>Promiscuity in sexual matters is bourgeois. It is a sign of degeneration. The proletariat is a rising class. It does not need an intoxicant to stupefy or stimulate it, neither the intoxicant of sexual laxity or of alcohol. It should and will not forget the vileness, the filth and the barbarity of capitalism. It derives its strongest inspiration to fight from its class position, from the communist ideal. What it needs is clarity, clarity, and more clarity. Therefore, I repeat, there must be no weakening, no waste and no dissipation of energy Self-control and self-discipline are not slavery; not in matters of love either. But excuse me, Clara, I have strayed far from the point which we set out to discuss. Why have you not called me to order? Worry has set me talking. I take the future of our youth very close to heart. It is part and parcel of the revolution. Whenever harmful elements appear, which creep from bourgeois society to the world of the revolution and spread like the roots of prolific weeds, it is better to take action against them quickly. The questions we have dealt with are also part of the women’s problems.
- Vladimir Lenin
Thoughts?
>>2403199this quote comes from an author that supposedly interviewed another person that had this conversation with lenin, even if it is true you have to ask yourself why he never bothered to put it in writing. probably because he also understood this wasn't that important
lenin did have a rather modest personal life, but he never asked celibacy or anything like that from the other bolsheviks, he asked results. case in point that guy that bullied a woman into killing herself after having sex with her and passing her around to the rest of the party
>>2403230>case in point that guy that bullied a woman into killing herself after having sex with her and passing her around to the rest of the partythe bauman affair did not consist of him passing a woman around the party… what happened was bauman had sex with another party member's wife, she got pregnant, and then he slandered her as a whore, so she killed herself. But she was not "passed around" and gangbanged or whatever you're saying.
>>2403235This. Lenin was also personally a teetotaler and against alcoholism but it's not like he demanded party members never ever drink.
>>2403502Work accidents don't count.
Air accidents don't count.
Also Lenin was shot so doesn't count.
>Shit tier meme. >>2403199Degeneration = Alienation.
Case solved.
One person = One Partner for life and eternity.
Many partners = Different partners until death.
ONCE A HOE ALWAYS A HOE.
>>2403521Fuck consent. You can consent to stupid shit does not mean it's ok.
Objective morality is better than your "consent" bullshit morality.
Btw, we already have this spook morality because the Other decided who/what/when is considered consent and when not. It's just another form of the form/content dialectic. I'm just tired of all the bullshit. Why can't people be fucking honest and say what is actually happening.
>Right to privacy<Sure!>To do not so good things<No privacy then!Fucking spooks. Fucking hate them.
>>2403534promiscuity is physically and mentally harmful no matter what the participants think
>>2403551>rape kinkpeople with sexual trauma deserve adequate psychiatric treatment instead of enabling their self-harm
>>2403567Careful. In some places that's illegal. I hoped you would have said no so I could prance around and poke holes in your worldview. Unfortunately for me, not today.
>>2403569Althusser, is that you?
>>2403543Nah people can change, usually some religious awakening or they have class mobility and become more conservative.
But what I think what Lenin is saying is that if you have a higher cause to strive for promiscuity is a distraction or is a hindrance to having a realisation of that higher cause.
>>2403335>so at least by the metric of not having sex /leftypol/ is full of great revolutionariesNice
>>2403230>lenin did have a rather modest personal life, but he never asked celibacy or anything like that from the other bolsheviks, he asked results.Yeah. Lenin was an ascetic Russian revolutionary in his 50s (which seemed older then) who lived in a straw hut.
But yes. He thought the sex talk was a big distraction, but there's an interesting part in that conversation where he felt it was as repugant to try to justify one's own sex life before bourgeois morality and plead for tolerance as it is to "root about in all that bears on sex." I actually like that take. It's like, why would you go beg for "tolerance" from people who disapprove of your sex life? Do you also have a king?
>case in point that guy that bullied a woman into killing herself after having sex with her and passing her around to the rest of the partyI was reading Milovan Djilas who said the Yugoslav communists had a big free love phase, but they ended up straightening up a bit once things started to get serious because it just took up a lot of time and energy. They threw one of their guys off a train because he was sleeping with their wives. I think the main thing is the experience of actual revolutionary struggle when it gets serious and people are going to prison, hopping between safe houses, and also getting hanged from the gallows.
>>2403543Alienation is good though. Under socialism, the workers will desire more and desire more intensely.
>>2403548Consent is a red-herring. We all know that the freedom to make contracts of employment favors the bourgeoisie alone. The problem is power, not consent. It follows that we must attack the root of the power men have over women and so on and so forth. The material root of male power is petty-bourgeois private home ownership. We must obsolete the private ownership of housing in order to eliminate the power homeowners have to exploit spouses and children with the threat of eviction.
>>2403199My main thought is that I won’t treat Lenin like a prophet and start accepting his hottest takes
Then again this can be utilized to bolster the black pill
>>2404459Why is not having sex “strong”?
Why is having sex “weak”?
Do you have a non-spooked answer?
>>2403199Lenin was misinformed since some level of promiscuity was inherent in humans as animals.
If you want to look at the sexuality of a classless society look at hunter gatherer society. Mostly long term pair bonds but partner switching i.e. divorce, pre-long term partnership sex i.e. pre-martial in the modern sense. The rigidity of static marriage and patriarchal religion is what is the historical oddity, not that.
The fact is serial monogamy with a few one night stands is probably the default mode of human sexuality.
>>2404696You can't google?
https://www.marxists.org/archive/zetkin/1925/lenin/zetkin2.htmHere is the full bit.
>“The revolution calls for concentration and rallying of every nerve by the masses and by the individual. It does not tolerate orgiastic conditions so common among d’Annunzio’s decadent heroes and heroines. Promiscuity in sexual matters is bourgeois. It is a sign of degeneration. The proletariat is a rising class. It does not need an intoxicant to stupefy or stimulate it, neither the intoxicant of sexual laxity or of alcohol. It should and will not forget the vileness, the filth and the barbarity of capitalism. It derives its strongest inspiration to fight from its class position, from the communist ideal. What it needs is clarity, clarity, and more clarity. Therefore, I repeat, there must be no weakening, no waste and no dissipation of energy Self-control and self-discipline are not slavery; not in matters of love either. But excuse me, Clara, I have strayed far from the point which we set out to discuss. Why have you not called me to order? Worry has set me talking. I take the future of our youth very close to heart. It is part and parcel of the revolution. Whenever harmful elements appear, which creep from bourgeois society to the world of the revolution and spread like the roots of prolific weeds, it is better to take action against them quickly. The questions we have dealt with are also part of the women’s problems.” >>2403199Within capitalism promiscuity is definitely bourgeois. It's anti-woman (due to childcare) and it privileges those with wealth. Most people can't afford to live alone, and a couple is a form of relationship that serves this need well.
But if everyone had access to adequate housing and childcare was less of an individual burden, would this make promiscuity the default?
Still at the end of the day you don't want to be stuck old and less desirable with only the pool of rejects to draw from, but that's so long as there's a general tendency to form pairs and stop being sexually open. I think some fundamental questions about human sexuality are still unanswered, like about biological impulses towards (only towards since it's obviously not absolute) pair-bonding in humans. Serial monogamy is my guess for the common desired outcome, but this also has issues since the timing of ending a relation or starting a new one likely won't be equally satisfactory to both parties. If this was the norm both parties, so long as they're experienced enough, could be expected to take self-protective measures by trying to stay detached and leaving first. This seems like an unsatisfying way to relate to others by making it competitive and not a save relationship for feeling much tenderness. If people realize this and actively choose long-term monogamy in response, this would shift things again towards needing to secure a decent partner before being left with the undesirables, bringing things back to where we are now…
>>2404639How does having casual sex harm society?
I will 100% accept Marxism-Rogersism I just want the MLoids floating the idea to say it openly instead of beating around the bush
Unique IPs: 53