One thing that defenders of the sexual revolution will not understand is that, although the act of intercourse is private (or better be), everything else about sex is public. I don’t simply mean that people will know that John and Mary are in a “relationship,” horrid denatured word, or that sexual intercourse results in those visible creatures known as children. It is that our customs and moral directives regarding the sexes and their union determine what kind of people we will be. They are the language we all must speak. There is no such thing as a private language.
No one can decree what a word will signify for those who hear it, or even what it must signify for himself. That’s not how words work. Nor is it how symbolic actions work—actions that are, whether we admit it or not, significant. I put my hand in my pocket; it doesn’t mean anything. Maybe I’m searching for my car keys. Maybe my hand is cold. But if I’m holding a woman by the hand, that means something, the meaning is public, and it’s not ours to determine. John may rent a house with his brother Bill. That doesn’t mean anything. If John rents a house with Sarah, that does mean something, whether they like it or not. And it has implications. It denies the necessity of marriage. It declares, “A man and woman need not be married to enjoy the delights of sexual intercourse. They may do what we’re doing. There’s nothing wrong with it.”
Read Full Article »