Disagreeing with Greg Swann | Joy of Chastity

To my knowledge, there isn’t much I disagree with Greg Swann about. Political philosophy, specifically anarchy, is one such issue that I will be taking up on Declarationism.com in the future.

Beyond that single point, I agree with about half of what Greg states in this video, and disagree with the remaining half.

What I do agree with is the entire premise of making the pursuit of your ideal woman about you. Centering it on self first, foremost, and as a primary. This makes perfect sense, your pursuit, your goals, your dreams, are in fact yours. Acting on them in any other way is just ridiculous.

I also agree with Greg’s discussion of commitment. I find that the guy who e-mailed him is all over the place. I have zero first hand understanding of how someone can half-step so many intimate relationships, so consistently. It is personally incomprehensible to me that someone could live and act like this.

What I disagree with Greg on is most everything else in the video, to varying extents.

My experience directly contradicts much of what Greg says [assuming I am understanding everything he has presented in the video correctly, and hey, maybe I’m not].

First, it is unthinkable, even in the anti-romantic age of the western world as it stands today, that is impossible for a man of self-esteem, purpose, and integrity, to be entirely incapable of finding a woman to have real sex with; not the pseudo-masturbation that Greg speaks on (which is certainly common).

Even if it is only temporary, even if it only lasts days, or even a single night. I put forward the idea in my Australia 21C presentation that James Marshall (~36:30 mark) is a great example of just such a man, who happens to be single, or is single by choice, or currently by design, etc.

I still believe that.

Second, I think the nature of romantic love directly conflicts with Greg’s presentation of chastity. Particularly at the 25:04 mark.

“… if you want to express yourself sexually, either do it by yourself or do it with someone you are pursuing a marriage with.”

Greg goes on to qualify the latter part of that statement, which certainly helps, but does not completely address my entire disagreement. To be clear, I have no problem with the idea of ridding yourself (quickly, for that matter) of people you clearly have no future with, especially in the context of romantic relationships.

But there is absolutely no other way to even get to that critical stage in a relationship without first having sex with someone who is effectively a stranger (and human life does not require compromise, indeed, it requires the opposite). Sure, you may build a connection that makes them no stranger emotionally, but otherwise, your *new* partner is an entirely *new* part of your life.

There is absolutely no way to know if a member of the opposite sex is worthy of a long term relationship without first having sex, and lots of it, right away. Anything less is wild speculation, rampant in the (deeply) religious.

Independent but related point : love at first sight? Nonsense.

People no doubt can experience immediate and strong attraction to one another, but romantic love deserves more respect than this. Romantic love is something that is built, that is difficult, that takes effort, that takes mindfulness. It is not something to be taken lightly.

And it is something that takes time.

On this same note, marriage, real marriage, is second to mature romantic love. The second is not possible without the first, nor may marriage even follow mature romantic love. From my own life, I saw no obligation to marry my (then) girlfriend.

My love for her was absolute and completely clear to me; as clear as I love my own self. Concretizing that into physical reality with a celebration, rings, and even more formal commitments than ones already present, was an option, a choice, not a mandate.

It happened to be one that made sense to me and was important to her. And now, she is my wife and I am her husband.

Finally, not having sex before entering a committed relationship is an effective way to enter into a serious relationship lacking maturity, confidence, and experience — to the extent that you are completely unprepared for said relationship, and increase your odds of wrecking it with someone you truly care about.

Practically speaking I find this totally ludicrous. Paradoxically, there is an even more important issue at hand here.

Being so unprepared, in my mind, makes it extremely unlikely that you will ever get to the point that you would be in a relationship that can be said to contain romantic love, of any meaningful maturity or degree.

Let me spell this out : you are not going to get to that point.

In real life terms, I think young men and women should have sex with as many partners that matter to them as possible. Honestly, and if you are honest with your self, that is probably not going to be that many.

It wasn’t for me, and I met thousands upon thousands of woman before I met my wife. This is a testament to the world we live in, the anti-self, anti-mind, anti-romantic age. And it is also a testament to the kind of man that I am.

And yet I carry no regrets. I am quite glad I had the experience I did when I met my wife, and I am glad she had hers in turn. I would have it no other way, and completely reject the idea that any of those experiences were scarring (for me) or in anyway stained the person I am.

About Anthony Dream Johnson

CEO, founder, and architect of The 21 Convention, Anthony Dream Johnson is the leading force behind the world's first and only "panorama event for life on earth". He has been featured on WGN Chicago, and in the NY Times #1 best seller The Four Hour Work Week.    His stated purpose for the work he does is "the actualization of the ideal man", a purpose that has led him to found and host The 21 Convention across 3 continents and for 6 years in a row. Anthony blogs vigorously at TheDreamLounge.net and Declarationism.com.

Connect with Anthony

Get posts delivered to your inbox.


2 Responses to Disagreeing with Greg Swann | Joy of Chastity

  1. itshalffilled March 15, 2014 at 3:14 pm #


    I agree with pretty much everything you wrote here. Sex fundamentally brings things to the surface that might have previously been buried, and can change the nature of a relationship such that making a commitment before doing so is like committing to live somewhere without ever having been there.

    A further point that I’d make is that sex can be a form of self-expression, respect, celebration, and connection – independent of the feeling, choice, and ideal of romantic love.

    If you’re attracted to a close friend or acquaintance whom you respect, this can be a way to deepen the relationship or celebrate yourselves, with no need for any sort of commitment beyond “I respect you,” and possibly “I care about you.”

  2. David March 22, 2014 at 8:18 pm #

    I’ll start with the place I disagreed with Greg. I agree with Anthony that marriage does not have to be the one goal and the only end point. I personally do not want to get married. However, when I listened to what Greg Swann had to say I heard it through my own interpretations – so if I’ve misunderstood and Greg meant exactly the words he said and wasn’t talking about concepts, then I apologize. I take marriage in Greg’s vocabulary to mean a committed, lasting relationship and if that’s true, then I agree with his premise that you are best off expressing yourself sexually only with people with whom you could pursue a committed relationship.

    As I understand what he wrote, he’s basically saying don’t flitter about fucking everything. I’ve done exactly that flitting, so I can attest to the truth of the other points he makes about casual sex with people you’re not interested in. I had some very deep personal discoveries after having watched the video.

    I agree with Anthony on several points. Real relationships do take effort, they do take time, and you will need to sleep with somebody before you can really get to know them – I think Greg is saying to be more conscious and sure of it being a good decision before you do – not to eschew sex entirely until you’re married forever(and please correct me if I’m wrong). Greg’s specific words were it is masturbatory to “engage in lovemaking with somebody you don’t love”. I know he has many words for love and I would be curious what kind of love he means here. I reject the idea of never having sex until you’re married because people make mistakes – so if Greg meant exactly that then I have another point I disagree with. But I take it to mean somebody you genuinely like and are interested in. Somebody with whom a romantic relationship in the Nathaniel Branden sense is possible – somebody with whom you are being authentic with to the point of your knowledge of them and yourself. I’ve had one such experience. But I’ve had many more of the scarring kind.

Make your mark