The case against the sexual revolution A new guide to sex in the 21st century

Contemporary sex positivity goes against the inherent interests of heterosexual women, according to this alarmist treatise. New Statesman columnist Perry pleads with young women to reject hookup culture and "avoid being alone with men they don't know," contending that liberal feminism has been blind to biological and hormonal realities in pursuit of women's liberation. Characterizing men as "pikes" and women as "minnows," she argues that centering discussions about sexual behavior around the issue of consent forces women "to emotionally cripple themselves in order to gratify men" and condone behaviors that their moral intuition knows are wrong. She also suggests that rape is an inherent "mode" of male sexuality, that "snobbish progressives" are ignoring the dangers of child sexualization and pedophilia, that BDSM is unacceptable even with consent, that sex without love is hurtful to women, and that it is illogical for feminists to argue that "sex work is work" and also be "hyper-sensitive to any suggestion of sexual impropriety in their own workplaces." Though Perry acknowledges that accessible birth control benefits women, she expresses concern that it has fostered relationship-free sexual habits. Perry's essentialist perspective, harsh tone, and slippery slope arguments are unlikely to change the minds of young women who have embraced their sexual agency. This provocation misses the mark. (Aug.)