Thanks.
Note: This is a reprint of a column ran less than 2 months ago for the sake of those who think I’m a feminist.
Throughout history one of the main dynamics that has influenced relationships between men and women is what can be called the “vagina monopoly.” Men want them and only women have them. In fact, the world’s oldest profession was one that was originally only capable of being performed by women. That profession was the “renting” of women to men for sex. Most of the pathological aspects in male-female relationships revolve around the objectification of women as objects of sexual gratification.
Originally, feminism was about changing attitudes, particularly that women are of equal dignity as men. Women can be just as capable to become doctors, lawyers, CEOs or politicians. Far from being merely sperm receptacles, they are people entitled to the full balance of human dignity. The rallying call of these feminists was “love me for my mind, not just my body.”
Those days are long gone. Enter groups such as the Feminist Majority at the University of Illinois. The motto of this group and those like it can be described as “love me for my body … PLEASE!” The slogans they chose to put on their T-shirts revolve around sex toys and genitalia. In psychology this would be called a “fixation.”
Women traditionally have been looked upon as sexual objects. So what do these neofeminists do? Celebrate and proclaim liberation in being a sex object, of course. Frat boys on campus look at these poor girls as a vagina on two legs and they want to slap that idea on a T-shirt and sell it. They’ve gone one step further from the prostitution of women to preaching harlotry. The difference between a prostitute and a harlot is that the prostitute at least has enough self respect to demand payment for services rendered.
What the “patriarchy” has tried to establish for centuries is whole-heartedly embraced and celebrated, ironically, by self-styled icons of feminism. The results of such puerile notions have been nothing short of tragic.
Every study on the subject has shown that women who buy into the inner-slut mentality of neofeminism are devastated. They suffer from depression, low self-esteem, STDs, single motherhood and they generally feel rejected in life. They grow into jaded women who think that the path to fulfillment is in imitating the worst men among us.
College-aged women can entertain notions of promiscuity-as-fulfillment because society has always lusted after the young woman. However, as they age they find fewer and fewer partners. They’ve become “cold product” and are discarded in favor of “younger models.”
It has lead to the rejection of the biggest trait distinctive of women - motherhood. The senseless slaughter of children for the sake of sexual convenience (about 99 95 percent of all abortions according to the Guttmacher Institute) ranks first among the horrors in the history of humanity. More children have been murdered through abortion than any other genocide in human history. Abortion makes the Holocaust look like a petty crime in comparison.
It is time for a thorough re-evaluation of neofeminism in the light of the human wreckage strewn in its wake. Luckily there are women out there who are discovering that the path to fulfillment does not lie in the inner-slut myth.
Books such as Dawn Eden’s “Thrill of the Chaste,” Wendy Shalit’s “A Return to Modesty,” and others are reexamining the role of sexuality in a woman’s life and are finding that a sequence of unfulfilling anonymous sexual encounters are not at all empowering.
The case for sexual fidelity has never been stronger. Women are finding that sexual fulfillment isn’t found in anonymous sexual encounters or relationships that generate only from physically satisfying sexual escapades, but is found from the lifelong, permanent and complete union of marriage.
Being free from the Friday-night quests to the local syphilis buffet for Mr. Right Now means that women are free to pursue being doctors, lawyers, and being all-around great women. You know … all those opportunities that feminism was supposed to create.
Stumble It!Rate this post:
(No Ratings Yet)
Loading ...
supamike said,
Anyway, like I have said before on this issue is that a womans greatest asset is not her vagina. Most women know this, but too many dont learn this until too late in life. YOung girls are taught by their mother and schools to act like boys in their youth. To go out there and soar the wheats, if you will. Often many of these women find themselves lost in their older ages. A woman does not peak sexually until her late 30s, just when her fertility rates drop, and her assets are not selling the same way they did in her late teens and early 20s. Marriage suites women, becuz she is likely to have a better sex life if she has a mate for life especially in the middle ages. Feminism wants female soldiers to compete with men sexually and in the bedroom. BUt the truth is that competition is based on traits the favor men.
I have 15 and 16 yr old daughters…I only make sure they dont get caught up in this mess. I make sure they dont get caught up in the lies…It is up to us men to talk to out daughters, neices etc, on issues like this.
January 2, 2007 at 4:11 pm
thurston861 said,
We do not believe in women here anymore.
He needs to go write for the women and get them to stop this runaway train, because we have no money to have political clout.
January 2, 2007 at 6:37 pm
mirwalk said,
The bad part of this of course is that unlike a young person searching for themselves, feminists leave wreckage everywhere. Institutions are torn down and thrown away if it doesn’t fit feminisms attempt of the decade. They demand everything change to fit the new lifestyle they are trying, all the while it is destroying the lifes of men and children around them. And to top it all off they demand that the government foots the bill for the whole mess.
January 2, 2007 at 7:27 pm
supamike said,
January 2, 2007 at 8:36 pm
amfortas said,
Just look at this opening assertion - “In fact, the world’s oldest profession was one that was originally only capable of being performed by women. That profession was the “renting” of women to men for sex.”
Renting? By whom? You imply that someone else is doing the renting of a commodity, like a room in a tenament block. As always with you, it is men’s fault. The oldest profession is in fact the oldest illigitimate sale of a natural function, by women. Men may ‘rent’, but it is the women who rent-out. Women sell themselves by the hour, taking a two-fold pleasure in having a sexual encounter AND making men pay a price for it. Women take men’s earned money for sex. They take money which could have been available for another woman’s babies. Women who do this are no different from slum landlords who rip off poverty-stricken tenents. Prostitutes are thieves, not ‘honest’, not social workers to be praised above mere harlots.
How would you and society treat prostitution if it had always been a men’s racket and women paid for sex? All it would have taken was a small change in relative libido. The very drive that enabled women to successfully seek and aquire men’s protection, nurturing, provision and support was instead subverted and sullied, taken advantage of by rapacious thieves.
Look at this statement, just begging for the punch line. - “The case for sexual fidelity has never been stronger. Women are finding that sexual fulfillment isn’t found in anonymous sexual encounters or relationships that generate only from physically satisfying sexual escapades, but is found from the lifelong, permanent and complete union of marriage.”
The punch line? - Yet they, the educated women of today, the ‘liberated’ women, instead of seeking marriage are finding that they too can make money from sex instead of gaining mere fulfillment. Money Matters More to Women. More and more women have taken to prostitution in more blatant and varied forms in our modern age, selling themselves vicariously on the internet as well as in the streets and ‘nightclubs’ where they inveigle men to stuff their panties with money, even funding their way through college degrees with money that men have worked for. Your local Dr, the ex prostitute. She always has an even older profession to fall back onto. And they - and you - have the unmitigated gall to blame men. Blame the victims.
The article appears to be addressed to women, yet the average woman will just smile that Giaconda smile. They will see you as the fool. You are a just the sort of man after all, that they seek to rip off.
January 3, 2007 at 12:57 am
Denise Noe said,
(Denise) Hello, friendly Amfortas. I hope you’re doing well.
I must disagree with you. A switching of relative libido between men and women would not change the sex industry one bit. It would still be men paying with both women and men getting paid.
The reason men are willing to pay for partnered sex and women are not is that men have no built-in cost to partnered sex in the form of pregnancy or the psychological sense of risk that has evolved in the female brain due to pregnancy.
Women may pay for sexual pleasure by buying romance novels and sex toys. In the state I live, an authority confiscated sex toys from a porn bookstore. A group of women marched outside the state capital in protest, shouting, “Dildos for sale, not dildos in jail!”
A second factor that prevents women from paying for partnered sex is that arousal depends on being FOUND attractive. Men enjoy looking more than women and women enjoying being looked at more than men.
January 3, 2007 at 7:19 am
DaPoet said,
“The article appears to be addressed to women, yet the average woman will just smile that Giaconda smile. They will see you as the fool. You are a just the sort of man after all, that they seek to rip off.”
And in the end just like my father and youngest brother John and she males like him who cater to the spoiled and entitled gender…Will be both used and abused, their manhood squandered, taken away and crushed and in the end they will die at the hands of the females in their life…Nor will any of them see it coming until it is far to late to avoid their well earned fate…
And so I refuse to feel sorry for them and laugh in their faces…
January 3, 2007 at 7:35 am