Have We Moved Past Heterosexual Romance?
Article by Charlotte Cushman in The American Thinker
Have We Moved Past Heterosexual Romance?
The romantic relationship between a man and a woman is one of life's greatest joys. This distinctive and valuable relationship needs a defense and a greater understanding, and Ronald Pisaturo provides it in his book Masculine Power, Feminine Beauty: The Volitional, Objective Basis for Heterosexuality in Romantic Love and Marriage.[1] He presents a positive theory of heterosexual romantic love and a cogent defense for marriage, fidelity, masculinity, femininity, and much more.
From his introduction:
I argue that heterosexuality in particular enables romantic love in a way that integrates with all aspects of a man and woman. I argue also that sexual orientation is the result of volition in the same way that other aspects of romantic love are volitional. I discuss implications of my theory for the judging of homosexuality, and I debunk the mainstream theories that "affirm" non-heterosexual orientations. I then argue that objective cognition requires that the concept of marriage refer only to relationships between one man and one woman.
The underlying theme of his book is to understand one's own underlying sex-specific sexual values. The more that is understood about our values and why we value what we value, the deeper will be our love and our emotional responses to those values. Romantic love is not mindless. It requires utmost selectivity, and in order to select a sexual partner, one must know which criteria are essential and consistent with one's deepest values.
There has been a gradual deterioration of romance between men and women because of the assaults on Western civilization and the resulting war on sexuality. Feminist activists have denigrated the concepts of masculinity and femininity with claims that men and women are the same. We have been told over and over again with no proof that homosexuality is not a choice. Homosexuals are calling themselves married, legally, to members of the same sex, and anyone who doubts that marriage can apply to people of the same sex is accused of homophobia. And now, the latest is that someone can change his sex. These assertions have been pushed on us, and we are supposed to accept them without question.
But perhaps there is one good thing that can come out of the LGBT movement. It challenges us to think more clearly about the unique virtue of a romantic relationship between a man and a woman. This book meets that challenge.
Pisaturo rejects the claim that men and women are the same. He begins his book by explaining the physical differences between men and women, and that choices made in childhood grounded in those dissimilarities lead to masculinity and femininity. One of the most obvious examples is strength. Men have bodies with superior muscular strength, and because of this, a man can use his body for heavy physical work required for survival and human advancement. A woman's body is not organized for heavy physical work; it is organized to gestate life. Therefore, women usually do not choose to become construction workers. Since the job requires more strength and endurance than they have, it is not work they enjoy, so they choose to do something else. Throughout childhood, the child makes many judgments and chooses what to value and what not to value; what enhances (or doesn't enhance) his life. For example, girls may choose to admire or resent boys for their superior physical strength. Those early choices form one's sense of life, and it is one's sense of life that determines sexual attraction and preferences in adulthood.
Pisaturo's theory that one's sexual orientation is the result of many years of individual value judgments and choices. He defies the assertion that homosexuality is outside an individual's control. Pisaturo points out that the psychological professionals who assess homosexuality as inborn or a result of social constructs are not asking homosexuals why they prefer a same sex partner. The psychologists "are interested in feelings and behavior, and perhaps even conclusions; but they are not interested in thinking ... thinking is the only mental process that is subject to volition. If one discards thinking, one also discards volition."
Pisaturo goes on to describe the history of the gay activist movement, led by Marxists and Kantians. In 1973, homosexuality was taken off the list of mental illnesses after gay activists pressured and harassed the American Psychiatric Association. Even though the psychiatrists at that time made it clear that this didn't mean that homosexuality was normal, this has been ignored, and therefore its causes are not being explored, and those who do seek to understand it are verbally attacked. Pisaturo points out: "An individual who does not want to understand the cause of his sexual orientation is assuming that there is nothing good to be discovered about it." Pisaturo thinks the real agenda of the gay rights movement is not to promote goodwill towards homosexuality, nor to promote its understanding. The real agenda is the destruction of masculinity, capitalism, and all of Western civilization. Some of the quotations of some of its leaders suggest that pedophilia will be next on their list to be considered "normal."
Pisaturo is opposed to broadening the concept of marriage to include same-sex couples. He thinks that is "a killer of conceptual understanding of romantic love, and a killer of romance."
In a heterosexual relationship, unlike a homosexual one, there is a difference in sex between the two partners, and this difference is fundamental. The romantic concepts of a heterosexual are awash in the recognition and celebration of the difference between man and woman, between masculinity and femininity. To a heterosexual, a husband is not merely one of the two partners in a loving relationship; a husband is a masculine man united with a feminine woman. This union between husband and wife is marriage.
Words, which are symbols for concepts, have specific meanings for the purpose of clear thinking. Therefore, homosexuals should use a different term to designate their unions.
Pisaturo doesn't mince any words in his book. He is honest and forthright in his presentation and says exactly what he thinks. He gives an uncompromising, courageous explanation of real romantic love — the love between a man and a woman.
Good ideas fight bad ideas, and this book is the antidote to the LGBT activists who have dragged down the excitement and fulfillment of romance. The rise of Western civilization created a climate for romance to flourish. We need a renaissance, and Masculine Power, Feminine Beauty is an excellent start.
[1] Masculine Power, Feminine Beauty was originally published in 2015. In the forthcoming second edition, I was honored to be asked to write an essay that is included as an appendix to the book.
Post a Comment