I’m regularly surprised why there’s not more recognition of the slow moving sex strike since the 1910s and Margaret Sanger began liberating women from abusive r

I’m regularly surprised why there’s not more recognition of the slow moving sex strike since the 1910s and Margaret Sanger began liberating women from abusive relationships. The resulting neo-reactionary response since then with the “pro-life” movement is entirely predictable The concept of a sex strike predates the written record. Read Chris Knight’s 1991 “Blood Relations” for an absolutely fascinating deep dive into what is arguably the most effective means for social change. That’s not an un controversial position - however seems exceptionally well argued by Knight. See the case study of the matrilocal Sharanahua The quoted activist even says as much …“labor strike.” All periods of Sex strike are typically kicked off in periods of major social change or chaos. Makes sense in every biological sense that the environment becomes uncertain and more dangerous. There’s a reason there’s an entire group of society called the Baby Boomers. A lot of depth here that is very well researched but goes totally ignored. https://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt5vkr5f https://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt5vkr5f