identity crisis!
Posted on 02/01/2005 1:34:24 AM PST by The Loan Arranger
"The so-called sexual revolution is not, as advertised, a liberation of sexual behavior but rather its reversal. In former days, even under Victoria, sexual intercourse was the natural end and culmination of heterosexual relations. Now one begins with genital overtures instead of a handshake, then waits to see what will turn up (e.g., might become friends later). Like dogs greeting each other nose to tail and tail to nose."
Walker Percy, The Last Gentleman (1966) Nineteen sixty-six, the year in which Walker Percy's The Last Gentleman was published, is also the year I entered as a first-yearman at the University of Virginia. We did not stoop to the State U level of referring to ourselves as freshmen, sophomores, and such—not at "The University." We were all men at U.Va.—"gentlemen," we were told. Young women visited on weekends from Sweet Briar and Randolph-Macon, Mary Washington, and Hollins College. But they did not stay in the dormitory or the fraternity house. They stayed in college-approved housing, more often than not the home of a widow who had a few rooms to let and happily accepted a delegation from the colleges to assume the responsibilities of in loco parentis.
Parietal rules were enforced even in the fraternity houses—self-enforced by those of us who lived in them. Young women were not permitted in the bedrooms and had to be out of the house by a certain hour. We dated, blind-dated often. We did not know what "hooking up" was. We had never heard of date rape either, though some of us may have committed it.
(Excerpt) Read more at christianitytoday.com ...
I read the whole article - it will be ignored by the MSM of course.
I am not that far removed from the college scene. Hooking up was rampant at my very, very famous southern school.
In short here is a primary cause: the fear of being labeled 'anti-social'. If you are labeled that in college, it WILL hurt your future career, esp if you somehow managed to get into a fraternity or soroity.
Being 'social' means you never get upset about anything, and you NPR sing-song voice is perfectly pitched, regardless of the strain of the social situation.
What the vast number of kids are totally ignorant of is the New Testament, and specifically the attacks against the Pharisees within it. That is the core of the current fight. The 'rules' are there all right, such that later, when they are parents, their ability to exercise authority of any kind is minimized.
It is a kind of Weirmar Germany ... just a different set of rules.
A fine article by Dr. Guroian. If you haven't, I highly suggest reading some of his books or other articles. They're hard to find, though, since he writes about things that are very "unfashionable" in today's society. And I can tell you that he truly lives the lifestyle about which he writes...I've known one of his children for years.
Very long read in the original, but very good. As a school nurse, I hope to pass this information to my parents so they realize the dangers ahead!
Yes, it is the fault of radical feminism and declining moral values. But what these women don't even realize is that they've made themselves sexual objects and nothing more. If anything, the so-called sexual revolution and rise of feminism have, in fact, set this generation of women farther back than anything before.
The unfortunate outcome looks to be a generation of young people who have no clue how to relate to each other except in a sexual way. Talk about a huge evolutionary step backwards.
Thank you, excellent article.
" Yes, it is the fault of radical feminism and declining moral values."
No. It is the fault of radical masculinization of women, and worse, the effeminazation of men.
In short, you don't have to recruit men to become 'gay', if the women they are hooking up with share the exact same attitudes toward sex the men do. Homosexuality among men gets a lot of press; the erasure of heterosexuality between men and women is being deliberately suppressed.
One other thing. It is not the fault of women one bit this is all happening. It is the fault of men, 100 percent. We are readily built for conflict. But we fail to engage. Men have made room for all this nonsense.
Homosexuality, rabid feminazis .... they are the mold in a fridge that has to grow given the neglect of what manhood really means.
And what is step one of being a Man? Not being a slave to your 'equipment'. That is why the article effective states what they, the males, are labeled: "guys".
That is not an accident. They really are guys. But they are also simply chicken s**ts. Why? Because the playground, where fights were once common, are filled with the sounds of ..... quiet.
Guys don't fight anymore. They rent Fight Club, and pretend they do.
Guys don't bleed anymore. They rent 'Kill Bill' and pretend they know what blood looks like.
Guys don't cry anymore.
Guys don't grieve.
Men, on the other hand, seek God. Men protect women. Men fight.
Not everyone is equipped to play this hooking up game. To me this points out how the college environment reinforces the liberal mentality of "you're nobody unless you're gettin' you some."
I wonder how Christian teens do when they leave high school and go off to college.
This is one of the most radical notions in today's society, and maybe the primary reason the left has to be destroyed. The myth that we are nothing more than animals and hormones or instincts, if you will.
Men, on the other hand, seek God. Men protect women. Men fight.
And this is the solution. Perhaps what the author calls Gentlemen.
But, you know what they say, nice guys sleep alone.
identity crisis!
According to surveys, not very well. Close to 80% of kids raised in the Church leave their first love for temporal stuff.
Sin looks good for a season......
Excellent article, and your points are true, too, gobucks.
My daughter had to move out of the dorms at one point because she couldn't stand sharing a room with another girl - and that girl's "date" of the moment. They would simply parade in and get down to business in the twin bed about 5 feet away from my daughter's bed.
I now live near the University of Florida, where the sorority girls are referred to as "sorostitutes." This is because they are literally call girls for their fraternity "big brothers," who simply pick up the phone and call in a sorority girl whenever they want, sort of like ordering a pizza.
But the kids I have met here through GOP activities tell me that it's very rough for people who don't have that mentality, because they are made to feel like misfits and losers. One of them told me that girls did heavy drinking (swilling vodka straight out of the bottle) so that they wouldn't mind or remember the other things they were going to have to do that night.
"One of them told me that girls did heavy drinking (swilling vodka straight out of the bottle) so that they wouldn't mind or remember the other things they were going to have to do that night."
This is consistent with the reports I have heard, and what I witnessed. In effect, booze is sort of a required medication in order to endure being 'cool' all day long on stage, and worse, endure being 'in' at night. There were very, very few folks I encountered who honestly CHOSE heavy drinking b/c they really liked it. It was simply the ticket they had to punch, and evidently still do.
What was new for me to really think about was how the co-ed dorm scene is actually fueling more drinking. Not b/c again it is all that great ... but because the women know, if they don't drink, they will not be 'in'.
"sorostitutes" .... wow. That's a new one.
"According to surveys, not very well. Close to 80% of kids raised in the Church leave their first love for temporal stuff."
If my Sunday School ciriculum is any standard to judge, then it is no mystery why. Our kids are simply not challenged sufficiently in my church.
I have noticed this among college men. Twittery, chirpy--upward inflected at the end of a declarative sentence? Every statement a question? Statements turned into questions as a plea for approval and tolerance?
Ick. It's like swishing and wrist-flapping, but these are heteros of which we speak. speak?
poing
Natural law will not be denied. At some point, men will be forced by circumstances to manifest their God-given attributes. Those who cannot/will not will not survive.
You've just defined modern feminism.
I'm sure this happens to Christian teens too. I remember back in my early twenties, I fell for a guy from a local Christian college. When we got to talking about where the relationship was going, he admitted that he was thinking with his crotch, and wanted nothing more than a physical relationship. He didn't get one, although I would have liked to have planted my foot somewhere.
If you do then you are poorly informed. Some years ago Ravi Zechariahs described having gone to a Christian College to lecture on sexual/moral purity. He said that after his presentation he was besieged by students to the point of exhaustion. For many days and long hours each day he counseled young people who had wrecked themselves by trashing their sexual purity. He said one, only one, young person came to him to get direction on continued service to God.
I seriously doubt this college was any exception. This will be an overwhelmingly difficult fight for our children and they had better be prepared.
You aren't alone in that complaint. Sadly, even those churches that DO cover morality issues, rarely talk about WHY God says what He does about them. All kids hear is "don't" - but they aren't given reasons.
bump
Nothing new @ WKU (my alma mater). The Chi Ho's and the Alpha Openthigh Pi's were the big sorostitutes....
My kids stayed at home for the first part of their college daze. We white-knuckled some of those 25-mile commutes while waiting for the last child in to turn off the kitchen light. At this point, one of my prayers seems to have been answered. Like many home school families, we are seeing kids grow up to adulthood more wholesome than we were at their ages. Raising kisd in one faith (Christianity) seems to offer better hopes of success than trying to raise them in two faiths, with secular humanism proclaimed as the faith best suited for the real world.
Ne Zot! My husband listens to NPR ... THAT's where he's getting this obnoxious speech pattern. It makes me want to scream!
Great comments, gobucks, and very relevant to the article.
What you said reminds me of something I heard on a tape about child-rearing. The speaker was talking about feminism, and he said that pastors who treat feminism as "The Enemy" aren't looking deep enough. He said, "Men left their homes and families first. They decided other things were easier and more immediately gratifying than protecting their wives and children, leading them, and forming them in righteousness. Men are God's designated leaders for the family ... so why are we surprised that the women, and then the children, followed us out of the home? Men led the way when things went wrong, and men will have to lead the way to put things right."
I was proudly "anti-social" in college. My stubborness and refusal to go along with the flow (becoming an "other directed" man) has brought me nothing but success. The only thing good about college were my classes.
Bookmarking for later read.
yes. Please feel free to consider my obsession w/ the Ohio State Football team to be a small part of what I am about. The big part of what I am about deals with the torch in my heart. Boys should not be doomed to guydom. I'm in the business of making guys look 'uncool'.
That's a terrific principle! I'm making sure my daughter thinks "guys" aren't worth her time :-).
bump a keeper
I don't really think 22 years is that long ago, in the grand scheme of things ... that's around or a bit more than the lifespan of the college students we're talking about. That's when I was dating in college, and the vast majority of the women I dated were virgins (or at least acted the role convincingly) and intended to remain that way until they knew they were with the man they would marry.
What happened? Where did sanity go? Yeah, I blame the "men" (so-called) just as much as the women, but men have always been "looking for action" and women have always been smart enough to set limits to protect themselves. Why have the women so willingly swallowed the big lie that promiscuity is a good idea?
Is it that they are just so desperate for male attention, perhaps because they didn't get enough of Daddy growing up, due to a divorce? Is it because there are fewer men, and the competition is much worse? (But what are they competing for -- many of them claim they aren't fishing for any sort of committed relationship, and sex too early in a relationship usually kills any chance of that anyway.) Have they swallowed this feminist idiocy that trying to treat men like sex objects somehow empowers women? (Hint: do two wrongs ever make a right?) Is it because they've given up on waiting for marriage because they've given up on marriage? (Well, that's too bad, but it doesn't follow that picking up a drunken stranger is right solution.)
So what in heck is in it for the women? STD's? The opportunity to get pregnant by some tool who doesn't even remember their name? Ruining their ability to have a happy marriage? The wonders of having to someday explain to their teenage children that they had 30 or maybe 40 sex partners in college? What's the attraction?
And I guarantee there are nice guys, er, men, and women, too, on campus who have completely asexualized themselves because they are terrified of this cr*p and aren't sure what to do to date normally and stay out of the sewer. I might well be one, were I in college today.
[loud applause]
Someone said it 2000 years ago, "Whoever commits sin, is a slave to sin."
And this is the solution. Perhaps what the author calls Gentlemen.
...or knights.
That's a very good question. One answer is that fatherlessness has left many young women with a pathological need for male attention.
Another issue is that it is normal and healthy for young adult women to be seeking mates, but our culture is not oriented toward marriage and parenthood at 19-22. Girls are following their instincts in looking to attract men at this age, but the opportunity - or even the desire - for a Godly marriage isn't there.
Also, for most girls, the sexualized environment of college is nothing new. They'be been in it since about the 6th grade. The deal is that boys use girls for sexual gratification, and girls use boys as status symbols and to meet their need for attention and connection. It's a very unhealthy tradeoff for both sides, although condemnation is often piled on the boys because their sexual use of girls is more obvious than girls' use of boys as "markers" in girls' status competition.
Sure, there's nothing wrong with looking for a spouse in college. I did it, and I'm glad I did ... well, I hated the process, but loved the results. ;-) It doesn't mean you have to get married at 22, either, but there's nothing wrong with that if you're marrying the right person for the right reasons.
But a hook-up with a drunken stranger? That's not seeking a spouse, it's a perversion of it.
Also, for most girls, the sexualized environment of college is nothing new. They'be been in it since about the 6th grade. The deal is that boys use girls for sexual gratification, and girls use boys as status symbols and to meet their need for attention and connection.
I understand that dynamic from high school. (As an observer, not a participant.) It frightened the heck out of me when I started dating myself.
But shouldn't college-age people being growing into a more adult way of relating to each other? Or, are you saying that they've been using each other and being used by each other for so long that their ability to get to that more adult relationship pattern is destroyed? That's truly sad.
I mean, what kind of "status" could any girl gain by sleeping with a drunken stranger ... except, of course, that of a cheap slut?
This garbage is destroying our culture. The only reason the divorce rate isn't higher is that too many people are shacking up instead of marrying.
Another sad thing is that many nice young women have been inculturated into believing that it's great to collect platonic male friends, and an achievement not to have any romantic interest in them. Those are precisely the men from whom they should be picking their future spouse! After all, a good friend is reliable, caring, trustworthy, kind, generous, and communicative. Which of those traits would a normal woman not want in a future husband? "But I'm not attracted to him" they whine. Fine, then develop a strong platonic friendship with a good guy you are attracted to, then marry him.
Exactly. But look what their options are ... if you don't get married (at 19 or 22, or 24) you have no moral opportunity for sex. Their hormones are screaming, "Time to reproduce!" while their culture is telling them, "Four years of college. Two years of grad school. Four years to make Associate. Two years to buy house. Two years to buy second car." And so on. It's an unnatural situation, so of course their response is perverse.
Or, are you saying that they've been using each other and being used by each other for so long that their ability to get to that more adult relationship pattern is destroyed?
Yes, that's pretty much what I meant. And it is very sad. Most young people have spent their entire lives in age-segrated, mixed-sex incarceration. The social environment is very destructive. Girls will have sex to keep a boyfriend ... because if you've got a boyfriend, other boys will leave you alone ... and if the boyfriend has status - expensive car, sports star, or some other advantage - then other girls will be intimidated.
If's terrible for young girls (for boys, too, but girls are more physically vulnerable) because they can't escape. They have to go back there, day after day, year after year.
... many nice young women have been inculturated into believing that it's great to collect platonic male friends, and an achievement not to have any romantic interest in them ...
Good point. I think that's also a function of the emphasis on later marriage. Young women naturally look for kindness and attention from men. (They should have experienced it with their fathers, but too few have.) So when they find a man who is kind and attentive, they think that expressing a romantic interest - maybe leading to marriage - will drive him away.
I don't know whether that's universally true ... it's possible that a nice young man would find he's ready for marriage, with a nudge from a decent girl. But many of both sexes just don't see any benefit in marriage, especially with the distorted ideas of marriage that they've seen on TV, movies, or their own families.
I have never read anything that was so point blank dead on......
and its why I fear for America and its Christians......
I can tell you, too, that boys are sometimes more physically ... assertive than they really want to be because it seems like that's what's necessary to get a girl to take them seriously as bf material and stick around.
Aarrgh. That's one I hadn't heard, probably because most of what I read is aimed at girls and their parents. Our oldest daughter is 13, oldest son is 10, so we have to do the Teenage Girl thing first!
Are you serious? The attraction is the sex. That's the point. In case you haven't noticed, sex is fun. People like it. THAT'S the attraction. It's the same reason people drink to excess or use drugs or drive fast sports cars. Because it's fun and because it feels good.
"Chi-O, Chi-O, it's off to bed we go..."
Ping
Is that seriously any different than walking all the way up one flight of stairs to the girls' floor? Or even walking the whole 50 feet to the girls' dorm in the next building?
I think you're making a little bit of a artifical distinction here. In single-sex dorms, maybe the girls aren't right across the hall, but it ain't like they're far away. Heck, in my single-sex dorm, I saw more than my fair share of unclad women in our shower.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.