Sexual Revolution, phase II- intr
Sex and violence have had a role-reversal in the New Aeon. They are always mentioned in the same breath these days, and they share many intimate links, but it is hard to deny the evidence that violence was previously the exoteric form of this energy, and sex the esoteric. In a world of authoritarian government that upheld law with force, without the technology for sophisticated methods that spare life and injury, and before humanitarian culture taught us to shield our children from the existence of violence, prosecute the most innocuous physical aggression with lawsuits, and discourage the natural impulse to violence in all humans. Not all children are subject to this, of course, but those who are not will certainly excersize violence against those who are. Children taught to avoid violence will, when presented with a confrontation, back away and turn to an authority figure to protect them. This absolutely destroys the child’s strength, and teaches it to rely on punitive authorities to solve its problems. Violence, before lawsuits, was a simple fact of life. So was sex, but we didn’t TALK about it. Now EVERYBODY talks about sex. Nobody talks about violence, because we all pretty much agree on violence...
The overwhelming influence of mass media, not the beliefs of parents and teachers, creates the social norm that children look to for a frame of reference in which to situate their experiences. Sexuality is also a big “cause” on both the left and the right. They both have their own ideas about what to do with it (the tedious birth control vs. abstinence debate) but the point is that they are openly and publicly HAVING this debate. There is no debate about violence. “Both sides,” at least ostensibly, agree that violence is bad and wrong. Both sides agree that the violence of our enemies legitimizes violence against them. Only when there is a threat, as we saw in the build up to the war in Iraq, is violence deemed legitimate. When I see this, I think of the Catholic prerequisite to sex, marriage. Victimhood consecrates violence in humanitarian culture. It robs it of its “evil.” We see this in world events. We see this in media depiction of war. We see this in hollywood fantasy movies. We see this everywhere.
Sex and violence have switched places. They are twin currents of one energy, but what was above is now below. What was below is now above.
What does that even mean? What does that tell us? Does this phenomenon not show that something fundamental has changed in western culture? Violence is the biggest no-no of all. This is ironic, considering the fact that we live in a part of the world that inflicts de facto violence of various natures upon the entire globe, but then, the Catholic Church didn't REALLY stop extra-martial sex, it just created consequences like the scarlet letter and the coathanger. As grusome as those were, so is the covert violence happening outside of direct government control, from Contras in Nicaragua to Blackwater in Iraq, equally grusome. And just as marriage could sanctify abuse and rape within a Church-blessed union, so can self-defense sanctify abuse and rape within an occupied country.
The conduct of the sexual revolution must be based on an initiated understanding of violence. The basics for healthy sexuality are availible in our culture. The tools to build it are there, but we lack the plans according to which to build such a structure. History, the history of violence, can reveal the architechture to which the Revolutionary Sexuality must apply itself...
The overwhelming influence of mass media, not the beliefs of parents and teachers, creates the social norm that children look to for a frame of reference in which to situate their experiences. Sexuality is also a big “cause” on both the left and the right. They both have their own ideas about what to do with it (the tedious birth control vs. abstinence debate) but the point is that they are openly and publicly HAVING this debate. There is no debate about violence. “Both sides,” at least ostensibly, agree that violence is bad and wrong. Both sides agree that the violence of our enemies legitimizes violence against them. Only when there is a threat, as we saw in the build up to the war in Iraq, is violence deemed legitimate. When I see this, I think of the Catholic prerequisite to sex, marriage. Victimhood consecrates violence in humanitarian culture. It robs it of its “evil.” We see this in world events. We see this in media depiction of war. We see this in hollywood fantasy movies. We see this everywhere.
Sex and violence have switched places. They are twin currents of one energy, but what was above is now below. What was below is now above.
What does that even mean? What does that tell us? Does this phenomenon not show that something fundamental has changed in western culture? Violence is the biggest no-no of all. This is ironic, considering the fact that we live in a part of the world that inflicts de facto violence of various natures upon the entire globe, but then, the Catholic Church didn't REALLY stop extra-martial sex, it just created consequences like the scarlet letter and the coathanger. As grusome as those were, so is the covert violence happening outside of direct government control, from Contras in Nicaragua to Blackwater in Iraq, equally grusome. And just as marriage could sanctify abuse and rape within a Church-blessed union, so can self-defense sanctify abuse and rape within an occupied country.
The conduct of the sexual revolution must be based on an initiated understanding of violence. The basics for healthy sexuality are availible in our culture. The tools to build it are there, but we lack the plans according to which to build such a structure. History, the history of violence, can reveal the architechture to which the Revolutionary Sexuality must apply itself...