How feminism kills sex

A female psychologist spells it out:

Over the past two decades I have worked as a psychologist, life coach and sex expert, and I have found that Emily’s attitude is all too common. And such views don’t bode well for the success of relationships. With increasing frequency, women in their twenties, thirties and forties take a pragmatic, postfeminist view that sex is something over which they have no need to negotiate. In the bedroom, there is no compromise. If a man has a higher sex drive than a woman, then he can sort himself out. If he wants to try something new and she can’t be bothered, tough luck to him….

That goes to the heart of this issue. As women, we have come to expect that we can control our sex lives completely – but we get angry when a man wants to do so.

In a relationship of two, one individual is always in charge. In most modern relationships, the female partner is the one who has claimed the right to dictate the sexual relationship which means that lesbian bed death now increasingly applies to many normal couples as well.

Unfortunately, more talk talk, as the writer suggests, is not likely to provide the answer. The two options ultimately boil down to patriarchy or porn; all of the available evidence indicates that at this time most women prefer feminism and the latter, whether they realize that is the choice they are making or not. While the demographics indicate that this is already a problem, it will become a crisis once robo-dolls are as ubiquitous as personal massage devices.

The irony is that feminism will be the main reason the polygamous model of marriage makes a return to the West in the next century. Nature ensures that two or more women engaged in intra-marital competition will always be much more interested in sex than a woman with a sexual monopoly defended by the family courts. And so the Law of Unintended Consequences strikes once more….

Very few women will agree with this, of course, although a few never-married women in their late thirties are beginning to wonder if this equalitarian social order is really all that preferable to the masculine one that it replaced. But, as usual, the essential problems of the trend will not be clear to everyone until they are suffering from the entirely predictable effects.

One female reader’s comment demonstrates the very problem raised by the article very well: I am offended by this article. You are advocating submission, however may you have termed it– something which I find abhorrent, considering women have so recently, and still not completely, won even the intellectual semblance of equality and now you talk of giving it all up based on ideas of happiness and the family unit that need to be examined in today’s context.

That semblance of equality won’t be given up based on happiness and the family unit, but it will be given up in the name of societal survival, most likely before 2050.