Woman without her man is nothing
By Tom Cline
EDITORS NOTE: Thomas Cline, a 50-year law enforcement veteran is past president of the International Association of Ethics Trainers, a writer/trainer at the Chicago Police Academy and a consultant. He’s authored Cop Tales! (Never Spit in a Man’s Face…Unless His Mustache is on Fire) and Surviving Storms. Non-Tactical Career Survival for Law Enforcers. In this article he writes about the men and women in law enforcement, promiscuous sexual behavior and suicide.
Woman without her man is nothing – Hold on! Before you decide, hey, this guy is a jerk, and stop reading, or hey, finally a macho man, I challenge you to punctuate the title.
We men often make fools of ourselves attempting to be liked by a woman. Women, though few know it, hold all the trump cards in picking partners. They pick us. Until about fifty years ago I believe women knew that. However, the culture has been telling them that they are the same as men in sexual matters and, because it has been repeated often enough, many have bought the lie. In accepting the idea that we are the same, women have relinquished their best man-selecting trump card: “No, where is the ring?” Women weren’t always virtuous, but they were smart. You see, men and women engage in sex for different reasons. Men pretend love for sex, and women pretend sex for love. Mull this assertion awhile.
Guys cannot win in the battle of the sexes. When a man is attracted to a woman and gets physically close enough to have his testosterone react with her pheromones, especially if she coos and looks at him seductively, he is captured. During the chemical reaction the man reaches a point where the decision-making part of his brain is unable to function. According to… Dr. Neal Trautman of the National Institute of Ethics, if a man remains in a situation long enough, by medical definition, he becomes intoxicated. And, “God forbid!” he mixes alcohol AND pheromones; the stupidity gene reigns. The best solution I’ve heard for this temptation comes from the Bible: “Run.” Dr. Trautman is the only L.E. trainer who addressed this subject in his classes. My friend’s neighbor, a cancer victim, lost her cop husband whose passion for his female partner persuaded him to divorce her at such a critical time in her life.
What man has not done something stupid to impress the female of his desires and fantasies? I suspect women’s desires and fantasies about men are different and less related to the bedroom.
You may wonder why this is relevant to cops. Well, it has to do with the relationship of ethics to suicide. Most of the cop suicides in Chicago in the last few years have some commonalities; they involved promiscuous sexual behaviors and alcohol, both intoxicants for men, and at least two of the women.
If you or someone you know if law enforcement are considering suicide please call the the Safe Call Now crisis line at 1-206-459-3020. Safe Call Now is a CONFIDENTIAL, comprehensive, 24-hour crisis referral service for all public safety employees, all emergency services personnel and their family members nationwide.
In Jack London’s novel “The Call of the Wild and White Fang”, p.158, Wordsworth Editions he said, “One cannot violate the promptings of one’s nature without having that nature recoil upon itself.” Suicide is the ultimate recoiling of one’s nature upon itself and, observing so many incidents that involve promiscuity, love triangles and alcohol, I cannot help but think there may be a connection, and nobody wants to speak of it.
Sex is the most human thing we can do because it ensures the continuation of humans and creates bonds between a man and woman that cannot be explained as only pleasure seeking or species continuation. These bonds have tendrils that run deep into the heart and straight to the netherworld when abused. Animals in heat cannot help themselves and must engage if a mate is available. Humans however, have greater choice of when and with whom to engage and, if discretion is not used and pleasure is the only end, is it possible that our nature recoils upon itself? These situations become complicated and overwhelming for people and, rather than stopping the behaviors, humans are tempted to use negative methods like alcohol, drugs or more promiscuity rather than examining the rationality of the behavior that caused the recoil.
Judging from ethics classes where I raised this issue many recruits think promiscuity is okay; they embrace and promote it, especially men. They’ll cover for friends with lies and have said it is expected in law enforcement. The first few times I heard this I was shocked. Now I see it as the norm because the general culture is hyper-sexualized and children in grammar school are being introduced to sex as a pleasure tool. Masturbation is being taught and promoted in some curriculums. Culturally, the idea of sex being sacred between a man and wife is laughed at and demeaned as archaic, yet research points to the family unit as producing the most stable children and happiest couples.
Business speaker, Jim Rohn, said suffering is part of life and we get to choose our pain. The pain of self-discipline weighs ounces, and must be accepted often enough to become habit or we suffer the agony of regret. This pain weighs tons. It overwhelms us, particularly in the most human of matters. In this context, perhaps the burden of promiscuous sex is so heavy that it seems less painful to end our life.
This topic is one of those gorillas in the room and I wonder if anyone wants to breach it. Would you have the courage to breech it with a colleague who is abusing his/her sexual gifts? The risk is being told to STFU and losing a friendship, but what if it saves a life or a family from the suffering brought on by the agony of regret?
Oh yes, did you punctuate the title? The men I asked to do this punctuated it like this; “Woman, without her man is nothing.” Women see it differently. They punctuate it like this; “Woman, without her, man is nothing.” Well, I suppose there is another touchy issue.
Continue your good works!
Thomas Cline, Spouse, Father, MBA, MAP, a 50-year law enforcement veteran is past president of the International Association of Ethics Trainers, Board of Directors, Law Enforcement Training Trust, ILEETA member, and an instructional designer and trainer at the Chicago Police Academy where he developed curriculum on Ethics, Leadership, Variant Behavior, and Stress Management. Married 34 years, he and his wife have 7 children, one of each.
Tom has authored:
• Psyche Firefight (Law Enforcement Job Satisfaction in a Hostile Environment)
• Surviving Storms (Non Tactical Career Survival for Law Enforcers)
• Cop Tales Volume 1 (Never Spit in a Man’s Face . . .Unless His Mustache is on Fire.)
• Articles in Law and Order, Illinois Cops and American Police Beat Magazines
CLICK HERE to Email Tom for information on his training and workshops.
If you or someone you know if law enforcement are considering suicide please call the the Safe Call Now crisis line at 1-206-459-3020. Safe Call Now is a CONFIDENTIAL, comprehensive, 24-hour crisis referral service for all public safety employees, all emergency services personnel and their family members nationwide.
Leave your comments in the box below
© Copyright 2019 – The Law Enforcement Survival Institute, LLC and CopsAlive.com – All Rights Reserved
CopsAlive is written to prompt discussions within our profession about the issues of law enforcement career survival, health and wellness. We invite you to share your opinions, ask questions and suggest topics for us in the Comment Box that is at the bottom of this article.
At The Law Enforcement Survival Institute (LESI) we train law enforcement officers to cope with stress and manage all the toxic effects and hidden dangers of a career in law enforcement.
Our “Armor Your Self™: How to Survive a Career in Law Enforcement” on-site training program is an eight hour, hands-on, “How to” seminar based upon John Marx’ book of the same name. This seminar helps police officers and other law enforcement professionals armor themselves physically, mentally, emotionally and spiritually to build Tactical Resilience™ and survive their careers in police work. To learn more CLICK HERE. To learn about and buy the book CLICK HERE.
The concept of “True Blue Valor™” is where one law enforcement officer has to muster the courage to confront a peer who is slipping both professionally and personally and endangering themselves, their peers and the public. It takes a system of organizational support and professional leadership to support and foster the concept of courage and intervention. We will train your trainers to deliver this program to your agency.
To learn more CLICK HERE
Our “Armor Your Agency™: How to Create a Healthy and Supportive Law Enforcement Agency” Program includes critical strategies that you will need to build a system of support and encouragement for a healthy and productive agency. To learn more CLICK HERE
CLICK HERE to read more about The Law Enforcement Survival Institute.
CLICK HERE if you would like to contact us to learn more about training for your organization.
I’m John Marx, Founder of The Law Enforcement Survival Institute and the Editor of CopsAlive.com. Connect with me on Facebook, LinkedIn and Twitter.
CopsAlive.com was founded to provide information and strategies to help police officers successfully survive their careers and improve their heathy, wellness and effectiveness. We help law enforcement officers and their agencies prepare for the risks that threaten their existence. Thank you for reading!
Why Sexual Morality May be Far More Important than You Ever Thought
SEXUALITY, MORALITY
The Proposal by Sir Alma Tadema, 1892
One winter afternoon I was relaxing with a half-dozen fellow graduate philosophy students discussing theories of law and punishment. About an hour into the discussion, it occurred to me that some moral laws might limit pleasure and enjoyment in the short term but in the long term minimize suffering and maximize human fulfillment.
A few days ago I finished studying Sex and Culture for the second time. It is a remarkable book summarizing a lifetime of research by Oxford social anthropologist J.D. Unwin.[1] The 600+ page book is, in Unwin’s words, only a “summary” of his research—seven volumes would be required to lay it all out.[2] His writings suggest he was a rationalist, believing that science is our ultimate tool of inquiry (it appears he was not a religious man). As I went through what he found, I was repeatedly reminded of the thought I had as a philosophy student: some moral laws may be designed to minimize human suffering and maximize human flourishing long term.
Unwin examines the data from 86 societies and civilizations to see if there is a relationship between sexual freedom and the flourishing of cultures. What makes the book especially interesting is that we in the West underwent a sexual revolution in the late 1960’s, 70’s, and 80’s and are now in a position to test the conclusions he arrived at more than 40 years earlier.
Unwin’s cultural categories
Unwin described four “great patterns of human culture” and degrees of flourishing measured in terms of architecture, art, engineering, literature, agriculture, and so forth. The primary criterion for classification was how they related to the natural world and the forces it contains.[3]
1. zoistic: Entirely self-focussed on day-to day-life, wants, and needs, with no interest in understanding nature. Described as a “dead culture” or “inert”.
2. monistic: Acquire superstitious beliefs and/or special treatment of the dead to cope with the natural world.
3. deistic: Attribute the powers of nature to a god or gods
4. rationalistic: Use rational thinking to understand nature and to make day-to-day decisions.
Unwin’s degrees of sexual restraint
Degrees of sexual restraint were divided into two major categores—prenuptial and postnuptial. Prenuptial categories were:[4]
1. Complete sexual freedom—no prenuptial restraints at all
2. Irregular or occasional restraint— cultural regulations require an occasional period of abstinence
3. Strict Chastity —remain a virgin until married
Postnuptial categories were:[5]
1. Modified monogamy: one spouse at a time, but association can be terminated by either party.
2. Modified polygamy: men can have more than one wife, but a wife is free to leave her husband.
3. Absolute monogamy: only one spouse permitted for life (or until death in some cultures)
4. Absolute polygamy: men can have more than one wife, but wives must “confine their sexual qualities (i.e., activity) to their husband for the whole of their lives.”
So what did he find?
Hesperus, the evening star, sacred to lovers by Joseph Noel Paton, 1857
I have prepared a 26-page collection of quotes from his book that summarize his findings; but even that would leave you with a significant under-appreciation of the rigour and fascinating details revealed in data from 86 cultures. Here are a few of his most significant findings:
1. Effect of sexual constraints: Increased sexual constraints, either pre or post-nuptial, always led to increased flourishing of a culture. Conversely, increased sexual freedom always led to the collapse of a culture three generations later.
2. Single most influential factor: Surprisingly, the data revealed that the single most important correlation with the flourishing of a culture was whether pre-nuptial chastity was required or not. It had a very significant effect either way.
3. Highest flourishing of culture: The most powerful combination was pre-nuptial chastity coupled with “absolute monogamy”. Rationalist cultures that retained this combination for at least three generations exceeded all other cultures in every area, including literature, art, science, furniture, architecture, engineering, and agriculture. Only three out of the eighty-six cultures studied ever attained this level.
4. Effect of abandoning prenuptial chastity: When strict prenuptial chastity was no longer the norm, absolute monogamy, deism, and rational thinking also disappeared within three generations.
5. Total sexual freedom: If total sexual freedom was embraced by a culture, that culture collapsed within three generations to the lowest state of flourishing — which Unwin describes as “inert” and at a “dead level of conception” and is characterized by people who have little interest in much else other than their own wants and needs. At this level, the culture is usually conquered or taken over by another culture with greater social energy.
6. Time lag: If there is a change in sexual constraints, either increased or decreased restraints, the full effect of that change is not realized until the third generation. (Note: I’ve added a clarifying footnote at the end of this article. See footnote #13)
How does this compare with our culture today?
Unwin published his findings in 1936, long before the sexual revolution that occurred in the West. We now have an opportunity to test his conclusions by observing if our own culture is following the predicted pattern. Unwin’s “generation” appears to be approximately 33 years, so it should take about a century for us to see the cultural changes take full effect, but we are far enough along in the process that we should be able to observe certain predicted effects.
We now have an opportunity to test his conclusions by observing if our own culture is following the predicted pattern.
Prior to the sexual revolution which began in the late 1960’s, prenuptial chastity was still held in strong regard by Western culture. But, starting in the 1970’s, pre-marital sexual freedom became increasingly acceptable. By the early 2000’s, the majority of teens were sexually active, to the extent that remaining a virgin until marriage was regarded with disbelief if not ridicule. At the same time, our culture moved from a social norm of absolute monogamy to “modified monogamy”.
Unwin’s predictions for our culture
Photo by Kelly Sikkema on Unsplash
Thanks to the rationalist generations that preceded them, the first generation of a society setting aside its sexual restraints can still enjoy its new-found sexual freedom before any significant decline in culture, but the data shows that this “having your cake and eating it too” phase lasts a maximum of one generation before the decline sets in. Unwin wrote:
The history of these societies consists of a series of monotonous repetitions; and it is difficult to decide which aspect of the story is the more significant: the lamentable lack of original thought which in each case the reformers displayed, or the amazing alacrity with which, after a period of intense compulsory continence (sexual restraint), the human organism seizes the earliest opportunity to satisfy its innate desires in a direct or perverted manner. Sometimes a man has been heard to declare that he wishes both to enjoy the advantages of high culture and to abolish compulsory continence. The inherent nature of the human organism, however, seems to be such that these desires are incompatible, even contradictory. The reformer may be likened to the foolish boy who desires both to keep his cake and to consume it. Any human society is free to choose either to display great energy or to enjoy sexual freedom; the evidence is that it cannot do both for more than one generation.[6]
Looking at our own sexual revolution, the “having your cake and eating it too” phase would have lasted into the early 2000’s. We are now at a stage where we should begin to observe the verification or falsification of Unwin’s predictions.
Unwin found that when strict prenuptial chastity was abandoned, absolute monogamy, deism, and rational thinking disappeared within three generations.
Unwin found that when strict prenuptial chastity was abandoned, absolute monogamy, deism, and rational thinking disappeared within three generations of the change in sexual freedom. So how are we doing as we enter the second generation since our own sexual revolution at the end of the 20th century?
1. As predicted, absolute monogamy has already been replaced with modified monogamy. Common-law relationships are becoming the norm. Although divorce occurred prior to the 1970’s, the mainstream of our culture still maintained the view that marriage should be for life, and common-law relationships were regarded with some distaste. That has clearly changed. Those who actually practice life-long commitments in marriage have become the minority, with couples born prior to the sexual revolution much more likely to maintain a life-long commitment in marriage.
2. Deism is already rapidly declining, exactly as predicted. Prior to the 1960’s, a combination of rationalism and a belief in God was the norm for mainstream culture. Not only has belief in God greatly decreased since the 1960’s, but there has been a trend to remove the concept of God from government, the educational system, and the public forum. Those who still believe in God sense a strong societal pressure to keep deistic beliefs private. In its place, is a surprising rise in superstition,[7] classified by Unwin as a “monistic” culture, two levels down from the rationalist culture we had prior to the sexual revolution. There has also been a huge increase in the percentage of the population that classifies itself as non-religious, a symptom of the lowest, “zoistic” level of Unwin’s categories.[8]
3. The swiftness with which rational thinking declined after the 1970’s is astounding. In its place arose post-modernism, characterized by “scepticism, subjectivism, or relativism” and “a general suspicion of reason”.[9] But it gets worse … post-modernism is giving way to “post truth”. In direct contrast to rational thinking, a post-truth culture abandons “shared objective standards for truth” and instead, stands on appeals to feelings and emotions, and what one wants to believe.[10] People can now “identify” themselves as something which flat-out contradicts science and rational thinking and, in many cases, receive the full support and backing of governments and educational systems. Not only do people feel they have a right to believe what they want, but any challenge to that belief, even if supported by truth and logic, is unacceptable and offensive. Here is a quote from Unwin that has become particularly a propos in the last couple decades since our own sexual revolution …
If I were asked to define a sophist, I should describe him as a man whose conclusion does not follow from his premise. Sophistry is appreciated only by those among whom human entropy is disappearing; they mistake it for sound reasoning. It flourishes among those people who have extended their sexual opportunity after a period of intense compulsory continence. [11]
Summary of where our culture is going, given Unwin’s findings
For the first part of the 1900’s, mainstream Western culture was rationalist and experienced enormous technological advances — from horse-and-buggy to cars; from hot air balloons to supersonic flight and spacecraft landing people on the moon; from slide rules to computers. Unwin’s three main predictions — the abandonment of rationalism, deism, and absolute monogamy — are all well underway, which makes the ultimate prediction appear to be credible … the collapse of Western civilization in the third generation, somewhere in the last third of this century.
Unwin’s three main predictions — the abandonment of rationalism, deism, and absolute monogamy — are all well underway, which makes the ultimate prediction appear to be credible … the collapse of Western civilization in the third generation
Will our culture be the exception?
I suppose we can hope, but there is always a tendency to want to believe “it cannot happen to us.” Unwin describes this attitude as a “pardonable egocentricity” and a “quaint and comfortable doctrine”, that flies in the face of data, which indicate that the pattern of decline happens with “monotonous” regularity. That’s another way of saying that “insanity is doing the same thing yet again but expecting different results.” The primary predictions are already unfolding with alarming “alacrity”.
Why is there such a “monotonous” perfect inverse correlation?
The old adage, “correlation does not entail causation”, probably holds true here as well. Unwin makes it clear that he does not know why sexual freedom directly leads to the decline and collapse of cultures, although he suggests that when sexual energy is restrained through celibacy or monogamy, it is diverted into more productive social energy.
Perhaps, but I find it difficult to accept it as a primary cause. Mary Eberstadt’s recent research into mass killings, the substantial rise in mental health issues including depression, and the explosion of identity politics is a “primal scream” due to the loss of identity that was once provided by growing up in a long-term, immediate family with siblings and a sizable group of cousins, aunts and uncles, all of which provided identity—essential for well-being. Eberstadt shows and documents from various studies that this decimation of the family was a direct consequence of the sexual revolution at the end of the 20th century.[11]
Eberstadt shows and documents from various studies that this decimation of the family was a direct consequence of the sexual revolution at the end of the 20th century.
Her research indicates that increased sexual freedom led to the decimation of the family, which resulted in the loss of family identity, which produces Eberstadt’s ‘primal screams’—a massive increase in mental health issues, mass killings, and the rise of extreme identity groups at war with each other … all symptoms of a society rapidly spiraling into collapse. This appears to have greater explanatory power than Unwin’s psychological suggestion, although the two may actually be closely related, given what Eberstadt shows.
Both Unwin and Eberstadt provide substantial evidence that a sexual revolution has long-term, devastating consequences for culture and civilization. As Unwin states, “The history of these societies consists of a series of monotonous repetitions,” and it appears that our civilization is following the same, well-travelled road to collapse.
Back to the philosophical thought
So back to that afternoon in the philosophy seminar when it occurred to me that some moral laws will seem to limit human pleasure in the short term, but will prevent great suffering or maximize happiness and fulfillment in the long term. For years, it has been my thinking that God’s moral laws are not simply a bunch of arbitrary rules given to restrict mankind’s freedom. Instead, they are like operating instructions designed to spare people from suffering while maximizing human flourishing. Unwin’s and Eberstadt’s research provides strong rational justification for the inference that God’s moral laws pertaining to our sexuality, although they may restrain us from some immediate pleasure, protect us from enormous long-term suffering while maximizing our long term flourishing.
Note: If you enjoyed this article, you may be interested in another article Kirk has written, ‘What Does it Mean to be Human: Vastly More than You can Imagine’.
References and Notes:
1. A downloadable, pdf version of Unwin’s Sex and Culture is available here.
2. I have prepared a 26-page collection of quotes that can provide a more detailed understanding of Unwin’s book, but it is highly recommended that the reader, at minimum, at least skim Unwin’s book to get a better idea of the rigour and breadth of his research, as well as some of the many examples the data provides.
3. See section 7, Unwin, page 13 for a fuller understanding of these terms.
4. Unwin, page 341.
5. Unwin, page 342
6. Unwin, page 412
7. See, for example, Stuart Vyse, ‘Why are millennials turning to astrology?’, Skeptical Inquirer, 2018. and Denyse O’Leary, ‘As traditionalism declines, superstition—not atheism—is the big winner’, Intellectual Takeout, 2018.
8. Note: A non-religious culture is not necessarily an atheistic culture. They do not deny or accept the existence of God or gods. Rather, belief in a god or gods is simply not part of their lives; it is irrelevant.
9. Britannica, ‘Postmodernism’.
10. Description of Post Truth
11. Unwin, page 413
12. Mary Eberstadt, Primal Screams: How the sexual revolution created identity politics.
13. A loosening of sexual constraints probably does not occur in one year or even one decade. In our case, one could argue that the sexual revolution began in the late 1960’s, lasted throughout the 70’s and possibly into the early 1980’s. According to Unwin, only small changes in a culture occur in the first generation, due to the cultural ‘momentum’ of the previous generation, which still continues to be a heavy influence in the generation after the loosening (or strengthening) of sexual restraints. The changes become more prevalent in the second generation, but it is not until the third generation, after the initial generation has completely died off, that the changes reach their full effect, occurring rapidly over the course of that third generation. By the end of the third generation, the changes have fully taken place and the culture stabilizes at its new level. However, if it has stabilized at the highest level, then the flourishing of that culture continues to increase in subsequent generations (though Unwin observes that no culture maintains that state very long). If it has stabilized at the lowest level (i.e., a “collapse”), then that culture is destroyed from within, or conquered or taken over by a more “energetic” culture.
sex, sexuality, sex and culture, morality, J.D. Unwin, sexual morality
FacebookTwitterStumbleUponRedditTumblrPinterest94 Likes
Kirk Durston
This was sent to me by someone who I did not think would agree with my thoughts. It is frightening.
https://www.kirkdurston.com/blog/unwin
Thomas Cline once again proves himself to be the quintessential example of misogyny. His overall mindset about the relationship between women and men is archaic and demeaning to both sexes. What about same-sex relationships Tom? Is sex between two men less sacred? Assuming that women aren’t sexual beings just as males are? Assuming that the only thing men are after is sex in a relationship?! I feel as though I am reading a page out of a 1975 pre-cana brochure every time I read something from Mr. Cline. Do you realize that your words about women demean them? You figuratively disarm them when you make these assumptions and statements. You’re not empowering anyone. Your writing is simply a last-ditch attempt to find like-minded individuals within your rapidly shrinking social circle of masculine empowerment.
Our world, our society, our values and policing have shifted YEARS ago. To think that this mindset is still reviled and accepted is atrocious. This article serves one purpose and one purpose only: to stand as a shining example of WHY we need to change the way we think, why we need to strive for a more inclusive, egalitarian view of policing.
I welcome anyone to email me so we can discuss this topic further,
Outstanding article, thank you for breaching the gorilla! We do our best to present these topics at conferences, needs to be addressed way more! I plan on reading more of your work , appreciate the way you write.
Tim: What you did took tremendous courage that few can muster.
From Rollo May > Quotable Quote
Rollo May
“This exile is a fascinating symbolic act from our modern psychoanalytic viewpoint, for we have held in earlier chapters that the greatest threat and greatest cause of anxiety for an American near the end of the twentieth century is not castration but ostracism, the terrible fate of being exiled by one’s group. Many a contemporary man castrates himself or permits himself to be castrated because of fear of being exiled if he doesn’t. He renounces his power and conforms under the great threat and peril of ostracism.
— Rollo May, “The Tragedy of Truth About Oneself” (The Psychology of Existence: An Integrative, Clinical Perspective by Kirk Schneider and Rollo May), pp. 14-15”
John, thanks for the informative Newsletter. We’re all in this together. Have a wonderful holiday season and continue your good work! Best , Mar
I actually have addressed this topic with a former colleague twice. It caused me to lose a friendship and to be departmentally ostracized because of his influence.