This is part of a series of posts where I look into reasons to be Sex 3.0. There are far too many to list or even summarise in one blog post so I will create periodic blog posts with a few reasons in each post.
Now, we are all born into a Sex 2.0 world and raised to be Sex 2.0 but there are lots of reasons to move on and leave it all behind.
Honesty & Choice
To put it mildly, Sex 2.0 is dishonest in a large number of ways. Let’s take a look at an example.
Firstly we are all raised in a Sex 2.0 world to believe in the notion that lifetime monogamy is natural for human beings but it’s not. If it were natural for us to be lifetime monogamists then the most frequently occurring pattern in on-going sexual relationships would be :
- Two people meet
- They hook up
- They stay together for life in blissful monogamy
Anybody with even the tiniest sliver of observational ability can take a look around the world and see that this “and they all lived happily ever after” tale is not the most frequently occurring pattern in human sexual relationships but we are fed fairytales from birth that tell us different.
Why? Because human beings are not lifelong monogamists. We are pair-bonders by nature but not lifelong monogamists by nature. Pairbonding and falling in love and / or lust are all totally natural. Lifetime monogamy is not. So why not be honest about it?
Sex 3.0 is honest about it. How? Well, as this article discussed, there are only 2 kinds of relationships – fenced and unfenced. Sex 3.0 lays the cards on the table and presents you with this choice. The Sex 2.0 world doesn’t. The choice of unfenced is hidden. Society does not offer it to you it on offers, or to be more accurate obligates you into the “choice” of fenced.
A choice is not really a choice once it becomes an obligation.
Freedom From Dogma
In modern usage in the English language dogma means a set of beliefs or principles that are handed to you and that, under social pressure, you are simply supposed to accept without thinking or questioning.
In other words dogma is simply a set of beliefs and opinions that reached critical mass in the past because enough people believed them to be true at the time. These beliefs are then handed down from generation to generation and are presented as “authoritative” especially once the church and various religions started to get in on the act.
In that sense, Sex 2.0 is very, very, very dogmatic.
The problem with this is that the reasons why those beliefs were historically established in the first place – which in terms of human sexuality was to establish the Sex 2.0 deal – are no longer valid.
This is covered in far greater detail in the book and in these posts here and here but what I mean by that is that once human beings went through the agricultural revolution and invented property, the insanely high level of male paternity concern that this brought to our species led humanity to rabidly devour everything about human sexually and excrete it out in a new form called sex 2.0.
The steaming turd was enforced by dogma and women went along with it partly because they were either shamed out of society or killed if they didn’t and partly because women historically have required a male provider and, by co-operating with the Sex 2.0 deal, they got one.
However, in modern western society, women have social mobility. They can have their own jobs and careers if they want them and they can provide their own security. So there goes the female side of the Sex 2.0 deal – boom !
As for men, when it comes to the male side of the Sex 2.0 deal which deals with guaranteeing paternity (or at least nominally best ensuring it), the Sex 2.0 deal experiences what is politely called “paternal discrepancy” – in other words that guy you thought was your daddy ain’t your real daddy – in a significant percentage of cases. The percentage is thought to be as high as 20%.
With the relatively recent invention of DNA based paternity testing offering a far more efficient way of establishing paternity – greater than 99.9% in fact – the male reason for the dogma disappears too. So there goes the male side of the Sex 2.0 deal – boom !
Conclusion? Sex 2.0’s day is done and it’s only dogma and groupthink that is keeping it alive. Time to move on to Sex 3.0 and leave the dogma behind.
No More Shaming. No more Discrimination
Sex 3.0 is not all good though. We are losing some very serious expertise behind when moving away from the Sex 2.0 homestead.
One thing that people were always terrifically talented at in a Sex 2.0 world was shaming.
Shaming of who? Why shaming of absolutely everyone in the world of course. At least everyone that did not participate in and go along with the Sex 2.0 deal.
Now remember that the Sex 2.0 deal was always about women selling their sexuality in exchange for the security of a sanctified marriage and men providing said security in exchange for the honour of throwing that woman’s sexuality in a box, slamming the lid shut and stamping and labelling it as their property. Why? Why for the man’s peace of mind of knowing (or at least thinking) that they were raising their own kids, continuing their own genetic line and passing their precious property down their own blood line when they die.
Don’t want to go along with that deal? Then you shall be suitably shamed !!!
Don’t want to go along with that deal because you happen to be gay? Why that means you are a dyke or a faggot. Even today in many countries that’s enough to get you killed.
What if you are a woman that wants to have sex but does not want to get married? Well that makes you a slut or a whore !
What if you are heterosexual and male but don’t want to get married? Well, as women cannot experience maternity concern (the fear that she is raising a child that she thinks is hers but is not sure) the same way that men experience paternity concern due to the self-evident nature of childbirth, this does not prompt as much frothy hysteria as the slut or the whore would you are going to get shamed anyway.
You will be told you have to “man up”. Women’s magazines will call you a “kidult” – an adult who has not really grown up, accepted responsibly and done the right thing. Reams of articles about “Selfish Bachelors” will pour forward and scorn you!
George you cad ! You scoundrel you !
As one wag put it “The bachelor is a selfish, undeserving guy who has cheated some woman out of a divorce.”
What if you are heterosexual but are not in a sexual relationship with the opposite sex and are perfectly content with your life? Friends and relatives will question you, try to set you up on dates and will act like something is terribly wrong with you for being totally contented and happy with life.
Fuck Fear & Control
From a design perspective, the at the core of the Sex 2.0 design is fear and control.
Fear for both men and women. Fear for men that they might be cuckolded into raising somebody else’s child. Fear for women that they might have a sexual “notch count” that is so high that it damages their perceived value in the sexual marketplace.
This fear is tied into control. Desires to control the sexuality of others grow from these fears. How about a better design at the core of human sexuality?
From a human rights perspective, don’t you think that human beings should have the right to grow up in a world where fear and control are not at the heart of the human sexual experience?
With Sex 3.0 they do.
The death of the Sex 2.0 deal is a great opportunity. It’s time to relight the fire of civilisation and remind ourselves of what makes civilisation great … to rediscover it … and it is not fear and control.
It is freedom.