Condomistic sex isn’t sex

Orthosphere’s post http://orthosphere.org/2013/10/06/marriage-is-our-sacrament/ impressed me enough to drive me back to agnostic Catholicism.  Zippy posted somewhere or other that condomistic sex was sex because people say sobecause it is an intentionally disordered sex act, contrary to human nature; which also deeply impressed me for a while, but not anymore.  Edit: Zippy’s post is https://zippycatholic.wordpress.com/2007/12/12/contraception-is-so-gay/

Legend has it, once upon a time, a French kiss was a stronger declaration of intention to have sex than condomistic sex is in certain contexts today.

What does the world look like in the hypothetical where we treat condomistic sex as little more than a kiss?

Celibate.  People in the West have traditionally held off on having sex longer than other peoples; if today, a man can’t have a career stabilized until his ’30s, Plato would think that would be okay, advocating that approximately 30 year old men should marry approximately 17-20 year old women.  Today they would marry 26 to 30 year old women, and fertility can be extended.

For all the pornography our culture is steeped in, we are remarkably celibate.  What can be done about celibacy?  Stop disincentivizing reproduction.  Oh well.

What does a woman think she’s doing when she rides the alpha cock carousel?  She hopes that she’s dating a bunch of successful men and hoping one of them will marry her.  Perhaps she is; perhaps she is just following her bff who is more successful.  Western women are supposed to marry a little late anyway: I’ve heard something like 24 in pre-demotic Germany.

But I didn’t really want to talk about fucking the latex Jew.  The real problem is the problem of evil: why do men choose it?  Envy is rational because when you sabotage the guy right above you then you can take his position; it’s less rational in a large scale society.  The envy of Satan and Cain for God’s love of Adam and Abel is also irrational, because God knows everything, and isn’t going to give the bad guys what they want because they sabotaged their victims.

At some point, the envy of the billionaires for the nobles, and then the politicians, led them to promote communist revolution – that’s where we are today.  The envy of progressives for each other drives them to promote all kinds of nonsense against each other; the Donald Tokowitz affair is particularly amusing because it’s a billionaire getting taken down by progressives he promoted.  Progressive envy for other progressives is especially rational; destroying someone is a good way to get promoted as a progressive.

Anyway, Moldbug wrote to tell his fellow libertarians that anarchy is not liberty.  I’m more of an ethno-nationalist myself, so the anti-natal regime I live under is a problem for me.  Moldbug’s ideal state is pretty close to mine, but he seems to think that drugs and condoms are great, and I’m not so sure.  Zeus never used a condom.  As a ten year old reading ancient Greek literature, I saw the line “the embrace of a god is never infertile”, and thought it was unfair, because everyone knows that you’re supposed to mess around a lot before being burdened with a child.

Everyone who cares to find out now knows that women seek the highest-status man, and men seek the most women.  Does that mean that alphas should mate with  all the women?  No.  Of course they should not mess with the women, that’s behavior of men who think they have something to prove.  The King should exercise forbearance to set an example, the nobles to avoid scandal, the knights because their code forbids fornication.  This for internal harmony and simply to please God.  But it seems that cultures that act like a pack of chimpanzees and permit multiple wives end up having weak leadership.

The Sultans were fat and happy in Constantinople with their harems of White sex slaves, while Moscow, which was contesting with London and later Berlin for the title of Third Rome, had an eye on Constantinople, and fought a war with the a bunch of European countries over not just the Crimea but whether Russia had the right to expand into its moribund neighbor.  “While we’re Britons true, no Russian will set foot in Constantinople”, said the United Kingdom.

It was not until after the great kinslaying of WWI that Constantinople was permanently removed from the ruined Europe through population transfers.  By who?  Blue-eyed Mustafa Kemal Atatürk: their use of White sex slaves was not of no consequence.  Many years later, the UK gets overrun with immigrants; perhaps the Russians can seize Constantinople now.

In China, the 1%ers could have many wives according to their station.  The Imperial court was also filled with eunuchs.  The Ottomans had used castrated White slaves as clerks; Christians only used eunuchs for their special talent at singing (still evil).  The Chinese and multiple wives and their eunuchs slowly lost their technological advantage and found themselves powerless against pirates.

What has envy to do with condoms?  Too many men of my generation who think they have something to prove like to run around “having sex”, while not actually having sex.

Advertisements

5 responses to “Condomistic sex isn’t sex”

  1. nickbsteves says :

    Zippy posted somewhere or other that condomistic sex was sex because people say so; which also deeply impressed me for a while, but not anymore.

    That doesn’t sound very Zippy-esque.

    • peppermint7889 says :

      Yeah, I’m not paraphrasing him right, but I forget where he said it :/

      It was in a comment thread somewhere; he was talking about natural law and the difference between natural family planning and condomistic sex; he said that sex is the kind of act that sometimes leads to procreation, called condomistic sex a mutilated sex act, and dismissed the idea that it isn’t a sex act, in favor of the context he had in mind.

      But I really need to ask him directly; also to look over this article, I hope it is sensible enough for him to have some criticism 🙂

    • peppermint7889 says :

      Zippy responds –

      Peppermint:
      Contracepted sexual acts are certainly still sexual acts (and what people say about them doesn’t change the kind of act they are): they are just deliberately mutilated sexual acts. You may be thinking of this post, or this one.

      FWIW, I was actually thinking of this one – https://zippycatholic.wordpress.com/2007/12/12/contraception-is-so-gay/

      I respect Zippy’s reasoning, I just don’t think, like, I knew some people who spent a few years “married”, never had any children, and then got “divorced”; scarequotes because really, were they even married or having sex? I would say, no, they were just wasting each other’s time. I hope some day they do get real marriages.

  2. nickbsteves says :


    What has envy to do with condoms? Too many men of my generation who think they have something to prove like to run around “having sex”, while not actually having sex.

    Pretty much sums it up. Excellent!

Trackbacks / Pingbacks

  1. This Week in Reaction | The Reactivity Place - May 9, 2014

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: