Feminism Didn't Kill Marriage
Traditional Conservatives love to use feminism as their scapegoat for every social ill, but feminism did not kill marriage.
If you met a woman who had every green flag you could hope for; gorgeous, fit, loving, loyal, dressed modestly, no debt, no tattoos, no cosmetic surgery, nurturing, submissive, religious — but her one stipulation is that you can NEVER have sex with her, would you marry her?
Presume that you can have as many children as you want via artificial insemination. She’ll be affectionate and loving and never cheat on you, but you can never have sex. Do you marry her?
I posed this question to my Twitter following last week. I’ve posted variations of this question over the years since my earliest days on the SoSuave forums. It’s meant to illustrate one point: how important sex is to men (and women), especially in a life-long commitment to marriage. In 2024, traditional conservatism reinforces the common feminist trope that women should never settle for anything less than a traditionally perfect suitor for marriage. The onus is on men to “become the best versions of themselves” to fulfill the life plans of women.
Men, on the other hand, are encouraged to believe that their interest in women’s beauty and sexual access is superficial and wrong. Instead, men ought to vet a woman for all the criteria I listed in my hypothetical above. Beautiful but modest, fit but not slutty, loving, loyal, debt free, no artificial enhancements, submissive, religious, and above all – no tattoos! This is what defined my hypothetical: If all these criteria were met in the most ideal way, but actual sex was off the table, would you marry this woman?
Of course, the default religious deference goes something like, “The purpose of marriage is procreation, no sex, no marriage.” I accounted for this by amending the hypothetical with the part about how children could be had via artificial insemination. Now the answer was no to Hell No! I purposely avoided addressing the possibility of marrying her if the would-be husband could have an open marriage or concubines, as some respondents termed it. I did this to emphasize the fact that marriage isn’t marriage without a sexual component. And that sexual component is the most essential part of marriage.
Without sex, none of the ephemeral qualities that TradCons tell men they need to better themselves to attract a High-Quality Woman make any difference.
Sex is the glue that holds a marriage together.
TradCons think that sex is a base desire and a woman’s beauty and sexuality are subordinate to her virtuous qualities. But the truth is, none of those qualities can be appreciated without the element of raw sexuality being prioritized first. Sex is a dealbreaker in the marriage that TradCons believe will save Western culture.
Marriage has become the frontline in this new Red Pill schism.
Who really broke marriage?
Keep reading with a 7-day free trial
Subscribe to The Rational Male to keep reading this post and get 7 days of free access to the full post archives.