Does anyone else find the feminist-discovered sin of "slut-shaming" to be a ridiculous label for people exercising normal moral discernment? Apparently, behavior that used to be called "sin," and that used to be considered unacceptable, even amongst those who argued for non-discriminatory sex (i.e. homosexuality), is now considered a protected class, if it is not absolutely lauded.
It is in this vein that Emily Roiphe criticizes liberals for not being far enough on the sexual liberation bandwagon.
Fortunately enough, Cassy Fiano at Pajamas Media actually puts up a defense of slut-shaming, pointing out the various problems that sexual promiscuity causes.
Of course, there are less immediately obvious problems that Cassy did not touch on, but are important to note, so that the liberals and feminists do not simply bleat "condoms, vaccines, and cures will solve all of our woes so that we no longer need self-restraint!" Most obviously, there is the fact that the rise of the slut also presages the rise of the pick-up artist. Those who hate Roissy had better be aware that if sluthood is the future of women, the cad is the future of men.
Sluts dislike this, of course, because those who would embrace sluthood would probably rather that the non-desirable men simply disappear and die, or else turn gay. Unfortunately for their desires, men will not roll over and play dead so easily.
Either way, though, the reason we slut-shame is that female promiscuity leads to sub-Saharan Africa. And no one, no matter what they say, actually wants that.
That is all.
No comments:
Post a Comment