if enough heterosexual partners made a monogamous commitment, civilizational energy was promoted toward the finest societal foundation possible. Without exception however, each civilization he studied allowed its success to alter its moral code leading it to the abandonment of monogamy. When this happened, societies lost their cohesion and ultimately failed before being taken over by a more chaste civilization. This is exactly what we have been seeing over the last half century in the west, more so now than ever as Islam expands across Europe.

By undermining traditional western sexual norms, left-libertarians like Ian Freeman and those in Keene are unwittingly sowing the seeds of our cultural and societal destruction. [HAND RUBBING INTENSIFIES] From a libertarian perspective, the prevalence and preservation of strong family units should be a major priority, and can only be properly maintained within the context of heterosexual monogamy.

Something heavily promoted by cultural Marxists in order to destabilize western capitalist societies is polyamory – the idea of free love. One historical example occurred in 1919 when Georg Lukacs became Deputy Commissar for Culture in the short-lived Bolshevik Bela Kun regime in Hungary. He immediately set plans in motion to demoralize Hungarian culture. Reasoning that if Christian sexual ethics could be undermined among the youth, then the patriarchal family and the Church would be seriously compromised.

Lukacs launched a radical sex education program in the schools in which children were instructed in promiscuity and sexual intercourse. They were also encouraged to reject Christian moral ethics, monogamy, and parental and church authority. This occurred while cultural terror was perpetrated against dissenting parents and priests. A similar strategy has been employed in the United States since the 1960s.

Why? Because strong families are society’s first defense against the state. To destroy the family is to destroy the bourgeois class and its resistance to the power of government. It is in the family where capital is accumulated and passed on to future generations. It is in the family where independence accrues – independence from the state.

lenin family

The family is where tradition is learned and passed on. It is where reverence is maintained for something outside of government. Its where voluntary associations are cultivated that can be appealed to instead of the state. The family is the ultimate stabilizer of civilization. If someone from a strong family is having difficulty, they can turn to a family member for aid. Someone from a family that has disintegrated doesn’t have that option and are inevitably forced to turn to the state for help in the form of things like welfare and other subsidies – and are more apt to have to utilize things like public education.

It is in government educational centers that poor children are propagandized to believe the state is looking out for their best interest. Obviously, we know that is not the case. In any type of totalitarian system, you are going to see a fundamental attack on the family, and interference with how children are raised. This is because, again, strong families that create reverence for something other than the state are impediments to the state’s power.

By prompting polyamory as a virtue – which by every conceivable metric results in bad societal outcomes, especially for children, the left-libertarians associated with Free Keene and the Free State Project are hastening societal decline and empowering the government.

  • Richard Onley

    Having personally been raised in the quintessential, TV-perfect 1950s family, I find its authoritarian structure to be perfect dress-rehearsal for acceptance of the State, in much the same way that the Santa Claus legend grooms children for belief in God. So while most of these “alternative lifestyles” don’t evidence much of an improvement, I think it’s due more to a faulty structure behind both models. Without a steady grounding in education (including an ability to discern truth and use it as a basis) and acceptance of responsibility, no social structure will hold up long.
    The family ideal, as Twentieth Century pop culture has defined it, depended too much upon amorphous religious doctrines and an over-reliance on the State, and when those flaws became evident, the backlash was inevitable. The resulting “social experimentation” made apparently sweeping cosmetic changes, but ignored those two fundamental problems and, not unlike “Massholes,” carried over the problems they engendered.

    • Chuck

      I’ve found that parents lying to their children about Santa Claus causes them to believe their parents are lying about their belief in a god.

  • dus777

    yeah, um. There’s also this thing called community. No one need turn to government. And there is contraception….so looking 5000 years back might not be relevant?
    and you describe how governance used monogamy/guilt to control the masses…..and then suggest that was for the greater good. not
    And uh, Islam isn’t strong cuz they are monogamous…
    And um, turns out: monogamous societies; aren’t. They’re all cheating on partners in staggering numbers.
    Let’s be careful what we call “achievement” of a society, if reduced freedom is the result.
    Strong individuals resist the state. Strong individuals choose their sexuality and control it.
    For me, the sexual controls of my religious family lead me to bad choices that can’t be undone. You are preaching terribly bad advice.

    • Cantwell’s 1st Irregulars

      >There’s also this thing called community. No one need turn to government…

      Wtf are you talking about? Were does this post say people need to turn to government?

      > And there is contraception….so looking 5000 years back might not be relevant?

      Good outcomes for children comprise only one component of why heterosexual monogamy is the optimal sexual arrangement for society. I suggest you actually read the studies linked to in the piece.

      >and you describe how governance used monogamy/guilt to control the masses…..and then suggest that was for the greater good. not

      lol no, that’s another strawman. you seem to have very poor comprehension skills. that wasn’t at all what was presented here. You aren’t a very serious thinker are you? – and even if that was what was said, that’s not an argument against it. You understand what an argument is right? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rItm9j4vg_Q

      >And uh, Islam isn’t strong cuz they are monogamous.

      That wasn’t said. But again, simply asserting something without providing any reason or evidence is not an argument.

      >And um, turns out: monogamous societies; aren’t. They’re all cheating on partners in staggering numbers.

      A “cheating” society is not a “monogamous society.” You are essentially saying society isn’t strong and ppl are not upholding monogamous sexual arrangements. You are agreeing with the article but you are apparently too dense to realize it. When the moral code and cultural norms surrounding monogamy are eroded, yes, civilizations decline. That’s kind of the point…

      > Let’s be careful what we call “achievement” of a society, if reduced freedom is the result.

      What? You aren’t being clear at all with your thoughts. Comparably to the rest of the world however, there has never been another civilization that has existed that has achieved more or embraced “freedom” to the extent the west has.

      > Strong individuals resist the state. Strong individuals choose their sexuality and control it.

      Yep, I would agree.

      > For me, the sexual controls of my religious family lead me to bad choices that can’t be undone. You are preaching terribly bad advice.

      Maybe take responsibility for your own actions? Again, might want to read those studies. Exceptions do not disprove the vast amounts of data on this issue. Just because you are a petulant child that wished to rebel against the norms of your on society and your parents, and had bad outcomes as a result – that is not an argument against what was said here. In fact, IT CONFIRMS IT. Again, you seem to be too dense to understand you are making my case for me.

    • Cantwell’s 1st Irregulars

      >There’s also this thing called community. No one need turn to government…

      Wtf are you talking about? Were does this post say people need to turn to government?

      > And there is contraception….so looking 5000 years back might not be relevant?

      Good outcomes for children comprise only one component of why heterosexual monogamy is the optimal sexual arrangement for society. I suggest you actually read the studies linked to in the piece.

      >and you describe how governance used monogamy/guilt to control the masses…..and then suggest that was for the greater good. not

      lol no, that’s another strawman. you seem to have very poor comprehension skills. that wasn’t at all what was presented here. You aren’t a very serious thinker are you? – and even if that was what was said, that’s not an argument against it. You understand what an argument is right? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rItm9j4vg_Q

      >And uh, Islam isn’t strong cuz they are monogamous.

      That wasn’t said. But again, simply asserting something without providing any reason or evidence is not an argument.

      >And um, turns out: monogamous societies; aren’t. They’re all cheating on partners in staggering numbers.

      A “cheating” society is not a “monogamous society.” You are essentially saying society isn’t strong and ppl are not upholding monogamous sexual arrangements. You are agreeing with the article but you are apparently too dense to realize it. When the moral code and cultural norms surrounding monogamy are eroded, yes, civilizations decline. That’s kind of the point…

      > Let’s be careful what we call “achievement” of a society, if reduced freedom is the result.

      What? You aren’t being clear at all with your thoughts. Comparably to the rest of the world however, there has never been another civilization that has existed that has achieved more or embraced “freedom” to the extent the west has.

      > Strong individuals resist the state. Strong individuals choose their sexuality and control it.

      Yep, I would agree.

      > For me, the sexual controls of my religious family lead me to bad choices that can’t be undone. You are preaching terribly bad advice.

      Maybe take responsibility for your own actions? Again, might want to read those studies. Exceptions do not disprove the vast amounts of data on this issue. Just because you are a petulant child that wished to rebel against the norms of your on society and your parents, and had bad outcomes as a result – that is not an argument against what was said here. In fact, IT CONFIRMS IT. Again, you seem to be too dense to understand you are making my case for me.

      • dus777

        If you knew me, you would cower in shame. I am the opposite of the petulant child. I followed all the rules and obeyed. There was no rebellion, only loyalty to marriage and family at all costs. It destroyed my life and I lost my children. It took 3 years to get them back; and I am still rebuilding. Yes,I am the exception. I am the only man to ever beat the state at their game, in the county.
        And all my challenges started when I was a child, being told that sex was special and only for marriage between 1 man and 1 woman.

        • Sam Cru

          The system is set up to break up the family. This doesn’t mean that monogamy (coupled with a legal system that strongly enforces it by making divorce difficult or illegal) is an inherently bad mating strategy.

  • dus777

    And um. Good out comes for children is only relevant when there are children. So, contraception might be relevant, when it works.

  • dus777

    Didn’t know we were arguing. Maybe discussion could be more productive.

  • dus777

    When this happened, societies lost their cohesion and ultimately failed before being taken over by a more chaste civilization. This is exactly what we have been seeing over the last half century in the west, more so now than ever as Islam expands across Europe.

  • David Chaparro

    Hoppe would had removed this fags by now.