From the, often wonderful, Overcoming Bias comes a link to The Man Who is Thursday, who gives us his thoughts on the sexual revolution. OB gives his take from a men's rights perspective.
It had never occurred to me that the sexual revolution was somehow forced upon women to their detriment. He apparently believes this to be a widely held view - I wish he had included a link. The argument seems to be that women are being exploited if they have sex outside of marriage. It's quite big of him to have moved on beyond that.
I'm not fully comfortable with his apparent single dimensional scale of alpha-beta. But, say we can enumerate some combination of factors - wealth, looks, intelligence, humour - that we can rank partners on... I'll let him off the hook on this one, although its questionable whether these all correlate with sexual performance.
If sexual performance is a criteria for a suitable mate - deciding whether someone is an alpha or beta- surely the sexual revolution is a huge step in allowing people to find out more information in advance of commitment.
Even granting his premises though, why does he then assume that alpha men are more likely to have more partners than alpha women? Further, that alpha men will sleep with beta women, but alpha women not with beta males.
So, sorry, but he contradicts himself: he comes back around to the point that the sexual revolution benefited men (at least alpha men) because of the rather out-dated notion that men only want sex and women only want to find a committed partner.
I found it interesting because the guy is apparently not a complete moron, has thought his argument through, but comes to conclusions that are completely unpalatable for me. Part of me also fears there may be some thread of truth among the BS.
