Against all odds, it appears that conservatives are having a recreational sex moment. They're against it:
I hate to be "that guy," but, um, recreational sex is not a recent invention. It's not even an ancient invention. And it's certainly not responsible for anything new and different about modern society.
Just thought I'd point that out to any conservatives who might wander by.
If "conservatives" are worried about recreational sex, they should stop having sex. Or desiring it.
Side effect: Would also cut down on abortion rates.
Haven't you heard? Evangelicals are once again embracing purity pledges, "True Love Waits".
There's a way for men and women to avoid the temptations of sex: anti-androgens. Do it! Fewer conservatives in this world might be good for all of us.
I remember “purity rings” from the 90’s when my kids were in school. They would joke that the kids that wore them were the ones most likely to be having sex.
I don't know if they were technically "more likely" than other kids to have sex, but if they did, they were definitely more likely to get pregnant, natch!
In my southern high school, the purity ring kids were the ones doing everything but vaginal sex. Everything butt. Which made this song I discovered later in life so hilarious. (Definitely NSFW.)
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=j8ZF_R_j0OY
Not everything that is natural is good for individuals or good for society. Too many people is a huge problem for many reasons. Immigration is by the way one aspect of this, as things are still somewhat Malthusian in parts of the world.
Humankind would be a lot better off if we could control reproduction.
The good news is that we not only can control reproduction, we do control reproduction. There are a steadily increasing number of countries that have achieved zero or negative population growth. The population growth rate of the world as a whole is declining and may be expected to go negative within the next forty or fifty years.
I've been a believer in zero population growth for more than fifty years, and am not pleased that it has taken so long for the rest of the world to sign on, but the fact is that we're getting there, finally.
Mostly they've not had access to education and birth control.
'Sign on'?
Nature wants to eat you. Just sayin'.
In case you missed it, we live in an era in which is is fully possible to enjoy sex and also control reproduction, that is unless the American Taliban manages to outlaw the means of doing that.
If your argument hinges on 'too many peope', an argument racists and fascist make, be very careful you're not reinforcing false assumptions.
We do not have too many people. The world produces more than enough food to sustain everybody, and our natural resources are sufficient for everyone's needs if prudently managed.
Reproduction is not only controllable, it is arguably too well controlled, with below-replacement fertility in almost all non-poor countries.
I get why people were worried about overpopulation in the 1970s, but anyone still worried about it now is behind the times. It turned out, all we needed to do to solve the problem completely was to give women access to birth control and enough education to read the package directions.
Not surprising to hear that from Rufo, who came out of a creationist think tank. Conservative evangelicals have latched on to the sex-negative "procreation-only" stance of the conservative Catholics, even if they don't actually practice it.
Incidentally, Rufo got married at age 31 according to Wikipedia. Maybe someone should ask him if he was perfectly fastidious and abstemious in his personal sex life before then.
Just as much as Tim Scott was!
Sounds like Rufo is a bit "light in the loafers".......
I believe that Christopher Rufo is tipping his hand. Apparently he and/or his sexual partner(s) do not find recreational sex all that enticing. Maybe C. Rufo is just not very good at sex.
see Randy Newman //www.youtube.com/watch?v=qnbWD1VW0Pc
All things being equal, yours is most likely the correct answer. imo
From what I’ve seen it seems to me that conservatives are opposed to “recreational sex” for other people but not for themselves. Sort of like their stance on abortions.
My first recollection of an attitude like this was in college. I was talking to a guy who was a total stoner and we were talking about marajuana legalization. He was opposed. I asked him how he could be opposed since he smoked it all the time He said he knew he could handle it, but he wouldn’t want his younger brother to start smoking it.
Conservatives aren't against recreational sex. They just want to see women suffer for it. That's all there is to it.
It's a good idea to be cautious about extrapolating from one. Mr. Rufo is one conservative, and I would guess that a majority of other conservatives think he's crazy.
While true, it’s also true that the Right makes hay out of some things a few lefties have touted (defund the police) even though it was not in the mainstream for Democrats. What is also true is that there is a strong puritanical streak on the right that is worth publicizing.
This isn't just Rufo. This line of thought has been spouted my entire life. Promise rings and purity promises have been around a long time.
As for other conservatives...there is a long history of what's good for the goose most definitely is not what's good for the gander. Most conservatives imagine this applying to other people - poor, not white, liberal, etc. - and never think it will apply to them.
I would distinguish between extra-marital sex and recreational sex. There are lots of conservatives that believe, or at least say they believe, that sex should only happen between people who are married to each other, but who also believe that those married couples can have thoroughly enjoyable sex lives not limited to attempts to reproduce; in other words, that it's all right for married couples to engage in recreational sex with each other.
The position that people should only have sex for the purpose of making babies is an extreme position even in the conservative world.
If by extreme you mean supported by a huge percentage of conservatives, then I would agree.
Oh BS. Rufo is not some lone guy sitting in his basement. Ron DeSantis appointed him trustee of Florida's New College. He was a fellow at the crazy Christianist anti-evolution Discovery Institute, at Heritage, at Claremont, and now at the Manhattan Institute.
If other conservatives think he's crazy, why do they keep giving him well-paid gigs, publishing him, and following his lead?
You know he is talking about only women having sex. Hence the reference to the pill and single moms, which in wacko conservative land is purely the fault of women having sex outside of marriage. Since in wacko conservative land, women don’t have birth control and don’t have abortions, single motherhood is solely the women’s fault.
Um... I"m not sure how you can be against women having sex but not men, unless you primarily object to lesbianism.
I think it is more a combination of a belief that sex should be part of marriage and a belief that even if the speaker has previously had sex outside of marriage that does not mean it was a good thing or should be encouraged.
On the latter point, I will admit that I drank myself unconcious a few times in my youth. I do not do that anymore and frankly have a hard time understanding why I did, other than that I was young and stupid and my friends were doing it too. I will try to persuade my sons not to do that, although with the full knowledge that they probably will not listen to me.
“I"m not sure how you can be against women having sex but not men.”
Um. Have you never read the Scarlet Letter? That entire book is about a community vilifying a woman for having sex while not caring one whit about finding and punishing the man. Or read about how slaves just mysteriously gave birth to mixed race babies who had no white fathers named? Men have walked away from pregnant woman for millennia with no consequences. I’m pretty sure it’s very possible to be against women having sex while letting men off the hook for having sex.
People like Rufo believe only women should be punished for sex.
Bonobos, our primate cousins, use sex just to say hello.
Yep. And they're peaceful and know how to have a good time. Their close Chimp cousins are censorious about sex and -- as a result? -- are fighting all the time.
What about all the faithful married women who use birth control? Oh, I guess they're just sluts, too.
Medieval Catholic theology on birth control is going to be a big winner for these folks going forward, you betcha!
About as much of a winner for Republicans as it has been for the Catholic Church in filling empty pews all over the country.
You might even (if you weren't part of screwball Right) have the mother wit to realize that evolution is recreational sex in action. But no, It's all done by the watchmaker AKA God....or that the higher power IS having fun and not causing misery to others.....
Anyone who has a dog that humps legs knows that recreational sex isn't even solely human.
conservatism is a mental disorder
Define conservative.
Never mind, I'll read between the lines and do it myself.
A conservative is someone who says, in word and/or in deed, "I'm right, you're wrong, and this conversation is over."
Done. Next task ... answer the following:
Q: How many Republican politicians and voters are conservatives?
A: Pretty much all of them.
Q: How many Democratic politicians and voters are conservatives?
A: Way too many. Fortunately, not the D politicians with real power.
So after he has had the obligatory number of children, he should volunteer for chemical castration. Afterall what is the point of having a libido if procreation is not a goal?
First off, that's not a thing. We do not have medicines which reliably shut down sex drive in humans, or fertility in men. Some people have that side effect to some medicines, but it comes at usually other costs to their mental or physical state.
Secondly... It wouldn't stop him from talking about it.
Chemical? I'm in favor of piano wire for Mr. Rufo. It's the only way to be sure.
No to recreational sex....yes to threesomes....
Conservatives--gotta luv them
😉
Conservatives are a bunch of weird little sex pests. Let us recall that Tiny Ben Shapiro complained that a wet pussy was a sign of infection.
It would be hilarious if they weren't trying to impose their own weird sex hangups on the rest of us.
For a party that claims to value "freedom," they sure do spend a lot of time trying to take away the freedoms of people around them, and it's almost always about sex. Because again, every last one of them are weird little sex pests.
Conservatives are against sex but keep complaining that we need to have more babies, which must be why they're pro-rape.
It is worth noting that one of the underlying reasons for this pro-birth agenda is the white supremist fear of the "great replacement."
This isn't about orgasms, nor policing fun, nor even procreation, it is about power. The power of others for control of whatever aspect of life you care to place [here]. It's couched in the language of [here] to disguise this fact.
Persons that struggle with [here] and control of it have not yet realized that counterintuitively, there is no control without complete subjugation of oneself to that control. This sounds new agey, hippie dippie, but I defy you to control [here] without losing that struggle.
I found that hilarious.
For his next trick, Rufo will have the rubes denouncing ice cream and decrying the 4th of July as a commie plot.