"Of course, predictions are hard, especially about the future."No doubt McArdle will claim she's making a funny, but her whole column is chock full o' such boneheaded drivel.
At this point, it's just a matter of time. In some sense, the sexual revolution is over . . . and the forces of bourgeois repression have won.
That's right, I said it: this is a landmark victory for the forces of staid, bourgeois sexual morality. Once gays can marry, they'll be expected to marry. And to buy sensible, boring cars that are good for car seats. I believe we're witnessing the high water mark for "People should be able to do whatever they want, and it's none of my business." You thought the fifties were conformist? Wait until all those fabulous "confirmed bachelors" and maiden schoolteachers are expected to ditch their cute little one-bedrooms and join the rest of America in whining about crab grass, HOA restrictions, and the outrageous fees that schools want to charge for overnight soccer trips.Either McArdle thinks the "sexual revolution" was a gays-only phenomenon or she thinks that the availability of marriage cannot coexist with the choices not to marry and to fuck without a wedding ring. And she's apparently never considered that equality of rights is a good thing independent of any desire to exercise such rights.
What McArdle actually thinks is that marriage is all about the accumulation of wealth and saying "screw you" to losers who are unlike her.
That's why McArdle has never supported marriage equality, and still does not. (She concedes the inevitability of marriage equality, but never the immorality of inequality.) And why she's hopeful that unmarried sluts and their bastards will once again suffer public prejudice and shame. Because the more people she can say "screw you" to, the happier she is.