Commentary: The Sexual Revolution, 50 Years Later

Hugh Hefner died at age 91 on Sept. 27. While the death of a human being is never something to be celebrated, it would seem an appropriate time to weigh in on his legacy and the cultural movement he was a part of.

My grandparents used to tell me of the days when people met in classes or at dances, courted in ways that now seem brief and highly structured, then married, often for life. I was raised around elderly people who had fallen out of love, but whose sense of duty kept them together. Many of them fell back in love later in life. Some did not.

In contrast, only two generations later, dating is almost unrecognizable. Sex-positivity is the norm, leading to the common assertion that sex is good, and with the more partners, the better. Dating is generally casual – attempts to impress the partner with a fine dining experience are considered to be campy and awkward. Sexual contact is typically expected to be initiated within the first three dates. Many people prefer to maintain relationships which are purely sexual, or are engaged in explicitly non-monogamous relationships.

One might ask, what’s wrong with people following and being honest about their desires? Well, aside from any religious or moral qualms, it simply isn’t working. Studies are beginning to show that Millennials are having less sex than any generation in the last 60 years. In the age of free, easy sex, accessible at a moment’s notice via various apps, we still have deranged young men going on shooting rampages because they are upset about their continued virginity.

This should not surprise us. The sexual revolution did not make sex more broadly accessible – it has always been readily accessible. What it did, instead, was to remove sexuality from other aspects of life, creating a marketplace where goods are casually traded.

In the fast-paced sex market, if you are fit, charismatic and show signs of a healthy income, you can expect a robust sex life. If your gifts are more subtle you are far less likely to have sexual opportunities.

We are not surprised that a capitalist market economy which encourages the accumulation of wealth leads to income inequality. Why, then, are we surprised that the introduction of the marketplace into sexuality has led to sex inequality? Why, when the market economy creates a space for lower-cost, lower-quality goods, are we surprised that the sexual revolution has done the same?

So, as a romantic, and as someone who has undoubtedly benefited from the loosening of sexual norms and standards, I still have a hard time weeping for Hugh Hefner’s death.

But maybe he would have wanted it that way. After all, he fought for a world with fewer tears, less sentimentalism, more egoistic self-gratification. He got it.

All this young romantic can say is that hopefully it follows him to the grave.

Neil Longo is a 2015 graduate of Brigham Young University. After an internship with Utah Sen. Orrin Hatch, he began work for the Intercollegiate Studies Institute as a regional director. He currently lives in Portland, Ore., and hopes to pursue a Ph.D. in religious philosophy and to settle in Utah.