Counter-Currents
The Counter-Currents Book Club
F. Roger Devlin’s Sexual Utopia in Power
. . . & the book is on sale!
Counter-Currents
You can buy F. Roger Devlin’s Sexual Utopia in Power here.
196 words
Join us on March 3rd at noon PST, 3 PM EST, or 9 PM CET for the next meeting of the Counter-Currents Book Club, where we will be discussing F. Roger Devlin’s Sexual Utopia in Power with our panel: author F. Roger Devlin, Greg Johnson, and Counter-Currents Program Director Cyan Quinn.
Gender relations — if one even acknowledges that genders exist nowadays — are in chaos. Half of marriages fail. Women either hold out for the “perfect man” until menopause or put themselves on OnlyFans, hoping to strike it rich. Meanwhile, 22% of men aged 25-34 have resolved never to marry. Everyone is a victim of this catastrophe at a time when white fertility rates are at an all-time low.
How did the Sexual Revolution destroy happiness, and how can we find it again?
Is there hope for a new revolution — a reassertion of human nature?
Pick up a copy of the book here, which is on sale at a discount between now and March 3rd.
Please share widely, and hop in for a lively discussion. You can send in your questions for the panel via Entropy here, or through the DLive or Odysee chats during the stream. See you there!
* * *
Counter-Currents has extended special privileges to those who donate at least $10/month or $120/year.
- Donors will have immediate access to all Counter-Currents posts. Everyone else will find that one post a day, five posts a week will be behind a “paywall” and will be available to the general public after 30 days. Naturally, we do not grant permission to other websites to repost paywall content before 30 days have passed.
- Paywall member comments will appear immediately instead of waiting in a moderation queue. (People who abuse this privilege will lose it.)
- Paywall members have the option of editing their comments.
- Paywall members get an Badge badge on their comments.
- Paywall members can “like” comments.
- Paywall members can “commission” a yearly article from Counter-Currents. Just send a question that you’d like to have discussed to [email protected]. (Obviously, the topics must be suitable to Counter-Currents and its broader project, as well as the interests and expertise of our writers.)
To get full access to all content behind the paywall, please visit our redesigned Paywall page.
13 comments
I look forward to this. The book is available as a hardcover in Australia from Abbey’s books but the publisher is called Ministry of Love. Is this an authorised printing?
On the question of genders existing, they actually didn’t until the sexologists stole the word from the grammarians and started using it to redefine the male and female sexes in the 1950s. In grammar English, German and Latin have three genders, French, Spanish and Italian only two. So obviously gender is fluid and culturally constructed. We are much better off not using the word, except in quotation marks or Latin textbooks, and instead using sex. Most people can much less readily conceive of sex as mutable or anything other than binary (allowing for the rare developmental intersexes).
From one pedant to another, I agree with you except that intersex conditions do not alter the sex binary. Biologically, sex is defined by whether you produce relatively small, generally motile gametes (usually called “sperm”) or relatively large, immotile gametes (usually called “eggs”). There is no third type of gamete and thus no third sex, although some organisms can produce neither (and thus have no sex) or both (and we call them “hermaphrodites”).
The overwhelming majority of intersex people are unambiguously male or female (though it may not be readily apparent from the appearance of external genitalia). For example, people with Klinefelter syndrome are male. At most, an “intersex” condition can make your sex “neither” or “both”, but as far as I know the latter is only theoretical as no true human hermaphrodites (producing both eggs and sperm) have ever been observed.
This is one of my favorite books. I read it three times. I wish it were written in the 1990’s, when I was a teenager.
My sentiments exactly!
Good! When did you first read it?
About three years ago, roughly. That book would have helped me clarify some things when it came to dating and interacting with the opposite sex. F. Roger Devlin is good at explaining a lot of aspects of the relations between the sexes.
“Gender relations — if one even acknowledges that genders exist nowadays — are in chaos. Half of marriages fail. 22% of men aged 25-34 have resolved never to marry”
Why? ………. “No Fault makes No Sense”
Pamphlet Article; Parent’s rights march May, 2018-Washington DC:
Under Title IV-D of the social security act 42 USC section 658(a) State courts earn vast amounts of revenue from federal government through performance grants based on the number and size of child support orders issued and satisfied. They receive one dollar for every dollar collected to feed state budgets and an army of civil servants (Divorce industry fuels- family “education” programs, feminist N.O.W, shelter workers, BW advocates, State and Federal legislature, HHS, Child support enforcement, Child support administrators, Child Protection Agents, Youth and family services, Social workers, Psychologists and Court appointed child psychiatrist, Mediators, CASA’s, GAL’s, Lawyers, Judges, Police, Corrections officers and Juvenile holding facilities) all in a multibillion dollar operation employed to serve in this process of separating children from fathers and then establishing the industry of trying to deal with the problems created by this separation with the help of our legislators, leading to the demise of family and increasing mental health problems which start in adolescence. This is accomplished by first providing easy awards to one parent under the auspice of it being politically correct, or an acceptable act in order to successfully drive a wedge between parents and to further a lucrative growing process (divide and conquer). If this does not destroy the future of family for all these mothers it most certainly does for most of the children involved. Having visited House and Senate offices in Washington DC during this march, I have explained to those officials or teams who made themselves available that our training in the Defense Department taught us to recognize cash awards, funds, gifts or incentives like Title IV-D as incentive rewards which are potential “conflicts of interest”. Under such a highly “questionable system”, how can we substantiate the court claim which supposedly prioritizes “The best interest of the child?” (Reflection – Guzziferno)
In the words of Charles Dickens, “the principle of law is to make business for itself”
Groucho Marx once praised a man for inventing spaghetti stuffed with bicarbonate soda, thereby being the first to cause and cure indigestion at the same time.
I think we’re often drawn to abstract ideals like freedom, equality, fairness, and the like, and few want to be so churlish as to argue against them, but the messy reality is that we are animals with instincts, and there’s no guarantee that nature will conform to any of our high-minded ideals. I think our recent ideals regarding women are simply not compatible with human nature in the building of stable societies.
Sociologists tell us that the most reliable way to reduce birth rates is to educate women and get them into the workplace, and indeed every country in which that practice is common – mostly the West and East Asia – has below-replacement fertility. Thus, while it pains me to say so, I think these policies simply must be rethought, in light of reality, just as racial equalitarian orthodoxy must be, if Western society is to survive. (I think men’s relationship to work should also change, but that’s a different topic.)
No matter how nice it would be to live in a fair, equal world, we have to deal with reality as it seems to be.
Sociologist have also attributed the cause of woman in the workforce as not just part of a rights act, but to double the work force, stagnate salaries, while doubling the income tax to industries partner – the government.
That’s pretty close to what Aaron Russo quoted Nick Rockefeller as saying about why the Deep State promoted feminism. Of course, there were several other influences, but it did have the NWO seal of approval.
I remember reading that. The problem is greater than what most understand. According to a Prof. Baskerville of Howard University the State is now openly manipulating control of your children and family members for profit, a very dangerous principle. You’re talking about the government seizing control of the children of citizens who have done nothing wrong. This is the most dangerous power any government can have, to control and regulate the private lives of its citizens, including their families and their children. Over 50 million fathers in the last 3 decades have been affected.
Dr. Warren Farrell PHD and author of “The Boys Crisis, has shown that 100% of boys (to date) and young men involved in the school shootings in our nation’s recent history, (most if not All) came from fatherless homes. A point of interest made which may be considered coincidental, is that these boys who acted for the first time in the late 1980’s, were in fact from the first generation of one parent homes which spiked in the 1960’s and 70’s after the social/sexual revolution in that era which lead to the marked increase in divorce, and separations in marriage, fathers, and family. They were also the first generation or wave to commit these violent crimes under the same middle class conditions surrounding others. This study also informs us that the acts of this new group of young people from broken homes only displays a minority of the young people affected or the “tip of the iceberg”, allowing us to understand the potentially greater population of young people affected even though they have yet to commit a violent crime. The greater numbers that do not act out publicly, fall under media radar such as the ones in recent articles which claim that since 2000 the teen and pre-teen suicide rate has risen 70%.
I seem to have missed it? The article says “March 3rd”, but it was actually March 2nd? (I’d recommend including a weekday in all such announcements to help people detect typos like this…)
And only the first 10 minutes of the replay are publicly available, only enough to hear some introductions. :-/
Comments are closed.
If you have a Subscriber access,
simply login first to see your comment auto-approved.
Note on comments privacy & moderation
Your email is never published nor shared.
Comments are moderated. If you don't see your comment, please be patient. If approved, it will appear here soon. Do not post your comment a second time.
Paywall Access
Lost your password?Edit your comment