男人在约会中平均来说比女人想要的东西略有不同。当然，也有例外，但你知道，所有古老的动力学仍然非常明显。你知道，我们有整个产业，无论是约会应用程序产业，还是色情产业，还是大型生育产业，你都会看到我们本性的各个方面进一步的“技术化”。你知道，那些东西，基本的东西没有改变，我们的本性仍然在那里。

大家好，今天我有机会与玛丽·哈灵顿（Mary Harrington）交谈，她是《女权主义反对进步》（Feminism Against Progress）一书的作者，该书于2023年出版。玛丽的分析是，女权主义思想体系出现在工业革命之后，当时男性和女性都在重新调整他们的社会角色，并且它已经分裂为关怀型女权主义（care feminism），这不太符合经典的女性主义，以及自由型女权主义（freedom feminism），这才是大多数人会认同的女权主义。我们还谈到了“后女权主义”的“超人类主义”转向，让我们说，关于自由型女权主义，讨论了避孕药的发明及其对个人和社会产生的激进影响。在许多方面，这些影响是激进且扭曲的，因为避孕药被吹捧为通往享乐主义性爱乌托邦宇宙的门户，一个实现最终平等和满足每一次冲动的宇宙。而实际上，它非常迅速地变成了普遍的堕胎，在美国每年达到一百万例。这导致了男女之间性关系的根本性不稳定，将女性交给了她们最糟糕的冲动，也交给了那些更有可能采取短期性策略的精神变态者。然后是女性性欲的普遍商品化，让我们说在色情制品方面，这无论如何都占据了互联网流量的约25%。我们穿梭于所有这一切之中。所以，加入我们吧。

玛丽，你于2023年春季推出了你的书《女权主义反对进步》，那么，为什么不先带我们回顾一下这本书以及你在书中提出的论点呢？

好的，我想这本书分为三个部分：过去、现在和未来。我真正想做的是回答一个问题，在我自己有了孩子之后，这个问题对我来说变得很清楚：为什么母性在女性运动中是一个如此盲点？当我一边推着婴儿车在英格兰小镇的街道上闲逛，一边阅读时，我开始意识到，母性在女性运动中并非完全是一个盲点。事实上，许多女权主义作家已经或多或少地探讨了母性问题。但不知何故，每当有人试图在女权主义内部为母亲们辩护时，它最终都成了可怜的附庸，被放在一边，被遗忘。然后，又有人不得不站出来说：“那母亲们呢？”然后，这又被遗忘了。这种情况一直在发生。所以，我有一个问题：为什么？为了让一个很长的故事变得更短，当我深入研究这个问题时，我开始认为我们对女权主义的看法是错误的。我是说，这一切都始于乔丹，我发现自己不得不回答这个问题：如果不相信进步，有可能成为一名女权主义者吗？我是说，我意识到在有了孩子之前，我已经不再相信进步了。然后，当我有了孩子，我意识到我仍然是女权主义者，但我在女性运动方面有一些疑问，而且我仍然不相信，而且我也不再相信进步。当我把这些碎片拼凑在一起时，对我来说，解决方案并不明显。因为每当我告诉别人我不相信进步时，他们都会说：“啊，但你想回到没有投票权的日子吗？你愿意成为你丈夫的财产吗？”你知道，女性的生活发生了哪些其他方面的积极变化呢？我心想，这真是令人费解，因为实际上，你知道，这些人有点道理。但另一方面，我在这里，你知道，在女性运动方面感到非常孤独和隐形，推着我的婴儿车在英格兰小镇闲逛。我感觉，你知道，在某些方面，事情已经大有改善，而在其他方面，它们却似乎没有。那么，我该如何将一方面是进步，另一方面是女权主义的图景拼凑起来，并试图理解我们现在所处的位置呢？最终，我得出了一个结论：是的，如果你不相信进步，你仍然可以是女权主义者，但这取决于你对女权主义和进步的定义。因此，我 embarked on this extended reread of the history of the women's movement really in terms of technology in terms as some as as a phenomenon which began with the industrial reol ution and with the Transformations that came about in women's lives with the Industrial Revolution and as a set of usually very legitimate and very Justified responses to um a wholesale a wholesale uh disruption and upending and upheaval of what family life had hitherto more or less been and I mean of course this varies a little bit from geography to geography and culture to culture but I mean I'm I'm broadly writing about white boura women in the English speaking West because I mean that's that's where I that's where I stand so it seems and and to and if if we're honest you know the the majority of the history of feminism is really anglophone and Bourgeois and white so it seems a reasonable place to start you know not that none of that is to say that there are no other worthwhile perspectives but this is the one that I have so I decided to tell that story and and that's a that's a story of um women making a transition from um broadly an agrarian subsistence life in the Middle Ages um where everybody worked but they worked in a cont in in the context of productive households so really the home was the basic unit of work um in in in the premodern world and women women had there was women's work and there was men's work but really you know outside ex very aristocratic households everybody worked and women's work just happened to happened to take place with children underfoot and it was in it was generally of a Kind which was compatible with having children underfoot and this and none of this none of this was really a sort of was none of this was so much a kind of prescriptive thing about who ought to be doing what because of some some set of moral characteristics but more a pragmatic response to um men and women's different physiologies and and the and the needs of infant children which are considerable as you'll know as a parent and so and so that was that was the premodern world when then when then when the Industrial Revolution came along it first removed men it first removed Furs from the productive household and drained male workers away into into factories into offices into other working environments elsewhere increasingly and and then as as time and then and then as time wor on it also began to drain away women's work by producing by by producing as consumer products much of the most of the goods which women had previously made at home so U for example textile making has is some the some sort of 20 30 40,000 years of of that being classically women's work um there's a a Absolut Ely ancient history of of weaving being women's work and because it's which makes sense in the context of an of an ordinary subsistence home um because you can lift a loom off the ground so so it it it doesn't get it doesn't it the baby doesn't get tangled up in it it's social work which you can do with with other PE with with in company with children under fooot and there's a and anthropologists and historians have done extensive work and Research into why why it just makes sense from a material and a practical point of view for textile making to have been historically women's work and and and yet it textile making was one of the first one of the first domains to be industrialized um first with the spinning jenny and then um and and then later on with mechanical looms and there's a whole there's a whole radical history in in Britain in the early period of the Industrial Revolution when the textile makers were smashing the mechanical looms because they could see the end of their homebased subsistence life um looming up in front of them in in the form of these of these machines which had just taken taken the work from them um and and and and in and and the secondary effect of that was that women's work went away because you could just buy cloth um and that was a whole lot easier and and there are countless other examples of a similar Dynamic taking place um and and the the upshot of all of this is that most in an increasing body of the work that women had previously done in the home simply went away and they be and their role was in the course of that very much reduced um and so until the far from being as in as in a lot of premodern contexts an equal equally economically active and socially active participant in the work of a productive home they've become they've become as it were a sort of Chief consumer in a the the bouris housewife is a kind of Chief consumer in a private home and I've drawn from Ivan nich's 1980 book gender in the book to to to to understand the the transition which illich reads and I agree with him as as really a not not a not a moment of empowerment but as as a significant loss of agency um and the point which as as illich puts it women women make the transition from being from being active participants in a kind of ambiguous complimentarity with men where there's men's work and there's women's work but everybody's working to to what illich describes as economic sex which is to say a condition of notional equality but where in practice because of our physiology and because of because of the allotted role given to Women Within boura private domestic sphere women are in practice um structurally disadvantaged for illich sexism begins with the arrival of with with the arrival of modernity um so this is this is really my history of the past and women responded to this in two characteristic ways so so there were there were those which which in turn gives rise to the two polls of what I think of as first as as feminism proper up to up up to the the middle of the 20th century the first of those polls was the feminism of freedom and those well the so the first those po the feminism of care which was um and here I've slightly counterintuitively read a body of work a body of writing and a body of cultural work which is not typically read by by women's historians as feminism precisely um and i' I've drawn on the the various women's social reform movements which were Legion in the in across both sides of the of the Atlantic actually in the 19 Century there were countless social reform movements there was there was there were work to rescue prostituted women there was there was social reform work there was Outreach to the poor there were civil societies women ran Civil Society you know it wasn't as though these bouro Housewives sat at home doing nothing all day or just spent all their time shopping they went out they organized they they and they formed the backbone of civil society and they also wrote copiously they wrote journals and Publications and letters and you know and and articles and huge amount there a huge body of writing and a great and and and one of the central themes in it is the the intrinsic value of the home um so women may have been women may now no longer work directly um but but but but instead these these women sought to make the case for women's continued um value and and and the the the really fundamental moral and social and cultural importance of the private sphere as a space outside the market a space of respite and and it was it was sort of idealized as a space of moral elevation which and and and and a Haven away from the the pressures of the competitive market Society so that was so that and in that space women in that space women could educate children children could be nurtured and and and everybody could could as it were find Refuge from from the harsher pressures of the world outside so that's the ideal and this is this is really what I think of as the feminism of care and it's a bunch of women whose much of whose economic agency has been radically reduced relative to their grandmothers perhaps because they're no longer economically active and so they're setting out to make a case for the ongoing value of those parts of of women's work quote unquote which which are which they still see as important and which which are still irreducible in particularly particularly around the care of children and so that's feminism care but then on the other side there was a whole bunch of other women who were like well hang on a minute this is all very well but this only works if your husband does is if your husband is a good guy you know what if what if your husband drinks all the money what if your husband beats you what if your husband leaves you um what if he rapes you um you know you you have no redress you have no leverage um and then and so they set out to make the case um for wi women's entry as it were into Market Society on the same terms as men so the right to own property on the same terms as men which which was not which was not available within a legal and and a legal and a social system which was structured for around productive households so as so the point where two adults married the women's person was subsumed into that of the man because that was what made sense juridically in the larger context of productive households and this no longer made this no longer made nearly as much sense in the context of in the in in the industrial context where the an economic an an economic actor is increasingly an individual rather than a household and so you've got this you've got this this legal and political tension um in Play Between Women who still don't really still don't have separate personhood from men and who are finding increasingly as as a growing number of uh the feminists of Freedom began to argue that that they were they was they were severely vulnerable in that context and so increasingly you start you start seeing campaigns for women's women's right to own property for women's right to enter the market as as workers on the same terms as men and increasingly for women to be treated effectively um the same as men in all contexts and and and I think of this as the beginning of the feminism of freedom and there's a really rich interplay if you look at the history of the 19th century women's movement between these two polls because they're they're by no means that far apart most of these women knew each other and it wasn't it wasn't a sort of crazy back and forth culture War the way it feels sometimes now this is it was a very you Mo most of the the Fe the supposed feminists and anti-feminists actually knew each other um and often disagreed often often agreed on on more than they disagreed on most of them were active in the same social reform movements most of them agreed for example on the question of temper Temperance most of them agreed on issues like sexual morality and and the and the importance of tackling the sex trade and there are a great many issues where and and and most and most of them were very devoted very devout Women of Faith and so there was a great a great deal on on which most the even the feminists of freedom and the feminists of care broadly agreed um and and and collaborated on and and in the in the middle there are these two polls between the women who who see their interests as lying in um a political project of sameness with men and of the right to enter the market on the same terms as men and those women who seek to ring fence a distinct sex space for Women Within the context in the W which which makes space for motherhood which makes space for nurture and which makes space for for those those dimensions of women's lives which are irreducibly distinctively sexed and so and and this is a this is a dialectic which goes on in through various iterations all the way up really until the beginning of the 20th century it the middle of the 20th century sorry where the feminism of Freedom definitively won over the feminism of Care at the point where where a new technology came came into the came into the picture which allowed us medically to flatten those diff those irreducible differences between the Sexes or so it seemed to the point where really there was no reason not to argue for a feminism of freedom and that technology was uh hormonal birth control which which led inexorably um towards a ratchet towards the legalization of abortion which most 19th century feminisms feminists would have viewed as not not to similar as as broad broadly the same thing as in fanticide and and would have recoiled from it was very it was it was extremely unusual for for a feminist to support abortion in the 19th century but by the middle of the 20th century the popularization of hormonal birth control had had in had paradoxically increased the number of unplanned pregnancy simply because there was more sex happening that it be it became a matter of social justice and and women began increasingly to see to see it as a matter of social justice that you know young women were no longer compelled to you know R run off to another country or you know take their life in their hands with a Backstreet abortion or various other Horrors that were that that that that that proliferated Downstream of of this radical transformation in sexual mores and the upshot of that was again on both sides of the Atlantic within I within I believe a decade of one another the the legalization of abortion across both sides of of the Atlantic now I mean I'm I'm I'm deeply ambivalent on the question of abortion and I have friends who are who are pro and I have F who are pro- life and I have friends who are pro-choice and really the The Stance I've taken on that question in the book is to say well where wherever you wherever you sit on the absolute uh moral question um it's difficult to dispute that if if what you're arguing for is a right to assert is for women's women to have the right to assert their bodily autonomy even at the expense of another potential human life then that's that's about as definitive a case a stance as you could possibly take in favor of the feminism of Freedom over the feminism of care which would make which would make a greater amount of space for for for for the needs of the re really the most depend the the most dependent imaginable other that you can that you could possibly uh think of and and so and so wherever you stand on the absolute moral question um the the the the moment where abortion is legalized and that that then within the within the 20th century women's movement becomes inexorably hitched to the question of women's women's political personage as such um to the point where I mean the particularly in America the debate is now so toxic I'm cautious to say anything more on on it but it's it's it's arrived at the point now where there are people who genuinely wholeheartedly believe that for that for that right to be taken away would mean women no no are no longer able to access personhood as such and really what you're saying at this point and what the the the statement that you're implicitly making there is is to say that freedom is so much more important than anything else than that it's it's worth it's worth sacrificing a potential human life for if if it comes down to a zero what what feels like a zero some contest that even moral about the most about the most defenseless human life there is which is to say one which which is still in uturo and can't survive outside another a woman's body even even that life is is is forfeit if if the price of sustaining that life is the curtailment of a woman's Freedom now and again wherever you stand on the absolute moral question that's a very strong stance in favor of freedom and really and so and so the I see that as a real cero moment a real profound inflection point in the women's movement which it it embraced as the as the Baseline of women's political personhood as such a technologization of women's bodies in the name of individual freedom and and and really I see that the the the the 10year uh the 10year arrival of from from the legalization of the pill approximately 10 years to the to the or the legalization of abortion as our entry into the transhumanist era because that's the point where where Women's existence as such um comes to seem inextricable from a from a set of medical Technologies and remember what's what's fun what's what's so radical about these technological innovations is that unlike more or less every other Medical Practice up to that point certainly every lcit medical Medical Practice up to that point um these the these don't set out to fix what's broken — so I mean if I have a broken arm I go to the doctor and I say hey doctor my can you fix my arm please and the doctor has a hasn't has a you know you you go to medical school for years to learn what normal normal human health looks like um and and to learn what to do with people's bodies in order to fix what's broken and make it make it normal and healthy again and what's radic what's radical and transformative about birth control and later about abortion is that they don't fix what's broken in the name of normal human health they break what's working normally which is to say um women's women's fertility or or a normal pregnancy in in the name of individual freedom and I think we still underestimate what a radical transformation that was and I think we're still we're still working through the downstream consequences of that and really the second part of the book um explores some of the because some of the downstream consequences of of having entered into the transhumanist moment in the middle of the 20th century because I mean we're we're we're more than half a century further into it now and I think we're beginning to see some of the Contours of of that new reality um more clearly as time has gone on just recently Saudi Arabia ended its 50-year Petr dollar deal with the US which has the potential to weaken the US dollar since 1974 Saudi Arabia has sold oil solely in US Dollars which was huge for our global economic dominance now they want other options if there's less demand for the US dollar what happens to its value it's reasons like this that make it important to diversify some of your savings into gold and you can do that with help from Birch gold right now qualifying purchases by July 31st are eligible to get a one-of-a-kind limited edition golden truth bomb the only way to claim your eligibility though is by texting Jordan to 9898 98 for over 20 years Birch gold group has helped tens of thousands of Americans to protect their savings by converting an IRA or 401K into an IRA in physical gold protect your savings by diversifying away from the US dollar with gold text Jordan to 9898 98 and Birch gold will help you convert an old Ira or 401K into an IRA in gold for no money out of pocket right now qualifying purchases by July 31st are eligible to get a one-of-a-kind limited edition golden truth bomb text Jordan to 98 9898 that's Jordan to 9898 98 today so Mary the argument you've made um I'm going to summarize it and tell me if I've got it right so you went back far enough in time to assess the role that men and women played in home centered agrarian societies and you made a case that that was a stable solution of relative economic equality let's say and then the Industrial Revolution kicked in and it pulled men away from the home first but then it it um replaced women's work and that meant that women were up in the air about what their role was but it also turned them into something approximating comparatively wealthy individualist consumers then you said there were two responses to that one was the emergence of a feminism of care that detailed out the realm of women's responsibilities and opportunities in the really in the domestic sphere with regard to say relationships with their husbands their immediate family and more importantly their children and then you detailed out another stream of feminism which was the feminism of Freedom you Associated that to some degree with women's concern about being tangled up with men who weren't really good for anything and so that's interesting little twist on that but your fundamental point was that once women become became independent actors in the free market in the industrialized free market there was every reason to move towards the transformation of law so that women as independent economic actors would have the same economic rights as men but then but then there's that problem with bad men lurking in the background there that contaminates things and then you talked a little bit about the transhumanist movement identifying that at least in part with the rise of the birth control pill which is a radical Innovation basically equivalent to a genetic a major genetic mutation a species altering mutation and then you pointed out that oddly enough in concert with the rise of the pill we got the rise of legalized abortion and its widespread prevalence okay so that's where I want to drill into I want to tell you something biological and I want you to tell me what you think about it because I think it's key in some mysterious way to this entire problem the problem you've laid out is that women and men for that matter have been recalibrating their identity since the dawn of the Industrial Revolution it made us into more atomized individuals who were more consumer oriented let's say and that's a major social disruption but then on the pill and the abortion side here's something that is worth considering I believe so you know the evolutionary biologists have identified two fundamental reproductive strategies so imagine there's a continua okay on the one end you have they're called R selected or R strategists and and the r stands for reproduction essentially rapid reproduction let's say and so mosquitoes and puff balls and fish are our strategists and so the r strategy is fairly straightforward many many many potential Offspring millions or even billions of them zero post sex investment so that's the r investment strategy okay and so most of your fertilized offspring gites are going to perish enough will last for them to replace you or maybe even for the population to thrive but it has nothing to do with you after the sexual act okay on the other side our so-called K investment K strategists and those are creatures mammals would be a reasonable example that have very few Offspring but pour a lot of resources into them and the ultimate K strategists are human beings so our investment strategy is long-term high cost investment even spanning multiple Generations okay so there's a real distribution and humans are on the extreme end of one of those uh directions let's say one of those poles of the distribution okay now there's a subsidiary observation that goes along with that and this is where the point is really gerain so now imagine that among human beings there are R strategists and K strategists okay so the our strategists are ones who have many sexual partners and low investment now that's a lot easier for men than it is for women because of course if women get pregnant they're high investment strategists immediately unless they circumvent that but the men can get away with it let's say being R strategists now a further question is just who the hell are these R strategist males so these would be the men who are interested in multiple sexual partners um low emotional investment and low post sexual investment Say in any result in children and we know the answer to that our strategist males are narcissistic mellan Psychopathic and sadistic and so what that means I think as far as I can tell is that when you free up women to be sexually available with the technological transformation you both deliver them into the hands of our strategist males who have all the lovely personality features that I just described or you or maybe something even worse is that you train men who might otherwise be high investment maters to adopt a r strategy with all of the psychopathy and melanism and narcissism and sadism that goes along on with that and so this is a very perverse outcome because and I guess I don't really know what people expected to begin with you said that for example you implied that you know women are pursuing their freedom let's say with regards to untrammeled sexual access on the reproductive front but that's not exactly a freedom it's more like a subjugation to sexuality as the prime motivator in life right I mean you could identify yourself with your sexuality which is of course what people are doing in Spades now but the idea that the opportunity the ability to pursue untrammeled sexual expression is actually a manifestation of freedom is an error if you believe that subjugation to biological untrammeled subjugation to biological whim doesn't constitute Freedom this is especially true if it turns out that it's delivering women into the hands of Psychopathic men which seems to be the case there's a great deal of Truth in that and really that speaks to the one of the it it speaks to the epigraph actually which I gave the second half of the second part of the book which comes from Horus I'm not going to try and quote the Latin at you but the translation is you can drive nature out with a pitchfork but still she comes back um it's a very famous quote um I think I've I've taken it taken it slightly mischievously out of context but it's a very important piece because the governing theme of the transhumanist era is using technology to try and abolish our nature and really that's that's the that's the that's the governing um theme the the governing project of the of the transhumanist era which is the point where we embrace the or as we hope the the power of Technologies to transform ourselves so we're no longer industrializing the world we're no longer using machines to say make weaving easier instead we're using Technologies to to remodel ourselves um to make us more like we think we ought to be at least Al or that's the idea and that really begins with a contraceptive pill which which is a a medical technology which we which the and the original utopians the first wave of feminist responses to the pill were hugely optimistic about what it would do I mean we're some we're some decades further down that track now and we can see that it hasn't really worked out like that and our mutual friend Lise Perry wrot recently wrote a very persuasive book detailing all of the ways it hasn't really worked out like that and all of the ways which as you've just outlined the sexual Revolution was considerably more to the benefit of um was it are are selected um all the these narcissistic Psychopathic um highly sexed and not particularly fatherly men seem to have been the net beneficiaries of this technological transformation Contra the Contra The utopians Who imagined that we might that it would open out a kind of sexual Utopia in which everybody could be free to be themselves women could finally Express themselves free from the the the gossiping the gossiping old ladies in the street and free from the risk of pregnancy and and it would make everything so sort of sunshine and rainbows and kittens and it would all be lovely now now we know we know at this point that that's not exactly what happened but but really this just go this this serves to illustrate the utopian spirit that people have brought to the project of Technology technologizing ourselves using using essentially biotech beginning with the the chemical intervention of the contraceptive pill um but we're considerably further down that path now and at at every stage we've set about embracing new new Innovations in biotech in the Hope really of remedying perceived flaws in our nature you know whether that's whether that's a pill to stop us being sad or whether it's a whether it's a technology which will which will which will mean women's fertility no longer has to fall off a cliff at the age of 40 because now there are now there are Technologies which will enable her to go on having kids into her 50s or her 60s or or whatever I mean the you we could we could be here all evening um enumerating the V the the Technologies um the the opportun ities and the biomedical advances and at every stage what happens is there's a utopian promise of being able to escape a previous embodied limit — there is a a new set of a new set of constraints on us if you like aspects of our nature which were previously managed by social means in the way that the the difference between women's and men's reproductive role was previously managed by what what now gets dismissively referred to as the sexual double standard which was in the area prior to iable contraception an extremely pragmatic measure — oriented at avoiding avoiding a proliferation of unwanted children within a community — and so so so so that's one example of of a way you know an asymmetry or some some awkward aspect of our nature was was managed socially in a way which just went away more or less overnight the moment of Technology came along that seemed as though it would fix the problem for us and there have been countless other examples since then and what invariably happens is you get a dividend of freedom and then what whatever it is that's been technologized in that way is then reordered to the market and you and you see this very clearly with the sexual Revolution which which promised a great utopian dividend of of self-expression and free love and you know everybody having aies and it'll be fine — and actually what it gave birth to was the corn industry and it gave birth to a ballooning sex industry and now you know 50 years on from that we have PornHub which is one of the biggest website one of the most one one of the most high high grossing websites in the world and which is already notorious for sex trafficking for abuse — for for countless other atrocities and for cooning the appetites of children frankly who are who are the majority of its consumers and and and much else besides so so so what but but really what I want to emphasize there is the dynamic at work we think we think technologizing ourselves will liberate us from some aspect of our nature what in fact happens is that that aspect of our nature becomes opened up to Commerce and in the meantime our nature is unchanged so the differences as you pointed out the differences between men and women in terms of mating strategies and courtship preferences and so on are still there our mutual friend Louise Perry sets this out very clearly in the case against the sexual Revolution men still want slightly different things out of a date to women on average you of course there are outliers but — women still broadly want an affectionate relationship you know a subset of men at least are very happy with a quick a a quick sexual encounter and then and then no no ongoing encumbrances you know though all the ancient Dynamics are still very visibly there nothing has changed all that's happened is that the social mechanisms we had for trying to manage those asymmetries between the Sexes have have been have have disappeared they've bled away they've they've been they've been dissolved — and instead what we have is a seemingly Limitless commercialization of the environment around them you know we have whole Industries whether it's the dating app industry or whether it's the porn industry or whether it's the romance industry or you name it whole Industries which have grown up off the back of our the the the the dissolution of our social codes around sex and courtship and I and and if you look if you look further closer to the present at for example the reproductive industry big fertility you'll see that the the dissolu the the technologization of ever further aspects of our of our nature in an effort to liberate us from its constraints so to allow two men to to liberate us quote unquote just so — for example to allow two men to have a baby — or to or to enable a man to to resemble a woman or or any any one of the other innumerable ways that we've set out to to abolish our own nature or to or to or to render it plastic and subject to our control never it it never works you know men still humans still can't change sex — two men still can't have a baby you know men still can't get pregnant you know those those thing the fundamentals have not changed our nature is still there all that happens is that it's it's made a whole lot of people Rich because it's opened up new domains of our of our embodied selves to the market and so really that's that's the story I set out to tell in part two of the book and I and I also set out to show how this this this relationship to our own bodies this pursuit of M medical Mastery of our own bodies has been radically accelerated by the internet and particularly by the the very disembodied childhoods that a number of that a lot of young people now experience where they grow up socializing fundamentally through digital avatars and then take as a matter of basic social justice the possibility the idea that they should be able to reskin their meat Avatar at will and which is you know combined with a number of combined with social contagion and common emotional pathologies which have been typical in adolescent girls since time in Memorial the the upshot has been as as we know the the social contagion of trans identities which has had which has had catastrophic and irreversibly harmful effects on thousands of girls now you know and the the detransition of movement is growing and I mean you these are these are familiar topics to you but this is this is all this is Downstream of a kind of escalating — escalating fantasy of of total Mastery of our physical selves and this fantasy of a of a of a physical self which is separable from our sense of our inner sense of ourselves as though our bodies and ourselves are two separate things which is which can seem believable if you spend a lot of time on the internet but isn't believable for a moment if you spend if if you spend 9 months pregnant — for example or you know or or fall over and break your leg really spend any time in the actual physical world at all right and and so that and so that's the set that's the story I set out to tell in the second part of the book and in the third I set out to offer some offer some Reflections on where we are now and where we might go next on the basis that we've already passed Peak progress and the and the the the he 1990s years of — having solved boom and bust and ended ended World conflict and so on and all of those other things we were promised we'd achieved are not coming back and that in fact life is likely to get us going online without expressvpn is like forgetting to mute yourself on a zoom call do you really want your co-workers to hear you munching on your lunch in the middle of town hall because your online activity flows through their servers internet service providers know every single website you visit and in the US they're legally allowed to sell that information to advertisers that's why you got to get expressvpn expressvpn routs 100% of your traffic through secure encrypted servers so your ISP can't see your browsing history the app hides your IP address making it extremely difficult for third parties to track your online activity it sounds complicated but I promise you expressvpn is actually really easy to use just fire up the app tap one button and get protected I love expressvpn because it works on all my devices so I can stay secure when I'm on the go protect your online privacy today by visiting expressvpn.com Jordan that's expressvpn.com Jordan and you can get an extra 3 months free expressvpn.com jordant toay let me ask you some questions about the second part and then we'll move into the third part so I'm going to summarize what you said again so you characterized the pill as the first major technology in what you describe more broadly as the transhuman movement which is an attempt to free us or to escape from let's say the hypothetical limitations of our embodied selves and so this was sold as a movement to Freedom now that was freedom described as instinctual Lous right because what free sexual access means that you can is that you can have your wants and needs gratified at any moment and maybe that's beyond the mere sexual right into the consumer domain itself so that's a very peculiar view of freedom but as you pointed out it was also accompanied by something that was naive immature and possibly even malevolent which was this notion that we would bring about a sexual utop IA where men and women Were Somehow equal and that that would be an improvement in all regards including on the male side now we've already talked about the difference between R and K Strategies and the fact that when we switch to an R strategy which is exactly what happens with the pill we facilitate the psychopathic men so that seems like a bad idea for the men and for the women and and I think it's actually irrefutable — it it there's good research evidence for this already but it also makes technical sense at a much deeper deeper biological level so and it's obviously the case that men who want short-term sexual relationships aren't the same men who want a long-term stable monogamous partner that requires responsibility obviously so okay so now and now we have this movement to Freedom too which you could be more skeptical about and call it a flight from responsibility and then you might say well why the hell not fly from responsibility if it's so burdensome 9 months of pregnancy the fact that you have a dependent infant for multiple years like 40 and why not fly from that and I would say at least part of the answer to that is when you escape from responsibility in that matter you also demolish the meaning of your life it's like a lot of the meaning in people's lives is obtained as a consequence of sacrifice right you sacrifice for your siblings you sacrifice for your parents you sacrifice for your friends for your wife for your children and there's dignity and purpose in that sacrifice and if you lift that burden from people then they're left then they're left wondering just what the hell they are and what they're supposed to be doing and that doesn't seem like much fun given the radical increase in mental health problems particularly among women aged 18 to 34 so you you move to freedom in this narrow naive immature and even pathological sense you escape from responsibil you demolish meaning in consequence and you facilitate the Psychopaths and then you you put another Twist on that which is real fun because there's the Psychopaths and the narcissists and the macu alans that you're going to meet with the dating app and in the sexual Marketplace let's say but that isn't the limit to the commodification of female sexuality I mean we know that about 25% of internet traffic and a tremendous amount of the motivation for its initial Construction by the way was the commodification of female sexuality so the engineers for example who couldn't get a date could at least

玛丽，你于2023年春季推出了你的书《女权主义反对进步》，那么，为什么不先带我们回顾一下这本书以及你在书中提出的论点呢？

好的，我想这本书分为三个部分：过去、现在和未来。我真正想做的是回答一个问题，在我自己有了孩子之后，这个问题对我来说变得很清楚：为什么母性在女性运动中是一个如此盲点？当我一边推着婴儿车在英格兰小镇的街道上闲逛，一边阅读时，我开始意识到，母性在女性运动中并非完全是一个盲点。事实上，许多女权主义作家已经或多或少地探讨了母性问题。但不知何故，每当有人试图在女权主义内部为母亲们辩护时，它最终都成了可怜的附庸，被放在一边，被遗忘。然后，又有人不得不站出来说：“那母亲们呢？”然后，这又被遗忘了。这种情况一直在发生。所以，我有一个问题：为什么？为了让一个很长的故事变得更短，当我深入研究这个问题时，我开始认为我们对女权主义的看法是错误的。我是说，这一切都始于乔丹，我发现自己不得不回答这个问题：如果不相信进步，有可能成为一名女权主义者吗？我是说，我意识到在有了孩子之前，我已经不再相信进步了。然后，当我有了孩子，我意识到我仍然是女权主义者，但我在女性运动方面有一些疑问，而且我仍然不相信，而且我也不再相信进步。当我把这些碎片拼凑在一起时，对我来说，解决方案并不明显。因为每当我告诉别人我不相信进步时，他们都会说：“啊，但你想回到没有投票权的日子吗？你愿意成为你丈夫的财产吗？”你知道，女性的生活发生了哪些其他方面的积极变化呢？我心想，这真是令人费解，因为实际上，你知道，这些人有点道理。但另一方面，我在这里，你知道，在女性运动方面感到非常孤独和隐形，推着我的婴儿车在英格兰小镇闲逛。我感觉，你知道，在某些方面，事情已经大有改善，而在其他方面，它们却似乎没有。那么，我该如何将一方面是进步，另一方面是女权主义的图景拼凑起来，并试图理解我们现在所处的位置呢？最终，我得出了一个结论：是的，如果你不相信进步，你仍然可以是女权主义者，但这取决于你对女权主义和进步的定义。因此，我 embarked on this extended reread of the history of the women's movement really in terms of technology in terms as some as as a phenomenon which began with the industrial reol ution and with the Transformations that came about in women's lives with the Industrial Revolution and as a set of usually very legitimate and very Justified responses to um a wholesale a wholesale uh disruption and upending and upheaval of what family life had hitherto more or less been and I mean of course this varies a little bit from geography to geography and culture to culture but I mean I'm I'm broadly writing about white boura women in the English speaking West because I mean that's that's where I that's where I stand so it seems and and to and if if we're honest you know the the majority of the history of feminism is really anglophone and Bourgeois and white so it seems a reasonable place to start you know not that none of that is to say that there are no other worthwhile perspectives but this is the one that I have so I decided to tell that story and and that's a that's a story of um women making a transition from um broadly an agrarian subsistence life in the Middle Ages um where everybody worked but they worked in a cont in in the context of productive households so really the home was the basic unit of work um in in in the premodern world and women women had there was women's work and there was men's work but really you know outside ex very aristocratic households everybody worked and women's work just happened to happened to take place with children underfoot and it was in it was generally of a Kind which was compatible with having children underfoot and this and none of this none of this was really a sort of was none of this was so much a kind of prescriptive thing about who ought to be doing what because of some some set of moral characteristics but more a pragmatic response to um men and women's different physiologies and and the and the needs of infant children which are considerable as you'll know as a parent and so and so that was that was the premodern world when then when then when the Industrial Revolution came along it first removed men it first removed Furs from the productive household and drained male workers away into into factories into offices into other working environments elsewhere increasingly and and then as as time and then and then as time wor on it also began to drain away women's work by producing by by producing as consumer products much of the most of the goods which women had previously made at home so U for example textile making has is some the some sort of 20 30 40,000 years of of that being classically women's work um there's a a Absolut Ely ancient history of of weaving being women's work and because it's which makes sense in the context of an of an ordinary subsistence home um because you can lift a loom off the ground so so it it it doesn't get it doesn't it the baby doesn't get tangled up in it it's social work which you can do with with other PE with with in company with children under fooot and there's a and anthropologists and historians have done extensive work and Research into why why it just makes sense from a material and a practical point of view for textile making to have been historically women's work and and and yet it textile making was one of the first one of the first domains to be industrialized um first with the spinning jenny and then um and and then later on with mechanical looms and there's a whole there's a whole radical history in in Britain in the early period of the Industrial Revolution when the textile makers were smashing the mechanical looms because they could see the end of their homebased subsistence life um looming up in front of them in in the form of these of these machines which had just taken taken the work from them um and and and and in and and the secondary effect of that was that women's work went away because you could just buy cloth um and that was a whole lot easier and and there are countless other examples of a similar Dynamic taking place um and and the the upshot of all of this is that most in an increasing body of the work that women had previously done in the home simply went away and they be and their role was in the course of that very much reduced um and so until the far from being as in as in a lot of premodern contexts an equal equally economically active and socially active participant in the work of a productive home they've become they've become as it were a sort of Chief consumer in a the the bouris housewife is a kind of Chief consumer in a private home and I've drawn from Ivan nich's 1980 book gender in the book to to to to understand the the transition which illich reads and I agree with him as as really a not not a not a moment of empowerment but as as a significant loss of agency um and the point which as as illich puts it women women make the transition from being from being active participants in a kind of ambiguous complimentarity with men where there's men's work and there's women's work but everybody's working to to what illich describes as economic sex which is to say a condition of notional equality but where in practice because of our physiology and because of because of the allotted role given to Women Within boura private domestic sphere women are in practice um structurally disadvantaged for illich sexism begins with the arrival of with with the arrival of modernity um so this is this is really my history of the past and women responded to this in two characteristic ways so so there were there were those which which in turn gives rise to the two polls of what I think of as first as as feminism proper up to up up to the the middle of the 20th century the first of those polls was the feminism of freedom and those well the so the first those po the feminism of care which was um and here I've slightly counterintuitively read a body of work a body of writing and a body of cultural work which is not typically read by by women's historians as feminism precisely um and i' I've drawn on the the various women's social reform movements which were Legion in the in across both sides of the of the Atlantic actually in the 19 Century there were countless social reform movements there was there was there were work to rescue prostituted women there was there was social reform work there was Outreach to the poor there were civil societies women ran Civil Society you know it wasn't as though these bouro Housewives sat at home doing nothing all day or just spent all their time shopping they went out they organized they they and they formed the backbone of civil society and they also wrote copiously they wrote journals and Publications and letters and you know and and articles and huge amount there a huge body of writing and a great and and and one of the central themes in it is the the intrinsic value of the home um so women may have been women may now no longer work directly um but but but but instead these these women sought to make the case for women's continued um value and and and the the the really fundamental moral and social and cultural importance of the private sphere as a space outside the market a space of respite and and it was it was sort of idealized as a space of moral elevation which and and and and a Haven away from the the pressures of the competitive market Society so that was so that and in that space women in that space women could educate children children could be nurtured and and and everybody could could as it were find Refuge from from the harsher pressures of the world outside so that's the ideal and this is this is really what I think of as the feminism of care and it's a bunch of women whose much of whose economic agency has been radically reduced relative to their grandmothers perhaps because they're no longer economically active and so they're setting out to make a case for the ongoing value of those parts of of women's work quote unquote which which are which they still see as important and which which are still irreducible in particularly particularly around the care of children and so that's feminism care but then on the other side there was a whole bunch of other women who were like well hang on a minute this is all very well but this only works if your husband does is if your husband is a good guy you know what if what if your husband drinks all the money what if your husband beats you what if your husband leaves you um what if he rapes you um you know you you have no redress you have no leverage um and then and so they set out to make the case um for wi women's entry as it were into Market Society on the same terms as men so the right to own property on the same terms as men which which was not which was not available within a legal and and a legal and a social system which was structured for around productive households so as so the point where two adults married the women's person was subsumed into that of the man because that was what made sense juridically in the larger context of productive households and this no longer made this no longer made nearly as much sense in the context of in the in in the industrial context where the an economic an an economic actor is increasingly an individual rather than a household and so you've got this you've got this this legal and political tension um in Play Between Women who still don't really still don't have separate personhood from men and who are finding increasingly as as a growing number of uh the feminists of Freedom began to argue that that they were they was they were severely vulnerable in that context and so increasingly you start you start seeing campaigns for women's women's right to own property for women's right to enter the market as as workers on the same terms as men and increasingly for women to be treated effectively um the same as men in all contexts and and and I think of this as the beginning of the feminism of freedom and there's a really rich interplay if you look at the history of the 19th century women's movement between these two polls because they're they're by no means that far apart most of these women knew each other and it wasn't it wasn't a sort of crazy back and forth culture War the way it feels sometimes now this is it was a very you Mo most of the the Fe the supposed feminists and anti-feminists actually knew each other um and often disagreed often often agreed on on more than they disagreed on most of them were active in the same social reform movements most of them agreed for example on the question of temper Temperance most of them agreed on issues like sexual morality and and the and the importance of tackling the sex trade and there are a great many issues where and and and most and most of them were very devoted very devout Women of Faith and so there was a great a great deal on on which most the even the feminists of freedom and the feminists of care broadly agreed um and and and collaborated on and and in the in the middle there are these two polls between the women who who see their interests as lying in um a political project of sameness with men and of the right to enter the market on the same terms as men and those women who seek to ring fence a distinct sex space for Women Within the context in the W which which makes space for motherhood which makes space for nurture and which makes space for for those those dimensions of women's lives which are irreducibly distinctively sexed and so and and this is a this is a dialectic which goes on in through various iterations all the way up really until the beginning of the 20th century it the middle of the 20th century sorry where the feminism of Freedom definitively won over the feminism of Care at the point where where a new technology came came into the came into the picture which allowed us medically to flatten those diff those irreducible differences between the Sexes or so it seemed to the point where really there was no reason not to argue for a feminism of freedom and that technology was uh hormonal birth control which which led inexorably um towards a ratchet towards the legalization of abortion which most 19th century feminisms feminists would have viewed as not not to similar as as broad broadly the same thing as in fanticide and and would have recoiled from it was very it was it was extremely unusual for for a feminist to support abortion in the 19th century but by the middle of the 20th century the popularization of hormonal birth control had had in had paradoxically increased the number of unplanned pregnancy simply because there was more sex happening that it be it became a matter of social justice and and women began increasingly to see to see it as a matter of social justice that you know young women were no longer compelled to you know R run off to another country or you know take their life in their hands with a Backstreet abortion or various other Horrors that were that that that that proliferated Downstream of of this radical transformation in sexual mores and the upshot of that was again on both sides of the Atlantic within I within I believe a decade of one another the the legalization of abortion across both sides of of the Atlantic now I mean I'm I'm I'm deeply ambivalent on the question of abortion and I have friends who are who are pro and I have F who are pro- life and I have friends who are pro-choice and really the The Stance I've taken on that question in the book is to say well where wherever you wherever you sit on the absolute uh moral question um it's difficult to dispute that if if what you're arguing for is a right to assert is for women's women to have the right to assert their bodily autonomy even at the expense of another potential human life then that's that's about as definitive a case a stance as you could possibly take in favor of the feminism of Freedom over the feminism of care which would make which would make a greater amount of space for for for for the needs of the re really the most depend the the most dependent imaginable other that you can that you could possibly uh think of and and so and so wherever you stand on the absolute moral question um the the the the moment where abortion is legalized and that that then within the within the 20th century women's movement becomes inexorably hitched to the question of women's women's political personage as such um to the point where I mean the particularly in America the debate is now so toxic I'm cautious to say anything more on on it but it's it's it's arrived at the point now where there are people who genuinely wholeheartedly believe that for that for that right to be taken away would mean women no no are no longer able to access personhood as such and really what you're saying at this point and what the the the statement that you're implicitly making there is is to say that freedom is so much more important than anything else than that it's it's worth it's worth sacrificing a potential human life for if if it comes down to a zero what what feels like a zero some contest that even moral about the most about the most defenseless human life there is which is to say one which which is still in uturo and can't survive outside another a woman's body even even that life is is is forfeit if if the price of sustaining that life is the curtailment of a woman's Freedom now and again wherever you stand on the absolute moral question that's a very strong stance in favor of freedom and really and so and so the I see that as a real cero moment a real profound inflection point in the women's movement which it it embraced as the as the Baseline of women's political personhood as such a technologization of women's bodies in the name of individual freedom and and and really I see that the the the the 10year um the 10year arrival of from from the legalization of the pill approximately 10 years to the to the or the legalization of abortion as our entry into the transhumanist era because that's the point where where Women's existence as such um comes to seem inextricable from a from a set of medical Technologies and remember what's what's fun what's what's so radical about these technological innovations is that unlike more or less every other Medical Practice up to that point certainly every lcit medical Medical Practice up to that point um these the these don't set out to fix what's broken — so I mean if I have a broken arm I go to the doctor and I say hey doctor my can you fix my arm please and the doctor has a hasn't has a you know you you go to medical school for years to learn what normal normal human health looks like um and and to learn what to do with people's bodies in order to fix what's broken and make it make it normal and healthy again and what's radic what's radical and transformative about birth control and later about abortion is that they don't fix what's broken in the name of normal human health they break what's working normally which is to say um women's women's fertility or or a normal pregnancy in in the name of individual freedom and I think we still underestimate what a radical transformation that was and I think we're still we're still working through the downstream consequences of that and really the second part of the book um explores some of the because some of the downstream consequences of of having entered into the transhumanist moment in the middle of the 20th century because I mean we're we're we're more than half a century further into it now and I think we're beginning to see some of the Contours of of that new reality um more clearly as time has gone on just recently Saudi Arabia ended its 50-year Petr dollar deal with the US which has the potential to weaken the US dollar since 1974 Saudi Arabia has sold oil solely in US Dollars which was huge for our global economic dominance now they want other options if there's less demand for the US dollar what happens to its value it's reasons like this that make it important to diversify some of your savings into gold and you can do that with help from Birch gold right now qualifying purchases by July 31st are eligible to get a one-of-a-kind limited edition golden truth bomb the only way to claim your eligibility though is by texting Jordan to 9898 98 for over 20 years Birch gold group has helped tens of thousands of Americans to protect their savings by converting an IRA or 401K into an IRA in physical gold protect your savings by diversifying away from the US dollar with gold text Jordan to 9898 98 and Birch gold will help you convert an old Ira or 401K into an IRA in gold for no money out of pocket right now qualifying purchases by July 31st are eligible to get a one-of-a-kind limited edition golden truth bomb text Jordan to 98 9898 that's Jordan to 9898 98 today so Mary the argument you've made um I'm going to summarize it and tell me if I've got it right so you went back far enough in time to assess the role that men and women played in home centered agrarian societies and you made a case that that was a stable solution of relative economic equality let's say and then the Industrial Revolution kicked in and it pulled men away from the home first but then it it um replaced women's work and that meant that women were up in the air about what their role was but it also turned them into something approximating comparatively wealthy individualist consumers then you said there were two responses to that one was the emergence of a feminism of care that detailed out the realm of women's responsibilities and opportunities in the really in the domestic sphere with regard to say relationships with their husbands their immediate family and more importantly their children and then you detailed out another stream of feminism which was the feminism of Freedom you Associated that to some degree with women's concern about being tangled up with men who weren't really good for anything and so that's interesting little twist on that but your fundamental point was that once women become became independent actors in the free market in the industrialized free market there was every reason to move towards the transformation of law so that women as independent economic actors would have the same economic rights as men but then but then there's that problem with bad men lurking in the background there that contaminates things and then you talked a little bit about the transhumanist movement identifying that at least in part with the rise of the birth control pill which is a radical Innovation basically equivalent to a genetic a major genetic mutation a species altering mutation and then you pointed out that oddly enough in concert with the rise of the pill we got the rise of legalized abortion and its widespread prevalence okay so that's where I want to drill into I want to tell you something biological and I want you to tell me what you think about it because I think it's key in some mysterious way to this entire problem the problem you've laid out is that women and men for that matter have been recalibrating their identity since the dawn of the Industrial Revolution it made us into more atomized individuals who were more consumer oriented let's say and that's a major social disruption but then on the pill and the abortion side here's something that is worth considering I believe so you know the evolutionary biologists have identified two fundamental reproductive strategies so imagine there's a continua okay on the one end you have they're called R selected or R strategists and and the r stands for reproduction essentially rapid reproduction let's say and so mosquitoes and puff balls and fish are our strategists and so the r strategy is fairly straightforward many many many potential Offspring millions or even billions of them zero post sex investment so that's the r investment strategy okay and so most of your fertilized offspring gites are going to perish enough will last for them to replace you or maybe even for the population to thrive but it has nothing to do with you after the sexual act okay on the other side our so-called K investment K strategists and those are creatures mammals would be a reasonable example that have very few Offspring but pour a lot of resources into them and the ultimate K strategists are human beings so our investment strategy is long-term high cost investment even spanning multiple Generations okay so there's a real distribution and humans are on the extreme end of one of those uh directions let's say one of those poles of the distribution okay now there's a subsidiary observation that goes along with that and this is where the point is really gerain so now imagine that among human beings there are R strategists and K strategists okay so the our strategists are ones who have many sexual partners and low investment now that's a lot easier for men than it is for women because of course if women get pregnant they're high investment strategists immediately unless they circumvent that but the men can get away with it let's say being R strategists now a further question is just who the hell are these R strategist males so these would be the men who are interested in multiple sexual partners um low emotional investment and low post sexual investment Say in any result in children and we know the answer to that our strategist males are narcissistic mellan Psychopathic and sadistic and so what that means I think as far as I can tell is that when you free up women to be sexually available with the technological transformation you both deliver them into the hands of our strategist males who have all the lovely personality features that I just described or you or maybe something even worse is that you train men who might otherwise be high investment maters to adopt a r strategy with all of the psychopathy and melanism and narcissism and sadism that goes along on with that and so this is a very perverse outcome because and I guess I don't really know what people expected to begin with you said that for example you implied that you know women are pursuing their freedom let's say with regards to untrammeled sexual access on the reproductive front but that's not exactly a freedom it's more like a subjugation to sexuality as the prime motivator in life right I mean you could identify yourself with your sexuality which is of course what people are doing in Spades now but the idea that the opportunity the ability to pursue untrammeled sexual expression is actually a manifestation of freedom is an error if you believe that subjugation to biological untrammeled subjugation to biological whim doesn't constitute Freedom this is especially true if it turns out that it's delivering women into the hands of Psychopathic men which seems to be the case there's a great deal of Truth in that and really that speaks to the one of the it it speaks to the epigraph actually which I gave the second half of the second part of the book which comes from Horus I'm not going to try and quote the Latin at you but the translation is you can drive nature out with a pitchfork but still she comes back um it's a very famous quote um I think I've I've taken it taken it slightly mischievously out of context but it's a very important piece because the governing theme of the transhumanist era is using technology to try and abolish our nature and really that's that's the that's the that's the governing um theme the the governing project of the of the transhumanist era which is the point where we embrace the or as we hope the the power of Technologies to transform ourselves so we're no longer industrializing the world we're no longer using machines to say make weaving easier instead we're using Technologies to to remodel ourselves um to make us more like we think we ought to be at least Al or that's the idea and that really begins with a contraceptive pill which which is a a medical technology which we which the and the original utopians the first wave of feminist responses to the pill were hugely optimistic about what it would do I mean we're some we're some decades further down that track now and we can see that it hasn't really worked out like that and our mutual friend Lise Perry wrot recently wrote a very persuasive book detailing all of the ways it hasn't really worked out like that and all of the ways which as you've just outlined the sexual Revolution was considerably more to the benefit of um was it are are selected um all the these narcissistic Psychopathic um highly sexed and not particularly fatherly men seem to have been the net beneficiaries of this technological transformation Contra the Contra The utopians Who imagined that we might that it would open out a kind of sexual Utopia in which everybody could be free to be themselves women could finally Express themselves free from the the the gossiping the gossiping old ladies in the street and free from the risk of pregnancy and and it would make everything so sort of sunshine and rainbows and kittens and it would all be lovely now now we know we know at this point that that's not exactly what happened but but really this just go this this serves to illustrate the utopian spirit that people have brought to the project of Technology technologizing ourselves using using essentially biotech beginning with the the chemical intervention of the contraceptive pill um but we're considerably further down that path now and at at every stage we've set about embracing new new Innovations in biotech in the Hope really of remedying perceived flaws in our nature you know whether that's whether that's a pill to stop us being sad or whether it's a whether it's a technology which will which will which will mean women's fertility no longer has to fall off a cliff at the age of 40 because now there are now there are Technologies which will enable her to go on having kids into her 50s or her 60s or or whatever I mean the you we could we could be here all evening um enumerating the V the the Technologies um the the opportun ities and the biomedical advances and at every stage what happens is there's a utopian promise of being able to escape a previous embodied limit — there is a a new set of a new set of constraints on us if you like aspects of our nature which were previously managed by social means in the way that the the difference between women's and men's reproductive role was previously managed by what what now gets dismissively referred to as the sexual double standard which was in the area prior to iable contraception an extremely pragmatic measure — oriented at avoiding avoiding a proliferation of unwanted children within a community — and so so so so that's one example of of a way you know an asymmetry or some some awkward aspect of our nature was was managed socially in a way which just went away more or less overnight the moment of Technology came along that seemed as though it would fix the problem for us and there have been countless other examples since then and what invariably happens is you get a dividend of freedom and then what whatever it is that's been technologized in that way is then reordered to the market and you and you see this very clearly with the sexual Revolution which which promised a great utopian dividend of of self-expression and free love and you know everybody having aies and it'll be fine — and actually what it gave birth to was the corn industry and it gave birth to a ballooning sex industry and now you know 50 years on from that we have PornHub which is one of the biggest website one of the most one one of the most high high grossing websites in the world and which is already notorious for sex trafficking for abuse — for for countless other atrocities and for cooning the appetites of children frankly who are who are the majority of its consumers and and and much else besides so so so what but but really what I want to emphasize there is the dynamic at work we think we think technologizing ourselves will liberate us from some aspect of our nature what in fact happens is that that aspect of our nature becomes opened up to Commerce and in the meantime our nature is unchanged so the differences as you pointed out the differences between men and women in terms of mating strategies and courtship preferences and so on are still there our mutual friend Louise Perry sets this out very clearly in the case against the sexual Revolution men still want slightly different things out of a date to women on average you of course there are outliers but — women still broadly want an affectionate relationship you know a subset of men at least are very happy with a quick a a quick sexual encounter and then and then no no ongoing encumbrances you know though all the ancient Dynamics are still very visibly there nothing has changed all that's happened is that the social mechanisms we had for trying to manage those asymmetries between the Sexes have have been have have disappeared they've bled away they've they've been they've been dissolved — and instead what we have is a seemingly Limitless commercialization of the environment around them you know we have whole Industries whether it's the dating app industry or whether it's the porn industry or whether it's the romance industry or you name it whole Industries which have grown up off the back of our the the the the dissolution of our social codes around sex and courtship and I and and if you look if you look further closer to the present at for example the reproductive industry big fertility you'll see that the the dissolu the the technologization of ever further aspects of our of our nature in an effort to liberate us from its constraints so to allow two men to to liberate us quote unquote just so — for example to allow two men to have a baby — or to or to enable a man to to resemble a woman or or any any one of the other innumerable ways that we've set out to to abolish our own nature or to or to or to render it plastic and subject to our control never it it never works you know men still humans still can't change sex — two men still can't have a baby you know men still can't get pregnant you know those those thing the fundamentals have not changed our nature is still there all that happens is that it's it's made a whole lot of people Rich because it's opened up new domains of our of our embodied selves to the market and so really that's that's the story I set out to tell in part two of the book and I and I also set out to show how this this this relationship to our own bodies this pursuit of M medical Mastery of our own bodies has been radically accelerated by the internet and particularly by the the very disembodied childhoods that a number of that a lot of young people now experience where they grow up socializing fundamentally through digital avatars and then take as a matter of basic social justice the possibility the idea that they should be able to reskin their meat Avatar at will and which is you know combined with a number of combined with social contagion and common emotional pathologies which have been typical in adolescent girls since time in Memorial the the upshot has been as as we know the the social contagion of trans identities which has had which has had catastrophic and irreversibly harmful effects on thousands of girls now you know and the the detransition of movement is growing and I mean you these are these are familiar topics to you but this is this is all this is Downstream of a kind of escalating — escalating fantasy of of total Mastery of our physical selves and this fantasy of a of a of a physical self which is separable from our sense of our inner sense of ourselves as though our bodies and ourselves are two separate things which is which can seem believable if you spend a lot of time on the internet but isn't believable for a moment if you spend if if you spend 9 months pregnant — for example or you know or or fall over and break your leg really spend any time in the actual physical world at all right and and so that and so that's the set that's the story I set out to tell in the second part of the book and in the third I set out to offer some offer some Reflections on where we are now and where we might go next on the basis that we've already passed Peak progress and the and the the the he 1990s years of — having solved boom and bust and ended ended World conflict and so on and all of those other things we were promised we'd achieved are not coming back and that in fact life is likely to get us going online without expressvpn is like forgetting to mute yourself on a zoom call do you really want your co-workers to hear you munching on your lunch in the middle of town hall because your online activity flows through their servers internet service providers know every single website you visit and in the US they're legally allowed to sell that information to advertisers that's why you got to get expressvpn expressvpn routs 100% of your traffic through secure encrypted servers so your ISP can't see your browsing history the app hides your IP address making it extremely difficult for third parties to track your online activity it sounds complicated but I promise you expressvpn is actually really easy to use just fire up the app tap one button and get protected I love expressvpn because it works on all my devices so I can stay secure when I'm on the go protect your online privacy today by visiting expressvpn.com Jordan that's expressvpn.com Jordan and you can get an extra 3 months free expressvpn.com jordant toay let me ask you some questions about the second part and then we'll move into the third part so I'm going to summarize what you said again so you characterized the pill as the first major technology in what you describe more broadly as the transhuman movement which is an attempt to free us or to escape from let's say the hypothetical limitations of our embodied selves and so this was sold as a movement to Freedom now that was freedom described as instinctual Lous right because what free sexual access means that you can is that you can have your wants and needs gratified at any moment and maybe that's beyond the mere sexual right into the consumer domain itself so that's a very peculiar view of freedom but as you pointed out it was also accompanied by something that was naive immature and possibly even malevolent which was this notion that we would bring about a sexual utop IA where men and women Were Somehow equal and that that would be an improvement in all regards including on the male side now we've already talked about the difference between R and K Strategies and the fact that when we switch to an R strategy which is exactly what happens with the pill we facilitate the psychopathic men so that seems like a bad idea for the men and for the women and and I think it's actually irrefutable — it it there's good research evidence for this already but it also makes technical sense at a much deeper deeper biological level so and it's obviously the case that men who want short-term sexual relationships aren't the same men who want a long-term stable monogamous partner that requires responsibility obviously so okay so now and now we have this movement to Freedom too which you could be more skeptical about and call it a flight from responsibility and then you might say well why the hell not fly from responsibility if it's so burdensome 9 months of pregnancy the fact that you have a dependent infant for multiple years like 40 and why not fly from that and I would say at least part of the answer to that is when you escape from responsibility in that matter you also demolish the meaning of your life it's like a lot of the meaning in people's lives is obtained as a consequence of sacrifice right you sacrifice for your siblings you sacrifice for your parents you sacrifice for your friends for your wife for your children and there's dignity and purpose in that sacrifice and if you lift that burden from people then they're left then they're left wondering just what the hell they are and what they're supposed to be doing and that doesn't seem like much fun given the radical increase in mental health problems particularly among women aged 18 to 34 so you you move to freedom in this narrow naive immature and even pathological sense you escape from responsibil you demolish meaning in consequence and you facilitate the Psychopaths and then you you put another Twist on that which is real fun because there's the Psychopaths and the narcissists and the macu alans that you're going to meet with the dating app and in the sexual Marketplace let's say but that isn't the limit to the commodification of female sexuality I mean we know that about 25% of internet traffic and a tremendous amount of the motivation for its initial Construction by the way was the commodification of female sexuality so the engineers for example who couldn't get a date could at least

嗯，交换裸体女性的图片或视频，越多越好，并以此获得满足感。所以，这占了净流量的 25%。你以 PornHub 为例，谈到了女性性欲的商业化。那么，我们该怎么说呢？我们说，从负面来看，避孕药出现了，这是在泛人类主义名义下，人类被摧毁的一部分。它助长了精神病患者、自恋者和自恋者。它将女性转交给那些男性。它在市场上产生了女性性欲的大规模商品化，并导致了堕胎，其发生率会让早期女权主义者和任何真正思考过这个问题的人感到震惊。比如“安全、合法、少有”。嗯，我们在“少有”这一点上 pretty much 失败了。目前美国每年有 100 万例堕胎。所以，我不在乎你是谁，你的立场是什么，但如果你不认为这是一个道德灾难，那么你的灵魂就有问题了。现在，这与我们如何通过法律来解决这个问题是分开的。好的，那么我有一个问题想问你，这将引导我们进入你的书的第三部分。我想，你知道，我在多伦多大学和哈佛大学教了很多年书，然后更公开地研究激励人心的核心故事。核心故事是英雄神话，英雄踏上他或她一生的冒险之旅，面对巨龙，获得宝藏，并将其带回社区并分发。好的，但在经典神话中，英雄几乎总是男性。所以，我班上的女性总是对此有问题。如果英雄神话是人类的中心故事，那么这对女性意味着什么？在基督教中，基督是女性和男性的救世主，而基督的受难故事是英雄神话的一个极端变体。因此，在我们文化的底层有一种观念，即女性救赎的途径是通过采取一种英雄的生存模式，你知道，面对生活的困难和问题。但还有更多，因为女性的特点是她们的神话取向，我认为它是多维度的和复杂的。所以，还有几个神话变体与女性的英雄神话并列。有“美女与野兽”，其中一位女性找到了一个可能有些可怕和掠夺性的男人，但他可能在根本性质上是积极的，她驯服了他。这是一个关于女性如何找到一个既有性吸引力又富有成效、负责任且有用的男人的故事。这是迄今为止最常见的女性色情幻想，以数量级计算，“美女与野兽”变体。然后还有基督教中提出的女性形象，你没有单独的女性，你有一个女性和婴儿作为一个单位，对吧？所以，现在我可能不愿意说，你之所以在英国小镇推着婴儿车时感到孤立，部分原因是我们社会中的情况，我妻子也遇到了同样的情况，当她有小孩时。我们的社会并不神圣化女性和婴儿的形象，女性和婴儿作为女性身份的基本单位。现在，你知道，据我所知，女性的神经系统也是如此，女性的神经系统不是为了她们自己的幸福而校准的，而是为了女性加上婴儿的共同成功。所以，女性更随和，这意味着她们更有同情心，对人更感兴趣，并且她们有更多负面情绪，这意味着她们是一个相当不错的警报系统。现在，负面情绪的增加使她们容易患上抑郁症和焦虑症，而随和性的增加使她们容易被精神病男性剥削。但这对她们的婴儿非常有益，因为你必须随和才能照顾婴儿，你必须是一个警报系统，足够敏感才能检测到环境中可能威胁到脆弱婴儿的所有威胁。好的，那么这应该引导我们讨论你的书的第三部分。这是一种概念化某种近似女性身份的方式，这种方式实际上对女性有效。也许从书中稍微绕道一下。我的意思是，关于我为什么在英国小镇推着婴儿车时感到孤立的问题，解释起来非常简单。我的大多数同龄人都休了为期一年的产假，顺便说一句，这比大多数美国女性的情况要好得多。在英国，你有法定的六个月产假，每个人都可以获得带薪产假，然后你可以再休六个月无薪假，大多数女性会休满一年，这与美国的情况相比是惊人的产假。据我所知，在美国，大约有三分之一的母亲在生完孩子后不久就回去工作了，在我看来，这简直是野蛮的。但抛开这一点不谈，我是说，我们怎么会走到今天这一步，大多数有抚养子女的女性都在工作，在英国大约占 75%，这是一个漫长的故事，其中自由女权主义与此紧密相连，我敢肯定你也很清楚。但实际上，我感到孤独推着婴儿在英国小镇的原因非常直接，没有人可以交谈，因为大多数女性都在工作。而且，我想，这实际上是我写的第一篇文章，当我开始公开写作时，我写了一篇关于公民社会缓慢流失和缓慢侵蚀的文章，这是由于大多数女性从事有偿工作造成的。要明确的是，这有很多积极的后果，但也有这个影响，实际上，只有退休人员和越来越少的那些有公共精神的婴儿潮一代还在支撑着我的小镇，就拥有一个运转良好的社会结构而言，句号。你知道，我紧紧抓住那些组织了婴儿聚会的老妇人，等等。我逐渐找到了社交生活，生活又开始感觉正常了。但是的，我是说，非常直接，我感到孤独的原因是因为我想和人交谈。而且，正如你可能看到的，这是一个任命问题。你知道，如果没有人可以交谈，那么有更多人可以交谈的唯一方法就是有更多人。没有人想成为一个留在家里的母亲，因为没有人可以交谈。所以，这是一种恶性循环。但其次，绝对是。但其次，关于英雄之旅的问题，我实际上写过，不是在书中，而是在其他地方，几年前我写了一篇关于这个问题的短文，因为在我看来，女性确实有英雄之旅，只是它不像男性那样遵循相同的轨迹。事实上，它有三个部分，对应于一个非常古老的原型，一个非常古老的女性原型，即少女、母亲和女族长，三位一体的女神，这是一个来自一些异教传统的形象，其中这些是同一个女神的不同面孔，可以说是。但它们在女性生活的不同阶段呈现出不同的方面。在我看来，这与大多数女性生活的实际情况非常吻合。你知道，作为少女，你是自由的，你有一种战士的方面，也许这就是你追求雄心勃勃的职业项目的时候。母亲更倾向于家庭和家庭领域，你知道，坦率地说，她可能不太关心工作。我知道很多非常有权势的少女，她们在三十岁出头就当了母亲，然后发现她们不再关心截止日期和电子表格了，无法再忍受了。我是说，这是轶事，我确信，是的，轶事来说，这很常见。然后，但后来，这是我发现非常有趣的事情，我在八十年代末和九十年代初接受心理治疗培训时，发现那门课程中有许多学员都是五十多岁和六十多岁的女性。这些女性大多数已经有了成年子女，她们的孩子已经上大学或即将上大学，所以她们基本上完成了母性之旅，完成了英雄之旅的母亲部分，她们正在进入人生的新阶段。她们正在进入我认为的女族长阶段。我认为这个经典的三部分女神术语是老妇人，但我的意思是，她们离老妇人还有一段距离。她们是充满活力、精力充沛、有公共精神的女性，她们有生活经验，有很多联系，有丰富的社交生活，认识了很多人，她们准备好回馈社会。我观察到，有大量的女性在完成了母性之旅的母亲部分后，然后拥抱了某种，然后重新培训。她们会有三份职业。她们可能在二十多岁时非常专业，在三十到五十岁时可能更兼职一些，然后她们会重新培训，从事心理治疗、神职工作、精神咨询，或者以其他方式参与社区，她们想做一些有公共精神的事情，回馈社会。而这些女性是文化反思、公共服务以及所有极其积极的、通常是低调的、但极其积极的、建设性的、生命赋予的社会结构贡献的巨大力量。而且她们在自由女权主义的叙事中被极度边缘化，几乎完全看不见，这种叙事实际上以少女为中心，并希望突出少女，并告诉女性英雄之旅意味着基本上终生扮演少女，而其他一切都只是……你知道，母亲充其量被视为一个需要解决的问题，而女族长根本就没有得到关注。即使得到了关注，也只是因为她被指责为“特里菲”（turf）或者以其他方式被唾弃，因为她是一个恐龙，过时了，或者不合时宜，或者无关紧要，或者可笑。事实上，这些女性是社会结构的支柱。我是说，那些女性在为像我在英国小镇那样有点创伤的新妈妈们泡一杯淡茶，告诉我我做得很好，这在当时真的很重要。那些女性每周免费组织童子军，因为她们可以，因为她们想回馈社会。那些女性正在重新培训成为咨询师，免费帮助受创伤的人。那些女性让事情得以继续。然而，自由女权主义的英雄之旅版本却完全看不到她们。我认为，我一直非常热衷于为更丰富的，如果你愿意的话，一个三部分的女性英雄之旅提供一个空间，实际上观察了母亲的生活，以及女性一生中平均的样子，当她成为母亲时。那么，这种对母亲和女族长的轻视，如果我们用评估男性短期交配策略的相同视角来看待它，那么我们也可以对女性做出同样的论断。所以，如果你认为并非所有意识形态都受到积极和向上的追求的驱动，你知道，爱人类。那么，为什么要轻视母亲和女族长的作用呢？因为你想保持你的自由，不是你想成为谁，而是保持你获得即时满足的自由，无论是性还是消费。所以，这意味着，我不知道是否有这方面的研究，因为这方面的大部分研究都是针对男性，关于精神病患者的性行为。我的猜测是，相当一部分推崇自由理念的女权主义者，当自由等同于放荡时，她们是天真、不成熟，并且有些黑暗三合一或四合一倾向的女性，精神病患者 B 类，边缘型等等，她们试图通过披上意识形态的外衣来证明她们拒绝成长和承担责任，并提供一个乌托邦的故事。你知道，这让我想起《匹诺曹》电影中的“快乐岛”，你知道，所有的坏孩子都去那里尽情狂欢，践踏一切。最后，你知道，被卖给了在下面辛勤劳作的无形奴隶主。所以，你知道，我们低估了 R 型策略精神病在意识形态构建中所起的作用，这是非常危险的。这是一个大问题，我们不擅长处理它。我认为，当涉及到女权主义者的动机时，我会有点谨慎。我个人会谨慎地将她们全部视为“快乐岛”上不成熟的居民。当然，在那些我称之为“杂志女权主义”的人中，也就是说，不是严肃的女权主义理论家，但那种源于 1960 年代海伦·格雷·布莱的“单身女孩的性爱”的女权主义，这真的是“女老板”女权主义，是《Cosmopolitan》杂志的女权主义，它实际上是享乐主义事业的一个薄薄的意识形态外衣。它与任何有意义的、深思熟虑的、精心构建的女权主义政治理论几乎没有关系。我是说，有大量非常严肃、非常热情、非常有价值的合法女权主义工作仍在进行，我将全力支持。例如，那些为被监禁女性辩护的女性，尽管有许多女性正在站出来抗议男性进入女性体育项目或女性监狱，例如，那些我也将她们归类为女权主义者。所以，我只是想表达，我想表达几分钟的积极情感，代表那些站出来的女性，就像我想象的那样，我也站出来说，不，实际上，有时女性的利益确实与男性的利益不同，有时需要我们以自己的方式捍卫自己，捍卫我们的性利益，并以她们自己的权利，因为有时这些利益可能会被边缘化。我相信这仍然是一个合法的项目，因为男性和女性仍然存在，并且我们在一些政治上重要的方面仍然存在差异。所以，我不会，我不会，我不会支持一个将所有女权主义都视为幼稚享乐主义项目的项目。然而，我百分之百同意你关于那种杂志女权主义，特别是当它发展到甚至不愿意承认性别差异本身有意义的时候，而是转而从事一个假装我们可以都是无形的，并且可以根据自己的选择来认同自己的项目，以实现进一步的自我实现，或者进一步的享乐主义，或者那些家伙想要的东西，我不知道。对我来说，那不是女权主义。那是一种，我的意思是，它几乎是肤浅的泛人类主义，或者其他什么主义，但它与仍在进行的严肃政治工作几乎没有关系，我认为它应该在桌上占有一席之地。夏天很容易把你的所有纪律都抛诸脑后，但伟大的生活不是通过走捷径来实现的。Hallow 应用提供了一系列令人难以置信的引导式冥想和祈祷，旨在帮助你深化你的灵性并加强你与上帝的联系。本月，Hallow 将推出一项新挑战：“希望的见证：圣约翰·保罗二世的生活”，由 Jim Cisell、Monseñor Shay 和 Jackie Angel 指导。这项挑战将带你了解这位非凡圣徒的生活，从他在波兰的童年，经历纳粹占领，到他在冷战期间的宗教生活，以及他在千禧年之交的教皇任期。踏上这场挑战，了解圣约翰·保罗二世所说的：“没有什么邪恶是我们不能在基督的陪伴下面对的；没有什么敌人是我们不能在基督的帮助下战胜的；没有什么十字架是我们不能在基督的帮助下背负的，并且他现在与我们同在。不要害怕。”立即在 hallo.com/jordan 下载 Hallow 应用，享受独家的三个月试用期。网址是 hallo.com/jordan。好的，那么让我问你，为什么你会认为那是更严肃的女权主义和政治工作呢？因为也许你可以提出一个反论，即好男人和好女人在根本取向上并不对立，而证明这一点需要一个不同于女权主义的名称。我的意思是，我不知道，这是一个真正的问题，因为女权主义的问题是，嗯，你指出了其中一个问题，即《Cosmopolitan》版本的女权主义，那实际上也不是最坏的版本。最坏的版本是一种极其痛苦和吞噬性的，你会怎么说，对父权制的仇恨，再加上对男人的根本仇恨。现在你提到了为什么会这样。我的意思是，我看到那些尖叫的蓝头发暴徒类型的一个方面是，这实际上是一种同情，那就是外面有无数女性从未与任何男性有过任何积极的关系。她们的父亲缺席、酗酒或犯罪，她们曾经与之相处过的所有男孩都是那种追求即时满足的 R 型人，基本上毫无用处。所以，我能理解为什么这是你描述的另一个恶性循环。但你描述的那些社会运动，比如 Riley Gains，是否合理地归类为女权主义，对我来说并不明显。Riley Gains 是在美国为反对愚蠢的男性进入女性体育项目而努力游泳的运动员。Will Thomas，使用旧名字，我认为我们都应该一直这样做，他正在追赶她，他显然，嗯，他不是一个忠诚的演员，让我们这样说。但是 Riley Gains 所做的，是否可以合理地归类为女权主义，还是，我的意思是，我不知道，这就是我想提出的问题。这是一个非常有趣的问题，我的意思是，我猜有几点可以说明这一点。首先，你对女权主义者所说的“家庭崇拜”在 19 世纪的解读，在我看来，非常直接地是一种女权主义项目，即为女性在家中的持续价值辩护。我将其解读为女权主义，尽管实际上在当时我不敢肯定她们会那样称呼自己，而且当时那些自称女权主义的女性肯定不会那样称呼她们。然而，我选择那样解读。所以，我想说的第一件事是，我对女权主义的构成理解一开始就相当广泛。你知道，对我来说，它真的在于谈论和代表我们作为一个性别所拥有的不同利益的方式。如果这就是你在做的，那么我认为有理由，有合理的理由使用这个词。第二点是，为什么我们不能拥有这个词？我向 Spencer Claven 提出了同样的观点，当 Andrew Claven 问我时，他也问了我这个问题。他说，为什么你要称自己为女权主义者，Mary？听起来不像你真的在做那个。我说，嗯，为什么我们要带球回家？为什么她们要拥有这个词？就我而言，她们没有做任何对女性有利的事情。你知道，如果你在为女性的利益作为性别阶级而辩护，那么你就是女权主义者。如果你的项目是废除，在法律和文化上废除生物性别，那么你，那么无论是什么，我不知道你在做什么，但它看起来不像女权主义。所以，我，我，我带球走了。我猜第三点是关于父权制的问题。在为那些为女性作为性别阶级而辩护的许多伟大的、有价值的女权主义活动家进行了全力辩护之后，我不会说，说了这一切之后，在我看来，父权制在现代世界并不存在，它不是真实的，它不是一个东西。我的意思是，曾经我认为你可以做一个相当合理的历史论证，即女性，即男性和女性都生活在一种父权制下，你知道，男性拥有财产，男性掌权，男性担任所有领导职务，男性拥有所有正式权力，男性拥有，是的，等等。那就是父权制，对吧？那只是我们今天生活的世界。父权制不存在。而且，就女性指出这一点或那一点并说，嗯，那就是仍然存在的父权制而言，我还没有遇到一个案例，它没有被归结为不可变的性别差异。我也不喜欢，这很好。你知道，我的意思是，你知道，人类无法改变性别，我们无法改变我们的基本本性。然后，其中有一些方面我特别不喜欢，好吧，我们仍然必须与之共存。而且，指出某种看不见的坏蛋在那里，并说，嗯，这一切都是一个针对我的宏大阴谋的证据。我认为人们只是看错了。他们正在寻找外部解释，而这只是人类状况的一个基本方面。这是一种对人类状况的悲剧性的反抗，这可能是我对它的解释。是的，我分享你对它的厌恶。这也是对人类状况机会的反抗，因为我们所承受的负担，比如说，在我们独特的、在某种程度上对男性和女性各自而言的凡人躯体中，也是我们生命中最大的机会。在经典的宗教传统中，你尤其会在《约伯记》中看到这一点，你对你的命运要心存感激，无论它是什么，因为无论你的命运是什么，心存感激都是接近你命运的最佳方式。所以，如果你认为母亲和女族长只是少女的障碍，那么你就会怨恨和痛苦你的最终命运。这听起来像是一种精神痛苦的绝佳良方。所以，我想进一步就女权主义的命名法问题向你提问。我的意思是，你提出了一个想要夺回领域的主张，我能理解。至于是否会成功，那是另一个问题，但我能理解你的观点。然后我也很好奇，我的意思是，男人和女人有不同的利益，这对我来说并不明显，除非他们没有好好合作，除非他们没有承担起成熟的责任。所以，这是我为什么怀疑这个项目最好被视为女权主义的另一个原因。我的意思是，女性更有可能为某些道德规范辩护，她们更有可能遭受，比如说，性放荡的后果，因为她们承担着怀孕和育儿的根本责任。但我会说，一种致力于男性维持和养育女性和儿童的伦理，也完全符合男性的最佳利益，尤其是好男性的最佳利益。所以，我想，如果你将女权主义定义为女性需要站出来为自己辩护，那么问题是，她们是为男人辩护，还是反对男人，还是反对坏的和剥削性的男人？所以，我不确定为什么这是一个女权主义项目，而不是一个道德项目，或者甚至是一个传统主义项目。这是一个好问题。我的意思是，如果你更喜欢那样看待它，那就随你便吧。我的项目，要说清楚，它不是一个普世主义的项目。我没有规定每个人应该做什么。因为我认为，除了我们本性的普遍一致的模式之外，什么是有效的，是如此地受到文化和物质细节的影响，以至于在一个家庭中有效的解决方案不一定会在下一个家庭中有效。所以，到目前为止，我是一个自由主义者，我非常不愿意提供普遍的处方，除了说我们的具身体性没有改变，回顾过去几百年历史，会给我们一个相当清晰的，清晰地认识到我们的具身体性在多大程度上保持相对一致。并且要说，实际上，我同意你，我们都解放了，男人和女人，而且，实际上，我认为现在我们需要的是更多的团结。而且，我认为，我认为这是我们两人在不同时间、不同场合都呼吁过的。在书中，在第三部分，我争论的一个方面是，对婚姻采取不同的态度，这种态度不那么侧重于将婚姻视为人生的关键成就，而更多地将其视为团结的促成条件，并且不那么侧重于“从此幸福快乐地生活在一起”的宏大浪漫，而更多地侧重于彻底的忠诚。我认为，对于那些足够富有，能够相对不受伤害地离婚的人来说，这是一个很难提出的主张。但如果你是一个年轻女性，想要在一个似乎越来越不稳定、越来越不确定，也许也越来越贫穷的世界里成为母亲，那么这是一个显而易见的。我认为在这些情况下，采取更务实的做法，例如从相对年轻的时候开始，寻找一个忠诚、奉献、有德行的伴侣，可能是一个好的起点，而不是在二十多岁和三十岁出头的时候，与坏男孩们度过激动人心的时光，然后拼命寻找彻底的忠诚。彻底的团结。好的，好的，那么让我，我的感觉是，你告诉我你的想法，我认为生活如果过得好，就可以被浪漫地冒险来概念化。当然，浪漫冒险的一部分就是浪漫。然后你可能会问，那么浪漫的先决条件是什么呢？你现在主张，少女追求短期性吸引是不明智的，应该被一种更成熟的态度所取代，这种态度与彻底的忠诚有关。但然后我也可能指出，你可以在这方面两全其美，因为我的猜测是，忠诚越彻底，关系中的浪漫就越多。例如，我们现在知道，在泛人类主义性革命兴起 60 年后，性生活最多的是虔诚的已婚夫妇。所以，很容易，我相信这是真的，因为我不认为男人和女人可以在性方面完全奉献给彼此，我认为这尤其适用于女性，如果这种相遇不是发生在一种以彻底忠诚为特征的关系的框架内，因为女性的奉献要大得多。是的，这很难安排，因为现在有太多的年轻人成长过程中没有健康的亲密关系模型。他们可能在破碎的家庭或有毒的家庭环境中长大。他们可能只有很少的关系模型可以从中获得灵感，除了他们在网上找到的东西。你知道，无论是某个大师，还是群聊，或者他们从中获得灵感的地方。我怀疑，即使我们看到人们试图建立更持久的关系的回潮，也会有一些非常痛苦的磨合期，因为人们发现自己必须从零开始逆向工程健康的社会团结，没有任何线索，并且几乎没有内在的韧性来建立。我个人知道一些人在这方面经历过极其困难的时期，有时甚至经历过相当可怕的经历，因为他们真的，你知道，从网上接受了一种非常简化的婚姻意识形态，然后试图在现实世界中应用它，结果却发现，实际上，在实践中，生活就是这么复杂。这是许多年轻人现在发现自己身处的悲剧性境地。你知道，他们几乎没有更广泛的社会结构可以借鉴，通常也没有多少支持结构，然后，你知道，他们发现自己试图生孩子，然后，你知道，长期生活在一起，几乎没有脚手架。但他们在努力，我赞扬他们。我，我，我只是，我猜在这一点上，我只是希望我们能找到出路。你知道，到达那个点，有一些年长的幸存者，那些第一代先驱者，他们能够与年轻的男性和女性分享他们的智慧，说，你知道，这里有一些我从尝试和各种方式的失败中学到的东西。也许，也许这里有一些需要记住的东西。但是的，我的意思是，我们只能希望人类文化和人类社会结构从长远来看是具有弹性的。即使我们现在已经达到了相当极端的社会液化的地步，我仍然乐观地认为，我们可以走出来，从长远来看，找到一个可能更健康、更具建设性的地方。好的，玛丽，我想我们差不多该结束了。我们完成了你书中的三个部分，并对所有三个部分进行了相当激烈的讨论。当然，向大家介绍了你正在发展的想法。所以，我强烈推荐人们关注你的作品。你提到了路易斯·佩里，还有许多其他女权主义传统中的学者，他们最近出现在公众视野中。所以，就我而言，这都是好事。重新思考我们对生化干预等事物的承诺，以改变我们处理我们本性最深层的方式。也许我们可以这样结束，如果你愿意的话。你之前在播客中将自己归类为古典自由主义者，所以你倾向于将最少监管的个人自由作为心理发展、长期社会稳定最佳策略的一方。那里开放的问题当然是，在缺乏根本的团结精神的情况下，这能在多大程度上发挥作用。让我问你一个相关的问题，你对离婚法自由化以及避孕的态度如何？所以，你对这些有什么看法？只是为了澄清，当我说明我到目前为止是一个自由主义者时，那是在我通常将自己描述为保守派的背景下。所以，从某种程度上说，总的来说，我离被归类为古典自由主义者还有一段距离。尽管我可能在某个时候开始在那里。但是，作为一个保守派，作为一个保守派女权主义者，正如我喜欢称呼自己的那样，我对无过错离婚的立场是，它是灾难性的。我对避孕的态度是，有一个强有力的女权主义论点反对避孕药。事实上，我在这方面投入了整整一章，在“女权主义反对进步”中，即“女权主义反对避孕药”。那么其他形式的避孕呢？我的意思是，有一部分我一直在想，也许那些该死的罗马天主教徒是对的。现在，这是一个我还没有完全愿意考虑的想法。你知道，你可以说，明智的人在计划生育方面可以运用一些智慧，但是，你知道，事情发展到这一步的证据非常不可靠。所以，我对避孕的态度很好奇。老实说，我对这个非常矛盾。我认为我反对避孕药的主要原因是它的泛人类主义特征。所以，我，我，我完全反对激素避孕，因为这个原因。它会搞砸，它会在生化层面搞砸女性，它会搞砸两性之间的关系，它会影响伴侣选择。我的意思是，我们熟悉这方面的当代研究。它具有生态灾难性。它对水生生物产生了灾难性的影响。它到处都很糟糕。所以，除了女权主义之外，还有一种生态学上的反对避孕药的论点。所以，我，以及其他形式的激素避孕。我对其他形式的避孕药更加矛盾。我认为，当你没有破坏正常运作的东西时，我比对激素干预我们的生理感到不那么不舒服。所以，我想，我现在可能会采取一个模糊的中间立场，我说，对我来说，最有利于以一种符合我们的本性而不是反抗我们的本性的方式运用技术的方法，可能是某种形式的生育追踪，结合屏障方法，例如，我认为这在非激进的罗马天主教徒中相当普遍，例如，他们会使用某种屏障方法，或者在危险点进行禁欲。所以，我认为，但对我来说，真正的出路不是试图，不是假装我们可以把所有的技术都放回盒子里，而是试图找到建设性的方法来重新组织我们拥有的技术，以适应我们没有改变的本实的现实。所以，所以，我想，我将倡导的关于生育计划的指导方法，这是女性一直寻求的，你知道，在我们发明避孕药之前很久，家庭一直试图在不同时间、不同原因来管理生育。将是尝试使用我们拥有的技术，以一种符合我们本性的方式，并支持我们根据本性繁荣发展，而不是试图与这种本性作战。所以，我认为这就是我对避孕的中间立场。我猜问题是如何区分什么是核心的，什么是外围的。但这是一个非常合理的尝试思考的问题，我当然能理解你的观点。我的意思是，避孕药，避孕药的激素影响比任何人敢于想象的都要普遍得多。它们可能以一种我们开始理解的永久性和政治性、准永久性政治性的方式扰乱了男女之间的关系。我的意思是，例如，我知道服用避孕药的女性更不喜欢有男子气概的男性，你知道，这实际上是一个大问题。我们不知道这有什么政治影响。好的，玛丽，非常感谢你今天和我谈话，并为所有观看和收听的人提供你的知识。也感谢所有正在观看和收听的人。感谢 Daily Wire 使这一切成为可能。我将继续与 Mary 交谈，在 Daily Wire 一侧，我将深入探讨她对这些话题的兴趣的起源，所以我们将做一些更具自传性的事情，这通常是 Daily Wire 的情况。如果你想加入我们，请随时鼓励，也欢迎。非常感谢你，Mary，非常感激。谢谢。 [音乐]

Get Our Mobile App

Reappropriating Feminism, Maternity, and the Woman’s Role | Mary Harrington | EP 466

Transcription