The Moralism of the Immoral
May 24, 2022
“WHEN I was a teenager, people with looser morals in the area of sex tended to characterize those with more conservative attitudes as prudes or killjoys. The attitude was that of the frat boy who pities the nerd or bookworm who doesn’t know how to have a good time. Nowadays the mentality is instead like that of a Bizarro-world Cotton Mather, or perhaps a mashup of Hugh Hefner and Mao Zedong. Critics of the sexual revolution are treated as agents of the devil or enemies of the people – bigots, haters, oppressors who must be hounded and silenced.
[…]
“It is … worth noting that as the sexual revolution has progressed, it has led to claims ever more bizarre and manifestly preposterous – such as the claim that the biological distinction between male and female is bogus and an expression of mere bigotry. How could anyone seriously believe such nonsense? The motive for wanting to believe it is not mysterious, since one might have gotten oneself locked into sexual vices so extreme that their rationalization requires such an absurd thesis. But how could one fool oneself into actually believing it? Here too a kind of Bizarro-world moralism rides to the rescue. If one can whip oneself up into a self-righteous frenzy that directs attention away from the absurdity of one’s belief and onto the purported bigotry of those who deny it, then the belief can (perhaps just barely) be sustained. And the more manifestly absurd the belief, the more moralistically shrill will be the rhetorical defense of it, because rhetorical force has to make up for the lack of any rational basis.
“We might call this the law of compensatory moralism: The more manifestly shameful or absurd one’s sexual vices, the more shrilly moralistic one will tend to be in attacking those who object to them, so as to compensate psychologically for one’s own deep-down awareness of this shamefulness and absurdity.”
–– Edward Feser, “Psychoanalyzing the Sexual Revolutionary“