What’s missing here is recognition that the regime itself thrives on dissolving coherence and disrupting inherited norms. Against that backdrop, an embrace of traditional sexuality (even a boorish one) isn’t a betrayal of conservatism but a structural defence of civilizational vitality.
"But manners are essential to any broad and peaceful social order. Without restraint and civility, liberty is impossible, for man cannot govern himself until he has tamed the tempests of his own soul. This is why Christianity was indispensable for the making of the West."
1/3rd of the German population killed in a horrific religiously-motivated war. Given that history I think religion is a bigger danger to social peace than men oggling sexy ads.
I'm disgusted by Trump's sleazy car-salesman personality, but I ultimately think it's the lesser evil compared to these medieval superstitious peasants who think "God's will" should determine our politics and that embryo selection is Satanic. The Sydney Sweeney ad was a celebration of beauty, of eugenics, of male sexuality. Even Trump, in his scammy way, celebrates wealth and accomplishment. Pro-lifers want us to celebrate these down syndrome babies and teenage mothers who don't abort their kids.
"They used a woman’s body as an object to sell clothes. Nothing new about that of course, but it is something which traditionalists have long bemoaned."
This was, at one time, bemoaned by all "sides" that found manipulation deplorable. The stills are, for the most part, neutral, but the motion pictures were laden with copulative symbolism.
The advancement of neuropsychology has ratified the efficacy of modesty. The immorality of seductive association is only tangentially related to sex. It is larceny at its core.
I agree with the article's premise. That said, I have tracked the long march through all its iterations, for nearly six decades, and cannot avoid thinking that the ubiquity of vulgarian impulse has led to a highly regrettable pragmatism. I can view it only as a tragic necessity.
All of that said, losing sight of proper standards is exceedingly unwise. It is one thing to be pragmatic, quite another to allow nihilism free rein. What begins as free rein, inevitably reigns freely. The servant becomes the master.
Thank you. I'm a libertine leftie myself, but these days I appreciate people on any side who are willing to stand for their principles and not get swept up in embracing everything their tribe does. And while I personally don't put much stock in this particular virtue, I appreciate calls for human beings to be more virtuous in general; these days that is missing from both left and right.
Darin Selnik spent his time in the pentagon focused on culture war slop. Sure wokeness in the military had to go. But he also banned Family Days and Resiliency days. You know, the days to allow people who are gone 30%+ of the year to have an extra day at home.
Then he has the gall to say how the IDF is better than the US military. Also trips over himself to mention he’s Jewish while saying so.
Real bastard stuff. We need to rid ourselves of conservatives and replace them with a true right wing
This piece makes a certain amount of sense in theory. But in using a photo ad for blue jeans (they're not even bikinis!) as the prime example to indict our ostensible porn culture is ludicrous. There is nothing "salacious" about this ad. Perhaps the pearl clutchers who run the Family Research Council might be alarmed, but people who value their liberty -- yes, liberty matters -- will roll their eyes and move on.
By the way, Sydney Sweeney is 27 and turns 28 next month. I think she's old enough to decide what to do with her life.
Thanks for the comment. The reason to use this specific ad is not that it's the most salacious ad out there but that prominent "conservatives" came to its defence. And to say there's nothing salacious about it is clearly false. (Perhaps you haven't watched all the versions.) If J. D. Vance had said, "as a Catholic I disapprove, but America is a free country" that would have been more reasonable.
The Sweeney ad is wonderful and clever and not at all "hyper-sexualized." Having said that, in concurrence, I would prefer to champion elevated forms of beauty that result not just from great genes but great virtue as well. Mira Nadon of the New York City Ballet, to take one of many worthy examples, seems an ideal endorser. Here's delightful clip of her dancing to Stravinsky: https://www.instagram.com/p/C87U5CrJQt_/
This isn't really an honest forthright discussion. The ad caused such a stir because Sweeney is white. Leftists were open about their reasons. They didn't bat an eye at when she was did interracial sex scenes in Euphoria. The implication that a hot white woman has good genes made them histrionic. Mealymouthed conservatives won't affirm this obvious truth; they'd rather pretend that its about boobs.
In a bygone era Sweeney's tits would have been slapped down by the Hays Code and the ones freaking out about her blue eyes wouldn't even be eligible for citizenship. Sure its a vulgar tool but mockery is necessary given its immediacy and conservatives' lack of institutional power.
Our society is at war with outsiders that have infiltrated and subverted everything we once held dear. Wars are won by offence, not by defense. And often fire needs to be fought with fire. Your only objective in war is to win. There is no secondary objective.
When the war is over the survivors can choose how to live.
I'm for the Sweeney ad, puritanism isn't really the way, let's face it any healthy heterosexual male desire a polygamous marriage of various women devoted only to himself all of them having kids from him, as men are designed to impregnate the most high quantity of women possible, monogamy is only a trade-off for matingmaxxxing because he can't achieve his preference due to impotence whether external or internal factors (e.g. poverty, law etc...) aka modifying standards in order to have at least one women instead of notne
What’s missing here is recognition that the regime itself thrives on dissolving coherence and disrupting inherited norms. Against that backdrop, an embrace of traditional sexuality (even a boorish one) isn’t a betrayal of conservatism but a structural defence of civilizational vitality.
"But manners are essential to any broad and peaceful social order. Without restraint and civility, liberty is impossible, for man cannot govern himself until he has tamed the tempests of his own soul. This is why Christianity was indispensable for the making of the West."
1/3rd of the German population killed in a horrific religiously-motivated war. Given that history I think religion is a bigger danger to social peace than men oggling sexy ads.
I'm disgusted by Trump's sleazy car-salesman personality, but I ultimately think it's the lesser evil compared to these medieval superstitious peasants who think "God's will" should determine our politics and that embryo selection is Satanic. The Sydney Sweeney ad was a celebration of beauty, of eugenics, of male sexuality. Even Trump, in his scammy way, celebrates wealth and accomplishment. Pro-lifers want us to celebrate these down syndrome babies and teenage mothers who don't abort their kids.
Charles Murray noted two outcomes to increased diversity.
1) Californication. Where we become a one party leftist state.
2) Latin Americanization, where the Conservative Party becomes a Vulgar Latin American Conservative Party (Trump) to be competitive.
Elections are won by the median voter.
"Elections are won by the median voter."
Elections are won by those whom the Deep State prefers
"They used a woman’s body as an object to sell clothes. Nothing new about that of course, but it is something which traditionalists have long bemoaned."
This was, at one time, bemoaned by all "sides" that found manipulation deplorable. The stills are, for the most part, neutral, but the motion pictures were laden with copulative symbolism.
The advancement of neuropsychology has ratified the efficacy of modesty. The immorality of seductive association is only tangentially related to sex. It is larceny at its core.
I agree with the article's premise. That said, I have tracked the long march through all its iterations, for nearly six decades, and cannot avoid thinking that the ubiquity of vulgarian impulse has led to a highly regrettable pragmatism. I can view it only as a tragic necessity.
All of that said, losing sight of proper standards is exceedingly unwise. It is one thing to be pragmatic, quite another to allow nihilism free rein. What begins as free rein, inevitably reigns freely. The servant becomes the master.
Thank you. I'm a libertine leftie myself, but these days I appreciate people on any side who are willing to stand for their principles and not get swept up in embracing everything their tribe does. And while I personally don't put much stock in this particular virtue, I appreciate calls for human beings to be more virtuous in general; these days that is missing from both left and right.
Bo, your piece is spot on. We have become so confrontational that anything that irritates my 'enemy' is fair game.
Hit the nail on the head with this. Elite conservatives would rather focus on culture war slop than improving the lives of their citizens.
Another example https://youtu.be/O1FccKxovLE?si=VGBekyCVAcISht-Q
Darin Selnik spent his time in the pentagon focused on culture war slop. Sure wokeness in the military had to go. But he also banned Family Days and Resiliency days. You know, the days to allow people who are gone 30%+ of the year to have an extra day at home.
Then he has the gall to say how the IDF is better than the US military. Also trips over himself to mention he’s Jewish while saying so.
Real bastard stuff. We need to rid ourselves of conservatives and replace them with a true right wing
This piece makes a certain amount of sense in theory. But in using a photo ad for blue jeans (they're not even bikinis!) as the prime example to indict our ostensible porn culture is ludicrous. There is nothing "salacious" about this ad. Perhaps the pearl clutchers who run the Family Research Council might be alarmed, but people who value their liberty -- yes, liberty matters -- will roll their eyes and move on.
By the way, Sydney Sweeney is 27 and turns 28 next month. I think she's old enough to decide what to do with her life.
Thanks for the comment. The reason to use this specific ad is not that it's the most salacious ad out there but that prominent "conservatives" came to its defence. And to say there's nothing salacious about it is clearly false. (Perhaps you haven't watched all the versions.) If J. D. Vance had said, "as a Catholic I disapprove, but America is a free country" that would have been more reasonable.
—NC
I completely agree. Bo’s pearls have been ground to dust from being so tightly clutched.
Corruption, too!
The Sweeney ad is wonderful and clever and not at all "hyper-sexualized." Having said that, in concurrence, I would prefer to champion elevated forms of beauty that result not just from great genes but great virtue as well. Mira Nadon of the New York City Ballet, to take one of many worthy examples, seems an ideal endorser. Here's delightful clip of her dancing to Stravinsky: https://www.instagram.com/p/C87U5CrJQt_/
This isn't really an honest forthright discussion. The ad caused such a stir because Sweeney is white. Leftists were open about their reasons. They didn't bat an eye at when she was did interracial sex scenes in Euphoria. The implication that a hot white woman has good genes made them histrionic. Mealymouthed conservatives won't affirm this obvious truth; they'd rather pretend that its about boobs.
In a bygone era Sweeney's tits would have been slapped down by the Hays Code and the ones freaking out about her blue eyes wouldn't even be eligible for citizenship. Sure its a vulgar tool but mockery is necessary given its immediacy and conservatives' lack of institutional power.
Our society is at war with outsiders that have infiltrated and subverted everything we once held dear. Wars are won by offence, not by defense. And often fire needs to be fought with fire. Your only objective in war is to win. There is no secondary objective.
When the war is over the survivors can choose how to live.
I'm for the Sweeney ad, puritanism isn't really the way, let's face it any healthy heterosexual male desire a polygamous marriage of various women devoted only to himself all of them having kids from him, as men are designed to impregnate the most high quantity of women possible, monogamy is only a trade-off for matingmaxxxing because he can't achieve his preference due to impotence whether external or internal factors (e.g. poverty, law etc...) aka modifying standards in order to have at least one women instead of notne