Glen Scrivener wades into ‘the good sex work debate’ and Bonnie Blue phenomenon

Christian creator and speaker Glen Scrivener has offered thoughtful commentary on ‘the good sex work debate’ between Louise Perry and Bonnie Blue, hosted by Chris Williamson on his Modern Wisdom podcast. 

The heated discussion, which explored the character and purpose of sex in modern society, sparked widespread debate concerning the legacy of the sexual revolution and the moral contradictions of latest culture.

At the guts of the talk, Williamson posed a central query: “What is sex for?”

Bonnie Blue, who has gained notoriety for staging extreme sex events and filming them, described sex as a type of leisure — “a hobby,” “fun,” and something that “doesn’t must mean anything.”

She claimed it could occur inside seconds of meeting someone and must be treated as casually as some other recreational activity.

Louise Perry, creator of The Case Against the Sexual Revolution, responded with a striking commentary: “You are the spirit of the age.”

Her words framed Bonnie as a living embodiment of contemporary sexual liberalism — a worldview that has detached intimacy from meaning.

Williamson added that Blue represents “the reductio ad absurdum of the sexual revolution,” suggesting she personifies its logical conclusion — the purpose at which freedom becomes disconnection.

Scrivener noted that Blue reflects the “equalisation” of the sexes led to by contraception and cultural liberalisation, which sought to make women as sexually independent as men.

This, they argued, led to a “disenchantment and commercialisation of sex”, stripping it of its sacred and relational meaning.

Williamson asked whether Blue might be considered “the natural final result of contemporary feminism.”

The response highlighted a distinction drawn by author Mary Harrington, friend of Louise Perry, between two types of feminism.

The first, generally known as the feminism of care, values interdependence, motherhood, and the popularity of biological differences between men and girls.

The second, called the feminism of freedom, prioritises independence and the pursuit of success on traditionally male terms.

Bonnie Blue, it was suggested, represents the acute of the latter — freedom without rootedness — while Louise Perry embodies a return to care and relational ethics.

Scrivener’s reflections highlighted the growing tension between two contradictory Western cultural narratives: that sex is nothing (a mere pastime) and that sex is all the things (the deepest possible trauma when violated).

He phrased the paradox this manner: “Squaring the circle is difficult. That’s why we just are likely to in the fashionable world live with each thoughts directly with utter cognitive dissonance: sex is nothing in any respect – it’s a leisure activity and when sex goes incorrect, it’s the worst thing that would ever possibly occur. If you would like to ease the cognitive dissonance, it’s best to really select.

“Are our bodies like playgrounds? In which case if it goes incorrect in a playground, what happens is that you simply graze your knee. Or are bodies more like temples? In which case if it goes incorrect in a temple, a sacred space has been violated and it’s a desecration. We know that sex is important, bodies are temples.”

The Christian perspective, he suggested, recognises sex as sacred — an act with deep spiritual and relational significance.

Ms Perry’s evolving worldview continues to draw attention.

Once an avowed secular feminist, she has increasingly acknowledged Christianity’s role in shaping moral and social stability.

Her book, The Case Against the Sexual Revolution, includes chapters resembling “Men and Women Are Different,” “Consent Is Not Enough,” and “Marriage Is Good.”

Ms Perry has since stated that Christianity is “sociologically true” — that societies rooted in Christian ethics are likely to flourish.

In a recent interview, she revealed her own conversion, explaining: “I used to be for a very long time convinced that Christianity is sociologically true within the sense that it makes societies flourish. But in the event you agree Christianity is sociologically true, you then’d expect it to be supernaturally true as well.” 

Scrivener closed his evaluation by suggesting that behind the disillusionment of the Nineteen Sixties sexual revolution lies a deeper spiritual hunger: “There’s a approach to come back from this disenchantment and see that behind the 60s sexual revolution is the Jesus revolution that is filled with goodness and wholesomeness and health for society.

“And while you’re able to just accept that Christianity is sociologically true, then possibly you’re also willing to contemplate that it’s supernaturally true as well.”