This top-rated and gilded comment on a default sub really showed me how far off society's moral compass is:

\"Religious people down the ages have often tried to deny their instincts (frequently naming them \"sin\"), but this demonizes a process which can't be prevented and, given that our existence is owed to it, I don't see any reason why it should be.\"

This user has equivalized one-night stands with monogamous, loving relationships.

Do people not have enough examples of healthy relationships in their lives to see how warped this viewpoint is? To see how fundamentally different the selfish desire to fuck someone tonight is from the true passion and commitment that comes from marriage?

Fortunately, another user brought in some sense: \"Let's not get too fedora here. The repression of certain instincts can be quite beneficial for society. Murder, rape, looting, pillaging are also all instinctually driven urges that man was able to overcome in order to function in society. Even fucking potty training is something that goes against the \"instincts\". The same goes for hypergamy. It just so happens that a society with monogamous or controlled hypergamous people has enough mental resources left to get into things like fine art, sciences and philosophy. Full law of the jungle is never a good idea, no matter how many enlightened fedoras will tell you otherwise. We're already regressing on those fields, so let's not make it worse by inflating our urges to be some core principle.\"

My existence is not dependent on a one-night stand, it is dependent on parents who loved each other enough to raise me. A healthy society is dependent on self-control and responsibility. It is disturbing that the shirking of these values is not just happening, but also being justified on a larger and larger scale.