It should come as no surprise to anyone familiar with “Sex and Culture”, the classic work of Oxford-educated anthropologist J.D. Unwin, that feminism and loose sexual mores are leading to cultural and civilizational decline in the West.
Sigmund Freud also discussed sexual restraint as a force that builds up civilization in his book “Civilization and Its Discontents”. Indeed, there are many similarities between the thinking of Unwin, Spengler, and Freud. Unwin’s findings were published 30 years before the Women’s Liberation Movement.
Thinking the laws of nature and concepts of sexual restraint no longer apply, just as our society does today, was a fatal error for each of the 80 tribes and 6 civilizations Unwin studied:
Convinced that the cultural process is a progressive development and that our own culture is the most developed of all cultures, we assume that every change in our cultural condition is evidence of a higher cultural development.
Historical cycles and what they tell us about the decline of cultures have once again become relevant a decade and a half later. Even as some biological consequences of a free-for-all sexual market have been staved off by advances in contraception and the legalization of killing unborn children, we have not been set free from the psychological, sociological and societal consequences of a feminized sexual marketplace.
As cultural control of sex is abandoned and female promiscuity embraced, and any imposition of female monogamy condemned by feminism as oppression, inexorable decline sets in.
Every Race, Every Tribe
After studying cultures as diverse as the Babylonians, Greeks, Romans, Anglo-Saxons, and dozens of other groups Unwin found a 100% perfect correlation between the practice of heterosexual fidelity and cultural development. As Unwin wrote, across 5,000 years of history he found absolutely no exception his rule:
These societies lived in different geographical environments; they belonged to different racial stocks; but the history of their marriage customs is the same.
In the beginning each society had the same ideas in regard to sexual regulations.
Then the same struggles took place; the same sentiments were expressed; the same changes were made; the same results ensued.
Each society reduced its sexual opportunity to a minimum and displaying great social energy, flourished greatly.
Then it extended its sexual opportunity; its energy decreased, and faded away. The one outstanding feature of the whole story is its unrelieved monotony.
Without exception, once restrictions on sexuality are lifted, especially female sexuality, a society destroys itself from within, and is later conquered from without.
When not focusing mental and physical energy on buliding strong families, members of a culture lose the impetus for upkeep and innovation. In other words, The Law of the Jungle returns and Beta males eventually figure out they’re being shafted, figuriatively saying, “To hell with this!” as they rebel against carrying the weight of society.
Sexual Market is Grandfather of All Human Markets
The Sexual Market rules every other market of mankind.
Men will go along with the demands of a society if there is a sexual incentive for them to do so. Leaving men sexless and powerless, as happens when women only chase the top quintile of men and abandon the other 4/5 of men means men have no incentive to work hard and participate in society.
After all, it doesn’t take much for a man to live on, and what masculine man needs a decadent lifestyle? In the 21st century, Anglo culture is becoming more tyrannical in an attempt to keep men chained to the machinery that runs its consumption economy, but ultimately incentives matter. No puss, no participation. Author Daniel Janosik puts Unwin’s findings this way:
If the British anthropologist J. D. Unwin is correct in his assessment of society, this present generation in the Western world may be the last one.
He found that when strict heterosexual monogamy was practiced, the society attained its greatest cultural energy, especially in the arts, sciences and technology.
But as people rebelled against the prohibitions placed upon them and demanded more sexual opportunities, there was a consequent loss of their creative energy, which resulted in the decline and eventual destruction of the civilization. Remarkably, he did not find any exception to this trend.
The fact the world’s three major religions, which date back to the Bronze Age have been structured around the ideals of monogamy and sexual restraint for thousands of years should tell us something about tampering with the set and frame of civilization, then calling the resulting degeneracy “progress.”
Unwin concluded that the fabric that holds a society together is sexual in nature.
When life–long heterosexual monogamous relationship is practiced, the focus is on the nurture of the family and energy is expended to protect, plan for, and build up the individual family unit.
This extends to the entire society and produces a strong society focused on preserving the strength of the family.
However, he found that when sexual opportunities opened the door to pre–marital, post–marital, and homosexual relationships, the social energy always dissipated as the individual focused more on self–gratification rather than societal good.
Since a woman is naturally fickle, dishonest, and disloyal, marriage evolved as a way of making it hard for her to monkey-branch to a higher status male or abandon her provider altogether when an exciting bad boy comes along.
The term husband means house-band, in which a man becomes the “band” that holds the home together. It is a band or a “bond” that women can’t abandon in a patriarchal society because culturally they will be outcast and/or become economically destitute.
Unfortunately, these harsh (but culturally productive) realities no longer exist because women are insulated from poor choices by a gynocentric welfare state funded with the tax dollars of Beta males.
Looking at some aspects of that decline, in 2010, 51% of adult Americans were married; in 1960, 72% were.
In 2010, 40.7% of births were to unwed mothers; in 1960, less than 5% were.
In the US elections in 2012, 39% of voters were unmarried; in 1972, 24% were.
According to a 2012 Pew Center study, 40% of American young people now believe that marriage is “obsolete.” Many young people no longer see a link between having children and being married. Cohabitation is gradually replacing marriage in the United States as the dominant household type. Marriage is declining in America, and in the West generally, and married people are less prominent and influential within our society, both culturally and politically. There will be negative civilizational consequences from these changes.
When cultural controls on sexuality are loosened, premarital, extramarital, and homosexual relationships proliferate.
In some societies, like Rome, pedophilia became part of the sexual equation. Indeed, we are seeing a new push for the normalization of pedophilia in Anglo America.
As old-fashioned as we think it sounds, heterosexual, lifetime pair bonding is the only condition which supports the growth of the human family and advancement of culture.
Aldous Huxley, author of Brave New World said Unwin’s work was “of the highest importance.” Huxley wrote:
Unwin’s conclusions, which are based upon an enormous wealth of carefully sifted evidence, may be summed up as follows:
All human societies are in one or another of four cultural conditions: zoistic, manistic, deistic, rationalistic.
Of these societies the zoistic displays the least amount of mental and social energy, the rationalistic the most.
Investigation shows that the societies exhibiting the least amount of energy are those where pre-nuptial continence is not imposed and where the opportunities for sexual indulgence after marriage are greatest.
The cultural condition of a society rises in exact proportion as it imposes pre-nuptial and post-nuptial restraints upon sexual opportunity.
As much fun as going from girl to girl can be, ultimately that type of behavior leads to the destruction of a culture. The West achieved undeniable and astonishing progress until the time of the sexual revolution.
After feminism, the wheels have started falling off the wagon.
It is exceedingly optimistic to think America and Europe will continue to prosper despite adopting sexual practices that are perfectly correlated with decline, and that have repeated throughout 5,000 years of history, especially when one looks at the demographic decline of the people who created the society and see the evidence of a civilization that is killing itself from within. (Before, perhaps being conquered from without.)
Technological progress has brought us an improving quality of life, but the price of maintaining that progress becomes higher as man has turned his focus to the fulfilling the physiological, sexual base of Maslow’s Hierarchy rather than higher aspirations on the pyramid. In simpler terms, constantly trying to find a woman to bust a nut with keeps man from pursuing higher goals in life.
Thinking we have surpassed the need for “outdated” sexual morality is a modern repetition of old, libertine philosophies adopted by other cultures and tribes that ultimately led them to their demise, even though liberals tell us we are “progessing” by doing so. Progressing, perhaps. But progressing towards what end?