Sexual Harassment

No law is more deeply engraved in human nature than that which leads men to make advances towards women and women to flirt with men.  It was written there long before history began, before time began to be reckoned.  Why?  Because it is necessary for the perpetuation of the human race.

Today, cultural Marxism seeks to overturn this law, or at least half of it.  Women are to be allowed to do whatever they want, befitting their “victim” status in cultural Marxism’s hierarchy of saints and sinners.  But men–should one so much as look at a woman with a gleam in his eye, he is to be damned to eternal shame, cast out of public life, deprived of employment, and ordered to undergo psychological “re-education”, presumably so he can become a better person by turning gay.

All ideologies seek to outlaw one or more aspects of human nature.  Orthodox economic Marxism sought to outlaw the connection between labor and reward; people would work hard simply because they were helping to “build socialism”, not because doing so would gain them more money.  We saw how well that worked out in the Soviet economy.  As the workers and peasants there said, “They pretend to pay us and we pretend to work.”

Past societies, including the Victorians whom we should take as our models, also disapproved of advances and flirtations.  But knowing  as they did that they were dealing with a powerful force in human nature, they sought to limit it the only way it can be limited: by keeping men and women separate.  On the occasion when young men and young women mingled, they did so under the watchful eyes of chaperones.  And if Bobby and Betty Sue were left alone for a bit on the back porch, well, it was expected he would soon propose.

Cultural Marxism, in contrast, demands in the name of “equality” that men and women be put in the closest physical proximity, sometimes, as in military situations, literally cheek to jowl.  But if the man shows the slightest awareness he is with a woman, he is condemned for “sexual harassment”. In effect, the man must play the eunuch.  We may find that politically cutting our soldiers’ nuts off is not the very best way to make them fight.  And in the civilian world as well as the armed forces, every man must live in mortal terror of a woman accusing him of the dreaded crime.  The fact that the accusation may be false, that women know they can destroy male coworkers they do not like with a simple charge of “sexual harassment”, is unimportant.  The accused has as much chance of survival as did those in Stalin’s Soviet Union who were charged with being “an enemy of the people”.

Are the cultural Marxists insane to think they can simply outlaw so basic an aspect of human nature?  Not at all.  That is not their real objective.  Unlike the old economic Marxists, who painted a rosy if impossible picture of the Communist paradise they sought to create, the intellectuals of the Frankfurt School who created cultural Marxism offered no positive alternative vision.  Their sole purpose, in their own words, was “negation”, or “negative dialectics” – simply bringing everything down.  They were nihilists.  And if your goal is ripping your society apart, there is no better way to do it than to outlaw basic aspects of human nature and punish anyone who transgresses by acting human.  That is what cultural Marxism does on every aspect of identity; religious, ethnic, sexual, you name it.  Any normal human behavior, and especially any male behavior, is to be punished.

Both here and in Europe, the reaction against cultural Marxism is building.  Goaded beyond endurance, normal men and women are rebelling.  They are rejecting cultural Marxism’s “experiments against reality”, to borrow Roger Kimball’s apt phrase.

The cultural Marxists love denouncing any opponents as “fascists”.  Fascism has been dead for more than 70 years.  But cultural Marxism may well create a groundswell of opposition from the right that will take new and different forms.  If that is the only way to put a stop to the endless war on men, Whites, and Christians, let it come.

8 thoughts on “Sexual Harassment”

  1. Not only does this hit it on the nose, it does so with a refreshing and understated courage, a “smile, when you call me that” attitude that carries no chip on the shoulder–just a simple, calm manhood. Thanks.

  2. I agree with your article as it pertains to cultural Marxism, but this slew of sexual harassment is not guys being guys. Weinstein, Lauer, Franken, Conyers et al behaved improperly. What will not be reported is many a woman used this to their advantage and don’t become “damaged” or “humiliated” until it benefits them.

  3. I happen to agree with the gist of this article, but for the sake of Lord Jesus, leave Marx out of it, PLEASE??? IT adds NOTHING to the discussion, and in fact it muddies the waters terribly. Find a different term that is more descriptive. Trying to paint everything as Communism is just totally freakin’ brain dead.


    …is not exactly what I’d call “a simple, calm manhood.”

  5. Pardon me, but where is your quotation from? I see nothing remotely like it in Mr. Lind’s article, and certainly nothing like it in my comment.

  6. Please read the article again. Two or three times, and you may get it. Cultural marxism is the most potent force in our leftist culture right now, and has been since the 60s. And it seems to me that invoking Our Lord and calling people brain dead is not constructive

  7. So call it Cultural Satanism and be done with it. That’s just as descriptive. Like calling everything Communism is ‘constructive’? HOW BORING. And it was a figure of speech because he’s not my lord, I’m not into idolatry either.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *