The Sexual Revolution Is Eating Its Own Children?

I remember the myths we were fed about Christianity, or Puritanism, or conservatism, or bourgeois virtues in school. One of the main ones – made up and perpetuated by Mark Twain – was that Christianity, with its negative view of human sexuality, created sexually frustrated persons who were afraid of exploring their own sexuality. That was in Eastern Europe, under Communism. Few Americans know that the sexual revolution actually started much earlier, in the 1920s, in the Soviet Union, then spread to Europe after WWII, and reached the United States with the spread of Marxism in the late 1960s. It was not a revolution, it was a reaction. And it was a reaction against Christianity and its ethics of sexual purity and marital fidelity. The new paganism wouldn’t have any of that. It fought against Christianity by insisting that a child had the “right” to explore his own sexuality independently of authority and of ethical rules. “It can’t be wrong if you like it.”

But I’m sure we all remember those days of “exploration,” or whatever other names we gave to the rampant promiscuity; the same promiscuity that modern psychologists are trying to push on the children in the public schools through sex ed. The sexual revolution brought us so many good things, didn’t it? It finally freed us from Christianity and its “fear of sexual expression.”

Except that. . . .

It’s reversing.

Now, the new fad among the children of the sexual revolution is to hide the gender of their own children from them. Some time ago, I wrote about a couple of lesbians who allowed their son to want to be a girl and eventually change his gender. Now we have a couple who decided to not reveal to their son his gender. For all practical purposes, as far as the child is concerned, he was genderless, until very recently when they decided to reveal his gender to him. The mother – a self-described “radical feminist” – thought that revealing the gender would be “harmful.”

Let me get this straight: Christianity was guilty for being too shy of gender and sex, and therefore a sexual revolution was necessary to free youngsters to discover as much of their sexuality on their own. Now, the pendulum is swinging in the other direction where the children wouldn’t be allowed to even know their gender or even think about it.

OK, now, which one is it?

Modern liberalism, devoid of any absolute values, is like a drunkard in a bus who is holding on to himself in desperate attempt to keep his balance. It first swings in one extreme, hits its head, then falls headlong in the other direction. But it would never allow itself to hold on to something fixed and absolute. No, such moderation and common sense would be too medieval and outdated. It is much better to nonsensically swing to one side and then to the other, destroying itself in the process. The extremes of the sexual revolutions are only one example of it.

The only problem is that the children who will come out of that social experiment will be exploited and abused to serve as guinea pigs for the ideological obsessions of their parents. When a person grows without the proper knowledge and understanding of himself – which it is the parents’ responsibility to teach – he will become a frustrated individual who will never know his place in the world. At the end, these children of the sexual revolution will be the very victims of it.