Communist sex appeal

John Zmirak brings up an effect that’s bigger than we usually realize:

What did I feel when I read that international AIDS experts were jubilant at the pope’s seeming to open the door to condom use as a means of preventing that deadly disease from spreading?

I felt relief. What ran through my mind was, “Thank God. That’s one fewer subject on which faithful Catholics have to seem like unbending, moralistic freaks.”…

I smiled, got out my scented, biodegradable doggie bags, and took the beagles for a long walk through my twee Victorian neighborhood. I hadn’t felt this good since I came out against the Iraq War — and realized that, for the first time in my life, there was some issue on which I agreed with the hot, artsy girls in Soho. I could talk to them at parties without inadvertently picking a fight. Indeed, I could sidle up to some twenty-something graphic designer in a slinky black dress, say something snarky about Dick Cheney, and make her smile. Why couldn’t this have happened to me back in college?

We reactionaries are as superficial as anyone else, and I think it’s a bigger irritant (especially for those of us working on college campuses) than most of us care to admit to know that nearly all the young, attractive women are against us.  Not only do they disagree with us–they think we’re bad people.  I do especially feel for my male, college-aged readers.  That dark-eyed beauty who you’ve had a crush on all semester since she became your lab partner, she despises you–or at least she would if she knew your true opinions.   She’s dreaming of her own Che Guevara to sweep her off her feet and lead her on an adventure of socialism…and sex.  The first time she came to class with that “Obama/Biden” T-shirt, didn’t your heart just sink?  Our enemies get laid a lot more than we do, and not just because their low morals permit it.

Now, one would think that this is only an issue for single young male conservatives.  Consciously, perhaps.  But unconsciously, any movement gains luster from association with female beauty, and every movement suffers from association with unchosen male celibacy.  Even married men and priests with every intention of being faithful to their vows remain sensible to the charms of the fairer sex.  (Long time readers will know that the author suffers from no such lack of sensibility.)  Not having any desire to sleep with these women, we shouldn’t care so much what they think of us…but often we do.  We still try to look good and impress women we honestly have no designs on.  That’s one side of it.  The other is that pretty girls have such a surplus of erotic charm that it seems to rub off on anything they touch.  Television has long known how to exploit this effect.  It must exert a strong force on the uncommitted to see Leftist causes surrounded by so much loveliness.

Perhaps its effect reaches even further.  I’ve long half suspected that the famed “Spirit of Vatican II” was in fact nothing other than communist sex appeal.  One can’t help noticing that mid-century theologians had what can only seem like a bizarre enthusiasm for the Church’s atheistic persecutors.  The concept of invincible ignorance was perversely applied to guarantee the salvation of the Church’s mass-murdering enemies.  It’s because they cared so much about “social justice”.  This noble passion was effectively attributed to all atheists, and it was more or less assumed to make them morally superior to all Christians.  One can hardly believe what a rosy view Catholics like Maritain and Rahner (not to mention the open Catholic heretics!) had of the souls of these totalitarian savages.  To me, it looks for all the world like infatuation.  Did they see one too many pretty girl waving a red flag and feel the sting of rejection?  I’m not talking about consciously courting sexual favors–if that’s what the council fathers were after, I’ll bet they were disappointed.  I’m talking about the unconscious impulse all men have to try to please pretty girls.

In the 19th century, most women were Christians.  Atheism and socialism were thought of as “guy” things, like football or belching in public.  The sex appeal factor must have worked in our favor back then.  The liberals, outmaneuvering us as always, knew they had to win over the pretty girls, so they invented feminism, the doctrine of female selfishness.  How to win them back?  I don’t know.  I’ve never really been good with girls.

10 Responses

  1. There is an important difference here between perception and reality, though. Religiously observant, married people have more and better sex than do others. (Annoyingly, I am having no luck finding cites for the religiously observant part, but I’m pretty sure it’s true.) Sex which is open to procreation or, even better, which is undertaken for the specific purpose of procreation is way hotter than what normal people do. Does having sex with a chemically neutered woman or a piece of latex really appeal to you all that much? Seriously? That’s what normals are doing when they are having sex, right?

    The Commies, like the Nazis, had excellent advertising. Our advertising sucks. The churchmen seem to believe that by speaking pseudo-hippy or continental-philosophy-sounding gibberish they will convince everyone how hip they are. Instead, they look like putzes who don’t even believe their own bullshit. You gotta sell the product you have, not try to distract attention from it.

    Every parish I have ever been to is crawling with chicks. The sex ratio in the 16-30 age range has got to be 10:1. Plenty of them are hot. So, even the bare factual claim that chicks dig secular, atheist, hipsterism seems a bit dubious to me. Chicks definitely do not dig Ned Flanders, but who says Christian men have to be like Ned Flanders? Hollywood, that’s who. Their advertising is good; our advertising sucks.

    How to win them back?

    Mel Gibson (minus his lame apologies and especially if he goes back to his wife). Grace Kelly. What woman would rather be Lady Gaga than Grace Kelly? What is sexier than this. Nothing, that’s what. Maybe this? Etc. Plus megaphones.

    One can hardly believe what a rosy view Catholics like Maritain and Rahner (not to mention the open Catholic heretics!)

    Well, I guess Rahner is not an open heretic. He does not come out and say “Pelagius was right.” But, he is another great example of the piss-poor marketing of the churchmen. We are going to attract our “separated Protestant brethren” back by embracing Rahner, a guy who pretty much denies the necessity of baptism, the necessity of faith, and endorses the most Pelagian-sounding view of salvation since, well, Pelagius. Similarly, the Orthodox. We are going to entice them back into communion by declaring silly season on the liturgy, sounding like we are rejecting supercessionism, parading women around on our altars, and demonstrating that the Latin Rite Church will explode into lunacy with the slightest relaxation of discipline from Rome. Our marketing sucks.

    Have you seen this ad campaign. Our diocese is currently begging money from us for it. It’s an ad campaign designed to get fallen-away Catholics to come back. The first commercial, EPIC, is OK. It effectively makes the point that, even on the standards articulated by secular culture, the Catholic Church is pretty great. It’s all charitable and scientific and multiculti and stuff. For reaching out to people who think those things are the highest values, it’s probably OK.

    The second commercial, MOVIE, is atrociously bad. From the setup, I assumed they were going to point out that you are going to Hell if you don’t get your ass back to Confession and to Mass (but maybe softly, softly). It is directed to fallen-away Catholics, after all, who ought to be worried about this. The first quarter or so is gold. It calls to mind the first of the four final things and alludes vaguely to the second. But, then, it gets so soft as to be non-existent. And the subtext! “Come back to the Catholic Church. We are as oppressively feminist and anti-racist as any modern workplace or university.” I also love the whole come to Jesus and have your memories healed thing. Reminds me of that Ahhhhhhnold movie on Mars, “Total Recall.”

    Anyway, what you are saying is right, but I think that it is more usefully though of as a consequence of the churchmen losing their role in patronizing art & running education and losing their competence in evangelization. We should be able to point to the difference between Modern and Catholic architecture as a tool of evangelization—hatred of Modern architecture is not exactly a fringe position, after all, except among our evil elite. Instead, the Cardinal Archbishop of LA builds the Klingon Cathedral. How come only Mel Gibson is able to see that film is kind of a good medium in which to express the traditional Catholic view of the Passion? Why don’t the dudes in the funny hats see this?

    Goth or Vampire subculture is another example. A dark fascination with death (the first of the four final things, after all) is a normal Catholic orientation, though not the only one. We’ve got bone chapels and the flipping Dies Irea, for goodness sake. Where is that good darkness in our Catholic life today? Nowhere. We’ve got “The Exorcist,” but that’s kind of old. Thus Goths and Vampires and every other silly misdirection rush in to fill the vacuum. We have something to sell to those people. We could at least be planting seeds. Our Lord’s story is dark, man. We’re all about the blood. Judgment is dark, man. Intense.

  2. Ugh. The first link in my comment is broken. It ends .jpg9 instead of .jpg Just need to clip off the 9 and it works.

  3. There’s really no way to “take them back”, because they are voting based on their economic self-interests. Democratic policy is to provide them with jobs and subsidies, through an extensive pro-feminist economic/legal structure.

    Their cultural paradigm of support for sexual liberation (i.e. female sluttishness) is backed by an economic platform of financial aid for single mothers, as well as a political platform of legalized abortion, and a legal platform of forced child support from unwilling fathers. Not to mention the legal platform of support for rape and domestic violence accusers, and the corporate/educational policies of support for sexual harrassment accusations.

    A young woman who wears an Obama shirt is simply signaling her membership on the winning side of the culture war.

  4. Hello Bill,

    I’ve fixed the link. It is a lovely picture.

  5. Hi Bill,

    Thanks for this excellent comment. You’re certainly right that the commies and heretics have done a far better job of image presentation than their enemies/victims. (Controlling the media helps a lot.) Perhaps that’s skewed my impressions that being known as a religious conservative would be such a turn off with the ladies. Of course, the fact that this impression is so easily formed is itself a significant fact, even if the truth is less extreme. And I can’t shake it. For example, I can’t imagine that if one were known for daring and heroic exploits as an undercover missionary in communist lands or as a soldier in a counter-revolutionary army, that that would help one impress a girl, at least in a romantically useful way. Heroes of the Left, on the other hand, seem to be amply rewarded in female admiration. I have no idea if this impression of mine is grounded in fact, but the fact that it’s so strong must mean something.

  6. Hello Justin,

    You’re certainly right that there’s no way for conservatives to outbid the liberals when it comes to catering to women’s self-interest. We can only appeal to their sense of duty or their desire for purpose or more meaningful relationships. Like you, I strongly doubt that such appeals can overcome the appeal to selfishness, especially in a generation of women who have never been told that they have duties to anyone but themselves.

  7. I agree with you about all that. Popular culture definitely presents the picture that conservative Christian men will not get hot chicks, and I think that this picture does indeed create its own image to some extent.

    To the extent I am disagreeing at all, it is to point out that the manufacture of cultural artifacts is where this image gets made. And the manufacture of cultural artifacts is conspicuously where the good guys have almost zero representation and influence.

  8. […] There’s a stereotype out there, created by we conservatives, that Leftists are a bunch of lechers who have decided to tear down the moral patrimony of our civilization just so they can more easily gratify their own carnal cravings.  Listening to them, though, I more often get the impression that Leftists are people with unusually weak sex drives.  Don’t get me wrong:  I’m sure they get laid more often than conservatives, but that’s not for trying harder.  It’s because chicks dig Leftist radicals. […]

  9. […] has because from having won over so many pretty girls. “Communist sex appeal”, I called it Communist Sex Appeal, but I never explained it. Thanks to you guys, I now see that I had it backwards. Right-wingers are […]

  10. By the time I went to college in 2008, I was in my late 20s and an extremely conservative evangelical. I ruffled feathers by publishing strident columns in the student newspaper, and got hissed at by many an angry feminist.

    What did surprise me however was how many cute college girls would privately tell me that they agreed with my opinions. I suffered no lack of feminine interest for standing my ground.

    Of course I was already married so perhaps they thought it was safe …

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: