Christian author and speaker Glen Scrivener has offered thoughtful commentary on 'the great sex work debate' between Louise Perry and Bonnie Blue, hosted by Chris Williamson on his Modern Wisdom podcast.
The heated discussion, which explored the nature and purpose of sex in modern society, sparked widespread debate about the legacy of the sexual revolution and the moral contradictions of contemporary culture.
At the heart of the debate, Williamson posed a central question: “What is sex for?”
Bonnie Blue, who has gained notoriety for staging extreme sex events and filming them, described sex as a form of leisure — “a hobby,” “fun,” and something that “doesn’t have to mean anything.”
She claimed it could happen within seconds of meeting someone and should be treated as casually as any other recreational activity.
Louise Perry, author of The Case Against the Sexual Revolution, responded with a striking observation: “You are the spirit of the age.”
Her words framed Bonnie as a living embodiment of modern 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 point at which freedom becomes disconnection.
Scrivener noted that Blue reflects the “equalisation” of the sexes brought about 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 could be considered “the natural end result of modern feminism.”
The response highlighted a distinction drawn by writer Mary Harrington, friend of Louise Perry, between two forms of feminism.
The first, known as the feminism of care, values interdependence, motherhood, and the recognition of biological differences between men and women.
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 extreme 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 everything (the deepest possible trauma when violated).
He phrased the paradox this way: “Squaring the circle is difficult. That’s why we just tend to in the modern world live with both thoughts at once with utter cognitive dissonance: sex is nothing at all - it’s a leisure activity and when sex goes wrong, it is the worst thing that could ever possibly happen. If you want to ease the cognitive dissonance, you should really choose.
“Are our bodies like playgrounds? In which case if it goes wrong in a playground, what happens is that you graze your knee. Or are bodies more like temples? In which case if it goes wrong in a temple, a sacred space has been violated and it’s a desecration. We know that sex is significant, 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 attract 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 such as “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 tend to flourish.
In a recent interview, she revealed her own conversion, explaining: “I was for a long time convinced that Christianity is sociologically true in the sense that it makes societies flourish. But if you agree Christianity is sociologically true, then you’d expect it to be supernaturally true as well.”
Scrivener closed his analysis by suggesting that behind the disillusionment of the 1960s sexual revolution lies a deeper spiritual hunger: “There’s a way to come back from this disenchantment and see that behind the 60s sexual revolution is the Jesus revolution that is full of goodness and wholesomeness and health for society.
“And when you’re able to accept that Christianity is sociologically true, then maybe you’re also willing to consider that it’s supernaturally true as well.”
