It seems to me the hippie enterprise of liberalizing sex has, despite enormous potential, failed to rid the world of constant frustration and permanent strife. But if you come to think of it, it couldn’t. I mean: 96.17% of the conflicts revolve around who’s shagging who. If you de-scarce the resource, reasons for war should vanish. The argument is so compeling that, upon verifying that things did not turn out this way, my first instinct is not to question the assumption, but to try and find what went wrong.
And, of course, there is an easy answer, the scapegoat reeking suspisciously of Market-h-ing, by what i mean the strategy of presenting promiscuity as “free love”. Sure, good sex and infatuation go hand in hand, but to promise that by lowering the barrier to sex would lead everyone to healthy, fulfilling relationships, certainly will pass as an unfulfilled promise.
Having more sex could come with very healthy effects, but blossoming expectations do have the opposite consequences, in spades. Calling sex for love just piles up unrealistic demands.
I am still confident on the merits of promiscuity, thoough.