The Sexual Revolution: Cause of a New Secularist Faith?

The Sexual Revolution of the 1960s is often portrayed in a positive light, hailed as bringing many benefits for society, especially women. One leading conservative scholar, however, is skeptical of this portrayal. The Sexual Revolution, Mary Eberstadt says, has instead caused deep societal problems and even led to a “new secularist faith.” 

On May 18, the American Enterprise Institute (AEI) hosted Eberstadt, Panula Chair in Christian Culture at the Catholic Information Center and Senior Research Fellow at the Faith & Reason Institute, at AEI’s headquarters in Washington for a discussion with AEI President Robert Doar about Eberstadt’s new book Adam and Eve After the Pill, Revisted.

Adam and Eve After the Pill, Revisted follows Eberstadt’s 2013 book of a nearly identical name, Adam and Eve After the Pill: Paradoxes of the Sexual Revolution. In her conversation with Doar, Eberstadt highlighted a speech by James Q. Wilson at AEI as an inspiration for these books, particularly Wilson’s claim that, as Eberstadt summarizes, “the best predictor for good or bad outcomes for kids was family stability.” This prompted Eberstadt to write her first Adam and Eve book, in which she “took a microscopic look at what had happened since the Sexual Revolution; what had happened to men, to women, to children, to general social morays.” One example Eberstadt mentioned at AEI was her discussion of a study on “The Paradox of Declining Female Happiness” since the Sexual Revolution. 

Eberstadt’s new book, in contrast to its predecessor, examined “the macrocosmic effects of the Sexual Revolution: what happened to politics, society, and Christianity itself.” Addressing the effects of the Sexual Revolution on Christianity, Eberstadt commented at AEI: “everybody believes in something, as we are seeing when perfectly secular people are as absolutist about issues like climate change, we are theotropic, we lean towards some kind of idea of transcendence. The question is: which one are you going for?” 

Eberstadt suggested there is now a “new secularist faith” which has emerged out of the Sexual Revolution. This faith essentializes abortion on-demand and defends it with “religious fervor,” she said. Eberstadt concluded the new secularist faith is thus “profoundly anti-Christian,” incompatible with Christian morality. She also suggested that “identity politics arises because of the vacuum left by western Christianity and by the decline of the family.” Previously, Eberstadt noted, identity for most people was rooted in their religion and family.

Eberstadt also proposed that the Church has poorly lived out the moral principles it claims. This proposal was prompted by Doar, who suggested that the Roman Catholic Church – to which both Doar and Eberstadt belong – institutionally “hasn’t been very effective in leading the flock or expanding the flock.” Eberstadt concurred, highlighting Catholic sexual abuse scandals. 

Eberstadt also suggested that “after the Sexual Revolution, most Catholics and other Christians mutinied in effect,” siding with non-Christians on some issues of sexual morality. Eberstadt argued, however, that the Catholic Church has not entirely lost its potential moral witness. “At a time when, for example, no institutions stand against pornography, the Catholic Church does.” Eberstadt spoke earlier during the event of the negative consequences of pornography and its normalization since the Sexual Revolution.

Asked by Doar about other negative consequences of the Sexual Revolution, Eberstadt highlighted the effects of contraception’s increased use. “In the 1960s,” she said, “the case was made: contraception will strengthen marriage. It’ll give people more freedom. And the case was also made that the increased use of contraception would prevent abortion.” Unfortunately, Eberstadt noted, there have instead been several unintended consequences: “skyrocketing rates of divorce, fatherless homes, unstable marriages.” Eberstadt also suggested that the availability of contraception increased sexual harassment, as the consequences thereof were decreased.

Despite an overall dour perspective on the Sexual Revolution and the Church’s response to it, Eberstadt indicated there is nonetheless reason for hope. “There is nothing inevitable about the way we have come to live. This social experiment is like any other social experiment; it’s subject to revision, it’s subject to the weighing of new evidence, and in that sense, I think we are in a better place than we were in 1997 [when Wilson spoke at AEI], because there is a new willingness to take a second look at this stuff.”

The chief evidence of hope, for Eberstadt, is the Supreme Court’s decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization. In what was perhaps her most profound comment during AEI’s event, Eberstadt stated: “Dobbs is the first major institutional rollback of the Sexual Revolution,” She suggested that this decision would prompt not only Americans, but the whole world to rethink the “unimpeded embrace of the Sexual Revolution.”

Eberstadt’s counter cultural assessment of the Sexual Revolution’s negative consequences is well-worth considering. The Left spins a mostly positive narrative of the Sexual Revolution, and Eberstadt recognizes there have been some benefits, especially as regards economic opportunities for women. Eberstadt nonetheless presents a compelling case that an accurate narrative of the Sexual Revolution is far more negative than most on the Left would have us believe. Those interested in the Sexual Revolution and how it led to current issues related to life, marriage, family, sexuality, and gender would do well to engage with Eberstadt’s analysis.