Bookmark and Share
My Photo


    Opinions expressed on the Insight Scoop weblog are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the positions of Ignatius Press. Links on this weblog to articles do not necessarily imply agreement by the author or by Ignatius Press with the contents of the articles. Links are provided to foster discussion of important issues. Readers should make their own evaluations of the contents of such articles.


« Word of the Day: palaver | Main | Avery Cardinal Dulles on faith, authority, and theology »

Monday, December 15, 2008



I must say that when I was in my 20s in the 1980s the term "hooking up" didn't necessarily mean casual sex. It COULD mean that, but it also just meant that you went out with your friends and happened to meet someone at the nightclub you were at... got her number... maybe made out on the dance floor or in the parking lot, got her phone number.

It seems as though the term "hooking up" has evolved into a very specific meaning that wasn't always the case just 20+ years ago.

Back when my parents were growing up, having a "gay ol' time" meant something a LOT different than what that phrase has meant since then.

Deacon Harold

There's also "friends with benefits," which I'm sure you can imagine what that means (no, the benefits are not medical or dental!)

Ed Peters

Dating and courtship will come back when girls insist on it. If they don't, guys will never bother with it on their own.


I found this to be the most disturbing:

"According to her, the pros are that hooking up emphasizes group friendships over the one-pair model of dating, and, therefore, removes the negative stigma from those who can’t get a date... Now, she said, you just hang out with your friends and hope that something happens."

This is my interpretation / prediction: a young person essentially joins a tribe of intra-sexual cohorts, gradually coming to have a sexual relationship with every single one of them (homo- and hetero-, you know its coming eventually) until he effectively has a sexual relationship with the COLLECTIVE. There are no real emotional ties to any single one of them; he *might* be interested in "settling down" temporarily with a single one, but really, why not two? Three? Ah heck, "marry" the whole group and get the State tax-breaks!

Or perhaps he gets bored with them, or moves on to another "phase in life." Chances are he will take up with a new cohort, a new sex-collective... and...

Need I even mention "Brave New World"?

"Without decent fathers, young men don't easily learn how to treat women, how to court, how to think about marriage (or being single)."

Yup, and I'll testify to this personally, having grown up without a father since age two, and having had a sexual relationship with a woman for five years during my early twenties. We both figured we'd get married eventually... and then I began reverting to Catholicism and she couldn't handle it. Darn you Catholic Church for showing me the Light of Christ! :-D


This is the barbarity into which the Western world has fallen. Society has turned its back on the civiling influence of the Church and these are the results. It is beyond ironic that "feminist" ideologies have resulted in such a degredation of women.



Which is the point Wendy Shalit made in "A Return to Modesty", good book...


I don't see the issue of STDs mentioned in this discussion. Is it a pro or a con to share those lovely diseases with your friends? A sign of inclusiveness perhaps? An added bonus - if you decide to, or have the misfortune of, having a baby,you can share them with the li'l one too. And as taxpayers, we can share in the medical and societal costs of treatment. It's a win-win situation!


During the initial interview in the defense of our marriage, which my wife tried to have declared null, I was asked how long we courted before we were married. When I replied, about six months, I was treated to an admonisment from the Canonist/Priest for having not taken very long. This bigoted attack began a back and forth exchange which lead to the Priest telling me to leave and that he could/would not represent me in the defense of our marriage, as I would not put up with his defense of a Church hell bent on nullifying a Sacrament. Before he could hustle me out of his office I asked him how long his parents had been married, to which he answered over fifty years, to which I retorted regarding how long they had courted.

The priest ceased talking and his countenance changed from angered to pensive to somewhat embarrassed as he, after a distinct period of thought, answered, they had courted even a shorter time than my wife and I.

My point was made as he told me to leave.

It is not only men who "violate" courtships. But that is another battle.

We did not "hook up". We knew what we were doing and made our choices. Time is irrelevent regarding courtship. The exchange of consent is what matters.

Adult Toys

I recently came across your blog and have been reading along. I thought I would leave my first comment. I don't know what to say except that I have enjoyed reading. Nice blog. I will keep visiting this blog very often.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Ignatius Insight


Ignatius Press

Catholic World Report


Blogs & Sites We Like

June 2018

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
          1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21 22 23
24 25 26 27 28 29 30
Blog powered by Typepad