Sunday, July 19, 2015

Here comes the normalization of open marriage

Instead of mere powers of prognostication, we'd prefer Heartiste be blessed with the ability to do something to help Western civilization hold itself together (though he'd argue that he provides a powerful tool that could theoretically be employed to do just that). I suppose we use the skill sets we have. Self-quote:
If the presumption is that marriage precludes extramarital sexual activity, then it seems reasonable to argue that opening it up to same-sex couples does in fact 'disrespect the idea of marriage'.

Perhaps it's time for that aspect of the definition of marriage to change as well. Expect it to be the next big Establishment objective after the shock troops are done mopping up any residual resistance to transgendering.
From New York magazine, right on cue, comes an article written by a gelded homo sapien who happens to have a Y-chromosome. The opening paragraph:
As I write this, my children are asleep in their room, Loretta Lynn is on the stereo, and my wife is out on a date with a man named Paulo. It’s her second date this week; her fourth this month so far. If it goes like the others, she’ll come home in the middle of the night, crawl into bed beside me, and tell me all about how she and Paulo had sex. I won’t explode with anger or seethe with resentment. I’ll tell her it’s a hot story and I’m glad she had fun. It’s hot because she’s excited, and I’m glad because I’m a feminist.
Outbred serial monogamy is a monumental achievement, one a civilization that has managed to make it the societal norm should be perpetually vigilant in maintaining. It goes against the natural inclination of women to a small degree and of men to a much more significant one, but the benefits in terms of social cohesion and, most crucially, widespread male societal buy-in is enormous. Things are easier to tear down than they are to put together.

Celibacy, monogamy, homosexuality, polygamy, incest, bestiality--they're simply different choices. No one approach is preferable to any other. Your job as a good, tolerant SWPL is to nod and smile and condone people for being true to themselves. That's all that matters. Concern for "societal consequences" is just thin euphemistic cover for a license to spread hate! hate! hate!!


Anonymous said...

I said it once and I'll say it again: gays and lesbians are not going to cause straight people to be more promiscuous. Even if gays and lesbians didn't exist, our society would be on the same trajectory towards promiscuity. A lot of it has to do with how technology and the modern economy makes it so that men and women don't need one lifelong partner like they used to hundreds of years ago. Polyamory would have occured as a phenomenon even if everybody were straight.

Gays and lesbos won't cause heteros to be more promiscuous. Heteros won't cause gays and lezbos to be less promiscuous. Black monoracial married couples (who have a higher rate of adultery) won't cause White monoracial married couples to be more promiscuous. Asian monoracial married couples (who have a lower rate of adultery) won't cause White monoracial married couples to be less promiscuous.

If same sex married couples could make hetero married couples to be more promiscuous, we would see Black monoracial married couples doing the same to White monoracial married couples, and White monoracial married couples doing the same to Asian monoracial married couples.

Dan said...

Is the article fake, written by a woman?

'Michael Sonmore' has not written anything else for New Yorker.

Leftists lie, almost all the time. It is what they do.

The name 'Sonmore' seems to basically not exist in the United States, according to .

Thane Eichenauer said...

Robert Stacy McCain apparently has come to the same conclusion.

grim said...


Homosexual marriage will over time make heterosexual couples more promiscuous outside of marriage, even if it's not rational that it would occur. Familiarity will make people believe this is common or acceptable, and therefore will increase its frequency.

There are other more important reasons for opposing homosexual marriage, but this is one.

Audacious Epigone said...


Legality and social sanction both influence behaviors over time. If the legality of marijuana and alcohol were flipped, the usage rates would converge and marijuana might even surpass alcohol. Regarding the adoption of outgroup norms, white out-of-wedlock birth rates are now higher than black out-of-wedlock birth rates were when the Moynihan report was published.


That was my initial reaction, too, but I'm not able to prove it. Whatever the truth, tangential--the point is that open marriage is being put forward by an establishment media organ as a feminist-approved lifestyle choice.

Anonymous said...


White illegitimacy did not increase because tons of Whites are trying to ape the behaviors of Blacks. Even in the most homogeneously White nations, illegitimacy has increased. A lot of this has to do with welfare for single mothers, and how technology and the modern economy has made it physically easier to raise a child by yourself (no matter if you're a father or mother).