A Culture of Archaic Taboo, Modesty, and Hypocrisy around Sexuality Creates Avoidable Psychological Trauma

Photo by Mitchell Hollander on Unsplash

Most of the trauma people experience from abuse is due to the stigma placed upon being abused by the culture. While it is true that abuse is traumatizing, it is the reaction of other people which causes an immense amount of psychological reinforcement and magnification of the trauma victims experience from abuse.

When society incessantly tells you that “X is bad and you should feel very bad, angry, sad, upset, or otherwise bothered by X” this preemptively creates the neurological pathways which cause the person to associate their trauma with the expected reaction that people expect.

This is especially true nowadays because the general public demands that you be psychologically tortured by this trauma, and because victims often feel fragile and inherently seek to appease others, those who are subjected to trauma often act out the expectations of others. When others constantly tell you how abused you are, and how hurt you must be, you believe them. Even if your experience was not this traumatizing, the expectations others place upon this experience cause you to believe it was.

There is also large amount of shame associated with being subjected to sexual abuse, and this cultural shame is what causes a considerable amount of trauma during the act. It is not that the act is actually harmful, but it is the social stigma which causes it to become harmful, much like how being bullied at school for your clothes is not physically painful, but it is socially painful.

Acting hurt is what allows people to shift this shame and guilt onto their attacker. While the attacker is truly to be shamed and is guilty of this crime, often times these actions and the trauma experienced are incredibly dramatized or become inflammatory points of social conflict, often about things such as ideology or beliefs.

This association of sexual assault as being a proxy assault on a political movement such as feminism becomes problematic because the culture of victimhood today is incredibly opportunistic, and those subjected to abuse are often weaponized by certain groups in order to push an agenda.

Every political group will take advantage of these assaults, not just feminists, because people will use any instance of sexual misconduct to punish their enemies as viciously as possible. The Neo-Nazis attempt to use sexual offences committed by blacks, Hispanics, or Jews as a condemnation for their enemies just as much as liberal groups will use sexual misconduct committed by enemy politicians or wealthy elites as condemnation.

These acts of publicizing sexual abuse are never about the victim, they are entirely to produce publicity, either to pique the interest of the public with a scandal, or assault the reputation of somebody who is a political or business enemy. Those associated with these political movements demand that the victim feel a high amount of trauma from their abuse, and then expect the victim to act this out, suffer every day from this trauma, reliving the experience in their mind, often telling the tale in public. These politicized groups want the victims to suffer from their abuse, because when the victim suffers, these politicized groups now have fuel to push their agenda, stemming from the evidence of the victim suffering from abuse.

There is an incredibly hypocritical sexual culture in places like America. Fornication, contraception, adultery, pornography, and other things are celebrated, while there is still a considerable amount of stigma about sexuality or sexual events. People have been taught this hypocritical view of intense stigma around sex despite things like sexual liberation, which leads to a problematic view of sex in society.

A recent example of this is Louis C.K. He was subjected to immense condemnation after a woman alleged that he was sitting in a room masturbating in front of her when she walked in the door. This was labeled as “gross and inappropriate” when in reality this should not be traumatic. There’s nothing harmful about a man jerking off some 6 feet away from you. The harm being done is purely imaginary, because these people are not in physical contact at all, and she is not being assaulted by fluids which may be diseased.

The harm comes entirely from the psychological perception of sexuality stemming from modesty. This is essentially putting a program in a person’s brain which causes them to be harmed by something as harmless as a fat man jacking off in a room 6 feet away from you. This causes people to experience psychological suffering despite this being entirely avoidable.

If this woman was taught to be indifferent to men jacking off, as if it were no different than using a phone or some other trivial hand action, then this woman would not be harmed. This is unfortunate because this abuse and the psychological pain this woman suffered is entirely avoidable since it results entirely from a learned culture rather than an unavoidable reaction to real physical harm being done.

This is the issue with most sexual scandals today. Most of these things are naturally harmless, but instead come from the learned psychological disposition which causes people to believe that “If a sex act occurs I am being harmed.” and this belief is what causes the trauma, not a man jacking off in front of you, not a man making a sexual remark, not a whistle, not a man fondling a woman at work. These actions only cause trauma and psychological pain because of the paranoia, fear, and shame which is taught to people about sex acts. If people were indifferent to these naturally harmless acts, then they would not produce any psychological trauma.

A comparable example is people, usually men, who were socially isolated as children, and when they go to take a picture, they will not touch the other person, only pretending to do this, which is known as the “hover hand”. These people have been taught that touching another person is basically always a crime, and since they become incredibly paranoid about human contact due to this culture, they will not touch other people for fear of rebuke.

This culture of fear, paranoia, and shame surrounding sexuality comes is entirely rooted in misogyny. It’s rooted in the belief that women are a form of property, and that “The only value a woman has is her body and her vagina.” This causes men to see all sex acts a woman performs as “damaging to the value of the woman”, which in turn causes the intense social stigma and shame around sex, especially abuse or being friendly to strangers because this signifies that the woman is loose with her body and has no value due to consistent “damage” caused by sexual interaction. Women also learn to use this artificial social stigma as a means to jockey for social positioning through bullying such as slut shaming or other acts meant to disparage other women, always in a means to bolster the ego of the woman doing the bullying.

The belief that a woman who has sex is damaged or has less value stems from the Old Testament of the bible, in that women were expected to be virgins when married. God commands you to stone women to death who were not virgins at marriage, and this is for the same reason he commands you to stone adulterers and homosexuals to death. This is because these acts have an immense capacity to spread diseases, especially in the ancient world where there was no contraception. These diseases were always incurable and could often prove fatal or otherwise produce sterility in the people afflicted.

There is also the concept that a loose woman cannot be married because she will not be faithful, that she is not fit to be a wife or mother, and these beliefs also stem from the same Christian belief designed to protect against diseases in the ancient world. Since God commands you to stone non-virgin brides to death, historical Christians had little understanding of exactly why God condemns these people to death, and this produces this superstitious and powerful stigma around sexual acts, and people now associate being loose with being unmarriageable and many other negative traits.

This is the root of the issue. The cultures in Christian nations like America place immense shame and stigma upon sexual acts, all because of archaic cultural norms which are no longer applicable in a modern society. Even though sexually transmitted diseases still do exist, condom use is fairly prevalent in today’s world. Though one might see a fornicator as a future adulterer, 50% of marriages in the USA end in divorce, so adultery is not a valid argument when marriage already has a 50% chance of failure and subsequent adultery anyways when the partner has sex with somebody else.

The most profound issue is that the sexually transmitted diseases afflicting humans, one of the most important legitimizing factors of marriage, can all readily be eradicated in humans the same way that communicable diseases are addressed in other domesticated animals. If a communicable disease is found in an animal, that animal is quarantined, or culled, from the group. They are separated so to ensure they do not infect other animals. This same process can eliminate the spread of sexual diseases instantly, simply by quarantining people who have these diseases, and eliminating them entirely once the last generation of those with diseases dies off.

Though people complain about ethical arguments, in reality, arguing against the culling of the human population to eradicate sexually transmitted diseases is arguing in favor of the spread of diseases such as HIV and other diseases which can cause death or cancer.

For example, despite being a 1st world nation, the number of children born with congenital syphilis rose by 40% between 2017 and 2018. This is a problem caused by a disease which can actually be cured with medicine. Despite penicillin, the cure for syphilis, being available to the public since 1945, people still spread this disease. These children are severely harmed because their mother was afflicted by a disease which can easily be eradicated if humans had any intention of doing so. Even diseases such as HIV for which there are no cure can be eradicated if these populations are quarantined to prevent the further spread of these diseases.

As much as it may infringe upon somebody’s rights or dignity to quarantine them, these people are spreading a disease within society, so allowing these people to do so is technically illegal and an act of bio-terrorism. It is the purposeful and avoidable spread of contagious diseases within a population. To defend a person’s dignity and rights when their dignity and rights an accessory to bio-terrorism is not a sound argument.

Committing bio-terrorism is not a right, thus there’s no reason to believe that quarantining people with these diseases is somehow an infringement of their rights or dignity. Over 50% of people have an STD, so it’s not like the country would just massacre these people despite some people falsely believing that is what culling means.

Culling just means to separate, and these people would all be given certain cities and certain areas to live in which would then be separated by borders which ensure that these communicable diseases do not spread to those who are not infected. It’s a small price to pay for eradicating diseases which afflict 50% of the population, many of which cause infertility, cancer, or death.

The follow up to this article further discusses marriage in modern society. (link to article)

Used to write things, a couple books. Delusions of being able to help humanity faded. Now I'm mostly just waiting to die.