Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

"My generation created the sexual revolution--wrecking lives of women ever since"
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-1232485/My-generation-created-sexual-revolution--wrecking-lives-women-since.html# ^

Posted on 12/01/2009 7:13:17 PM PST by cycle of discernment

My generation created the sexual revolution - and it has been wrecking the lives of women ever since

By Bel Mooney

02nd December 2009

I experienced first-hand the impact of the sexual revolution, and the sweeping changes it wrought between men and women.

The sexual pressure that came with free love has gone from liberation to degredation.

I'm always amazed at the way the liberal Left is eager to make excuses for any dubious results of their progressive ideas.

Yet the damaging consequences of that Sixties revolution are obvious in the society we now live in - ranging from the utter mess made of education in this country (directly attributable to the overturning of traditional ideas in the Seventies, an orthodoxy which still prevails), to the dangerous 'anything goes' attitude which challenges any idea of restraint in speech or behaviour.

One cultural historian of the Seventies, Howard Sounes, writes: 'The after-effects of the great social and cultural changes of the Sixties, like waves created by rocks tossed in water, rippled out through society.'

Today, those of us who express doubts about the long-term effects of such cultural changes are dismissed as prudes suffering from a permanent moral panic-attack. The denial of the liberals is ongoing: a blinkered refusal to admit the causes and effects of history.

But this is what the distinguished historian Eric Hobsbawm writes about the shift in standards in his authoritative book, Age Of Extremes: 'The crisis of the family was linked with quite dramatic changes in public standards governing sexual behaviour, partnership and procreation... and the major change is datable and coincides with the Sixties and Seventies.'

The ongoing sexual 'revolution' is, in truth, as selfish and reactionary as the sixties with (women) conned by the talk of freedom into abandoning all self-respect.

(Excerpt) Read more at dailymail.co.uk ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: babyboomers; erichobsbawm; sourcetitlenoturl
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-53 next last

1 posted on 12/01/2009 7:13:19 PM PST by cycle of discernment
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: cycle of discernment

Thank you for posting this. Times were more innocent just 40 short years ago and it is so easy to forget.


2 posted on 12/01/2009 7:24:55 PM PST by thecodont
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cycle of discernment

Of course, Hobsbawm blames Capitalism for all the ills of the 20th century. The sexual revolution, as destructive as it has been and continues to be, was but one barb of many attacks on the family, and those attacks comprising one prong of attack on “the establishment.”

The plan, by the communists/socialists/collectivists, was to destroy the established culture so that, in the vacuum that would ensue, they could come to power.

So Hobsbawm, the “distinguished historian” like most revisionists, contradicts himself even before he’s out of the gate.


3 posted on 12/01/2009 7:25:13 PM PST by Ghost of Philip Marlowe (Prepare for survival.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cycle of discernment

Lady, you wrecked a LOT more than just the lives of some gullible girls, you also helped to bring about the demographic demise that will very possibly take down Western Society (and Asian, for that matter). As we’re seeing with Islam, where the males dominate, the society thrives (in an evil way, in their case...but they are growing and expanding...we are shriveling).


4 posted on 12/01/2009 7:26:41 PM PST by BobL (Real Men don't use Tag Lines)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cycle of discernment
Hope she isn't a boomer when she says "My", because everything in the sixties was done by the previous generations, none of it was created or led by the kids, the very oldest one of which did not even place his first vote until 1968.

Abortion for instance is purely a creation of the pre-boomer generations, it was 1984 before every boomer was even old enough to vote in a presidential election, they had nothing to do with legislation and Supreme Court decisions and government, and institutions until long after feminism and abortion.

Here are the NOW founders at their forming in 1965, that was the year when boomers ranged in age from 1 to 19, no one in this photo is that young.

Image and video hosting by TinyPic

5 posted on 12/01/2009 7:28:45 PM PST by ansel12 (Scozzafava/Romney 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cycle of discernment

Very truthful article, but a hard sell—and not just with the left. Some of the uglier facets of the sexual revolution get plenty of support among self-described conservatives.


6 posted on 12/01/2009 7:29:13 PM PST by madprof98 ("moritur et ridet" - salvianus)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cycle of discernment
Good article. I think it will be very difficult to undo the damage that was done.

We now live in a tawdry and sad society. People are so busy having "fun" that they seem oblivious to how unhappy they are. Of course, this becomes a cycle: their unhappiness drives them to have "fun", the degradation of the "fun" makes them unhappy, so they go do it again, hoping to feel better.

We let go of God and lost our compass.

7 posted on 12/01/2009 7:29:20 PM PST by ClearCase_guy (Play the Race Card -- lose the game.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: qam1; ItsOurTimeNow; PresbyRev; Fraulein; StoneColdGOP; Clemenza; m18436572; InShanghai; xrp; ...

Xer Ping

Ping list for the discussion of the politics and social (and sometimes nostalgic) aspects that directly effects Generation Reagan / Generation-X (Those born from 1965-1981) including all the spending previous generations are doing that Gen-X and Y will end up paying for.

Freep mail me to be added or dropped. See my home page for details and previous articles.  

8 posted on 12/01/2009 7:36:54 PM PST by qam1 (There's been a huge party. All plates and the bottles are empty, all that's left is the bill to pay)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ansel12

Good gosh that looks like Helen Thomas on the far right hand side.


9 posted on 12/01/2009 7:42:08 PM PST by Nik Naym (Palin. Palin. Palin. Palin. Got that? Palin.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: cycle of discernment

Who knew it would create so many cat owners?


10 posted on 12/01/2009 7:42:50 PM PST by Thrownatbirth (.....Iraq Invasion fan since '91.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ClearCase_guy

We let go of God and lost our compass..

Yup.


11 posted on 12/01/2009 7:58:17 PM PST by handmade
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: madprof98; cycle of discernment
Very truthful article, but a hard sell—and not just with the left. Some of the uglier facets of the sexual revolution get plenty of support among self-described conservatives.

Thank you for saying that; it needs to be said, and repeated often. I shudder at some of the messages I read here that seem to celebrate what you have just described.

12 posted on 12/01/2009 8:02:11 PM PST by thecodont
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: cycle of discernment

I read other articles about Martin Amis and his sister. Alas, the third of Kingsley Amis’s golden imps suffered a sad fate. However, I think he’s letting his Dad off lightly. She was sadly neglected by her father so she bounced from one abusive relationship to another and she inherited her father’s curse of alcoholism. I really cannot see how her life would have turned out differently if, for instance, she had lived in the age of Dickens or Boswell.

You can’t finger the sixties for this one. It would have happened in any era.

As for Suri, I’ve read in other blogs that she nagged her mother into letting her wear those high heels.

In which case, that should give us a real reason to pound Katie Cruise (nee Holmes) for not exerting her maternal authority (can only lead to trouble).


13 posted on 12/01/2009 8:09:42 PM PST by sinanju
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cycle of discernment; informavoracious; larose; RJR_fan; Prospero; Conservative Vermont Vet; ...
+

Freep-mail me to get on or off my pro-life and Catholic List:

Add me / Remove me

Please ping me to note-worthy Pro-Life or Catholic threads, or other threads of general interest.

Obama Says A Baby Is A Punishment

Obama: “If they make a mistake, I don’t want them punished with a baby.”

14 posted on 12/01/2009 8:12:57 PM PST by narses ('in an odd way this is cheering news!'.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: handmade

It sad to report that it never would have happened if WOMEN, as a group had decided it wouldn’t happen.


15 posted on 12/01/2009 8:35:37 PM PST by Little Bill (Carol Che-Porter is a MOONBAT.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: ansel12
Here are the NOW founders at their forming in 1965, that was the year when boomers ranged in age from 1 to 19, no one in this photo is that young.

In 1965, I was 10 years old. In Jan 1973, I was yet to turn 18. How is it that I am held responsible for Roe vs Wade. When it was decided, I had yet to be able to vote at all...

the infowarrior

16 posted on 12/01/2009 8:53:41 PM PST by infowarrior
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: BobL

Yep!

IMPACT OF HOMOSEXUALITY, FEMINISM AND PC ON THE WEST

I believe it was the EARLY Romans who prohibited several classes of people from holding public office: Those of illegitimate birth (bastards), eunuchs and homosexuals. (That unfortunately changed leading up to the fall.)

While these children had no choice in the matter, bastards were prohibited because, having no sense of their family past or history, they could not be trusted to operate for the good of the culture based on its history or traditions.

Eunuchs (castrated males) and homosexuals because they could not and/or would not sire children and would, therefore, most likely have no abiding interest in preserving the culture for future generations.

While there are a number of exceptions, I’ll let YOU tell me what sort of folks we have in public office HERE today.

It appears that America has employed technology to compress into slightly over 240 years what it took the Romans over 2,000 to achieve — total and utter cultural collapse.

I believe the Romans would also have put radical feminists in that group – had they permitted radical feminism at the time. Wisely, they did not. More on that a bit later.

While channel-surfing recently, I stopped for a moment on an Animal Planet show featuring two lesbian roommates. And, no, they were NOT in the bedroom. As I watched, I began pondering the question of the growing impact of homosexuals and radical feminists on our culture.

None of these thoughts are original to me and all have been written about and discussed ad nauseam. This little rant is really an exercise in catharsis.

At the individual level, I have personally known a few homosexuals and, in general, have found them to be quiet, respectful and intelligent. Again, there are exceptions – such as the moron from California (where else?) cited below — but I haven’t personally met them and hope I don’t as there would be serious trouble between us.

Having said that, I fear that the homosexual – and the recent politically correct fervor to further legitimize that lifestyle – has done irreparable harm to our NATIONAL life and what remains of what many of us still call Western European Culture. When that impact is coupled with the rise of radical feminism (you’ll be pleased to know that the EQUAL RIGHTS AMENDMENT is again being disinterred), the product is a result from which the West may never recover.

Allow me to explain:

The physiological fact is that homosexuals normally do not reproduce. The current population replacement rate – the rate necessary to maintain the current native born population level — for the United States is somewhere north of 2 children per couple. Homosexuals usually don’t HAVE kids. Add the radical feminist impact – which holds that motherhood is some form of slavery and has driven many women to seek “fulfillment” OUTSIDE the home — and the current birth rate here is disturbingly FAR BELOW 2.1 per couple.

The other side of the demographic coin is that the virtually unrestrained immigration policies of past administrations have brought a huge influx of people from cultures radically different from that which existed here prior to the advent of PC, diversity, tolerance and all the other names by which many now call these self, nation and culture identity destroying behaviors.

Add the millions and millions of illegals who are now placing such a physical and economic burden on the healthcare and school systems that natural born citizens are being taxed to death and/or cannot, themselves, get the services to which they would otherwise be entitled. It’s a recipe for chaos.

And the politicians – who hope these new welfare recipients will support their perpetual reelection — turn a blind eye.

And as these groups agitate and campaign for THEIR particular flavor of diversity and tolerance, they also give added traction to virtually EVERY OTHER flavor. As they change millions of minds and cause others to reconsider long-standing and time-tested value systems, they are turning our world upside down.

The effect of these factors is that the America in which many of us older folks grew up is disappearing at an alarming rate. As the nation many of us came to love – and donned uniforms to defend – drifts toward some sort of Balkanized
despotism, large segments of these new arrivals – who know little and care even less of the traditions, values and history of this place and even refuse to learn the common tongue — separate themselves into ghetto-like enclaves where outsiders are often not welcomed unless they’re spending money. We run the very serious risk of repeating the experiences of the former Yugoslavia from which some of my people came.

Speaking of whom, my great-great grandparents waited for years then stood in long lines at Ellis Island to be deloused, interrogated and told they had to learn English and our history and traditions and pass a test – something the Hispanics and radical Muslim terrorists strolling across the border with Mexico don’ t have to do.

The Clinton administration – well known for its tolerance of the gay lifestyle – published some statistics in connection with AIDS that startled many. Of course, the PC then rearing its ugly head prohibited all but the brave from commenting on any of that.

The CDC statistics showed that 85% of all AIDS/HIV cases are
1. Active, non-monogamous homosexuals,
(the largest subset)
2. Heterosexuals and bisexuals who have had sex with group 1 and
3. IV drug abusers who share needles.
(Kinda gives new meaning to Romans 6:23, doesn’t it?)
The remaining 15% are those who have contracted AIDS via other,
non-sexual/non-drug means SUCH AS TRANSFUSIONS OF TAINTED BLOOD (which one homosexual “leader” on the West Coast URGED his fellow homosexuals to CONTINUE to attempt to contaminate in order to involve the straight community in the push to increase federal funding for AIDS research).

So, with the population replacement rate practically down to zero, we have some “leaders” of the homosexual community – who do nothing to help raise that rate – encouraging their members to make ill or kill those of us who have and/or are having and raising kids here.

I find it fascinating that many members of the homosexual community and the radical feminists are on the front line of the assault on traditional values and seek to replace them with more tolerance, diversity and other politically correct nonsense. They have succeeded beyond their wildest dreams.

While their activities have produced short-term benefits for them, that diversity, tolerance and egalitarianism have also opened the door to the idea that no culture is “better” than any other. Obama – apparently having confused Chicago with America — spent days recently apologizing to everyone he met for our defective, decadent and corrupt culture.

And that has brought to our shores a formerly foreign culture, the more radical elements of which are breeding at a rate well in excess of the rate among the indigenous LEGAL and NATURAL BORN population.

And, just as it already has in Great Britain and continental Europe, with those increasing numbers will come increased political and social power.

And with that will surely come a foreign theology and law system.

And that foreign theology – that’d be Islam— and law system – that’d be Sharia — DOES NOT TOLERATE HOMOSEXUALITY and regards WOMEN AS CHATTEL WHO HAVE NO PERSONAL RIGHTS LET ALONE THE SORT OF FREEDOM TO WHICH THE FEMINISTS ARE ACCUSTOMED.

The bottom line, gays and ladies? You will either fall under the sword (put to death for you government school folk) or confined to the house unless your “man” – who will beat you periodically – wants to take you out, in which case you will be garbed from head to toe. And, only HE can drive the car.

Here’s a short video clip of the reward your PC destruction of traditional American values will bring you.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wlyeT1MBEzE

A number of years ago, a writer posited that there was a “War Against Boys” within and without the government school system. He opined that little boys were being psychologically and emotionally emasculated by millions of female teachers and others in the America of John Wayne.

We have now entered the era of the feminized “metrosexual” (one now occupies the White House) where boys are discouraged – often prohibited — from playing games with toy plastic guns, rubber knives or other weapons. Feminists, if it hadn’t been for millions of young men with REAL guns venturing forth from time-to-time to face down very rough folks with designs on this country – and YOU — your freedom (albeit shrinking thanks largely to our having become the Metrosexual States of America) to promulgate your radical worldview would not exist.

So there you have it.

I’d urge you to think about these things while there MIGHT still be time to alter course.

PS: I had to get this out of my system BEFORE the new, improved congress passes the pending legislation making it a crime to post ANYTHING on the web that could in any way cause ANYONE emotional distress. Would it matter that it was factual? Nope! While it’s probable that the Supremes will rule it a violation of the First Amendment, I’d rather not squander my kids’ small inheritance on lawyers bringing the case.

Dick Bachert
5/6/2009


17 posted on 12/01/2009 9:04:48 PM PST by Dick Bachert
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: BobL

Yep!

IMPACT OF HOMOSEXUALITY, FEMINISM AND PC ON THE WEST

I believe it was the EARLY Romans who prohibited several classes of people from holding public office: Those of illegitimate birth (bastards), eunuchs and homosexuals. (That unfortunately changed leading up to the fall.)

While these children had no choice in the matter, bastards were prohibited because, having no sense of their family past or history, they could not be trusted to operate for the good of the culture based on its history or traditions.

Eunuchs (castrated males) and homosexuals because they could not and/or would not sire children and would, therefore, most likely have no abiding interest in preserving the culture for future generations.

While there are a number of exceptions, I’ll let YOU tell me what sort of folks we have in public office HERE today.

It appears that America has employed technology to compress into slightly over 240 years what it took the Romans over 2,000 to achieve — total and utter cultural collapse.

I believe the Romans would also have put radical feminists in that group – had they permitted radical feminism at the time. Wisely, they did not. More on that a bit later.

While channel-surfing recently, I stopped for a moment on an Animal Planet show featuring two lesbian roommates. And, no, they were NOT in the bedroom. As I watched, I began pondering the question of the growing impact of homosexuals and radical feminists on our culture.

None of these thoughts are original to me and all have been written about and discussed ad nauseam. This little rant is really an exercise in catharsis.

At the individual level, I have personally known a few homosexuals and, in general, have found them to be quiet, respectful and intelligent. Again, there are exceptions – such as the moron from California (where else?) cited below — but I haven’t personally met them and hope I don’t as there would be serious trouble between us.

Having said that, I fear that the homosexual – and the recent politically correct fervor to further legitimize that lifestyle – has done irreparable harm to our NATIONAL life and what remains of what many of us still call Western European Culture. When that impact is coupled with the rise of radical feminism (you’ll be pleased to know that the EQUAL RIGHTS AMENDMENT is again being disinterred), the product is a result from which the West may never recover.

Allow me to explain:

The physiological fact is that homosexuals normally do not reproduce. The current population replacement rate – the rate necessary to maintain the current native born population level — for the United States is somewhere north of 2 children per couple. Homosexuals usually don’t HAVE kids. Add the radical feminist impact – which holds that motherhood is some form of slavery and has driven many women to seek “fulfillment” OUTSIDE the home — and the current birth rate here is disturbingly FAR BELOW 2.1 per couple.

The other side of the demographic coin is that the virtually unrestrained immigration policies of past administrations have brought a huge influx of people from cultures radically different from that which existed here prior to the advent of PC, diversity, tolerance and all the other names by which many now call these self, nation and culture identity destroying behaviors.

Add the millions and millions of illegals who are now placing such a physical and economic burden on the healthcare and school systems that natural born citizens are being taxed to death and/or cannot, themselves, get the services to which they would otherwise be entitled. It’s a recipe for chaos.

And the politicians – who hope these new welfare recipients will support their perpetual reelection — turn a blind eye.

And as these groups agitate and campaign for THEIR particular flavor of diversity and tolerance, they also give added traction to virtually EVERY OTHER flavor. As they change millions of minds and cause others to reconsider long-standing and time-tested value systems, they are turning our world upside down.

The effect of these factors is that the America in which many of us older folks grew up is disappearing at an alarming rate. As the nation many of us came to love – and donned uniforms to defend – drifts toward some sort of Balkanized
despotism, large segments of these new arrivals – who know little and care even less of the traditions, values and history of this place and even refuse to learn the common tongue — separate themselves into ghetto-like enclaves where outsiders are often not welcomed unless they’re spending money. We run the very serious risk of repeating the experiences of the former Yugoslavia from which some of my people came.

Speaking of whom, my great-great grandparents waited for years then stood in long lines at Ellis Island to be deloused, interrogated and told they had to learn English and our history and traditions and pass a test – something the Hispanics and radical Muslim terrorists strolling across the border with Mexico don’ t have to do.

The Clinton administration – well known for its tolerance of the gay lifestyle – published some statistics in connection with AIDS that startled many. Of course, the PC then rearing its ugly head prohibited all but the brave from commenting on any of that.

The CDC statistics showed that 85% of all AIDS/HIV cases are
1. Active, non-monogamous homosexuals,
(the largest subset)
2. Heterosexuals and bisexuals who have had sex with group 1 and
3. IV drug abusers who share needles.
(Kinda gives new meaning to Romans 6:23, doesn’t it?)
The remaining 15% are those who have contracted AIDS via other,
non-sexual/non-drug means SUCH AS TRANSFUSIONS OF TAINTED BLOOD (which one homosexual “leader” on the West Coast URGED his fellow homosexuals to CONTINUE to attempt to contaminate in order to involve the straight community in the push to increase federal funding for AIDS research).

So, with the population replacement rate practically down to zero, we have some “leaders” of the homosexual community – who do nothing to help raise that rate – encouraging their members to make ill or kill those of us who have and/or are having and raising kids here.

I find it fascinating that many members of the homosexual community and the radical feminists are on the front line of the assault on traditional values and seek to replace them with more tolerance, diversity and other politically correct nonsense. They have succeeded beyond their wildest dreams.

While their activities have produced short-term benefits for them, that diversity, tolerance and egalitarianism have also opened the door to the idea that no culture is “better” than any other. Obama – apparently having confused Chicago with America — spent days recently apologizing to everyone he met for our defective, decadent and corrupt culture.

And that has brought to our shores a formerly foreign culture, the more radical elements of which are breeding at a rate well in excess of the rate among the indigenous LEGAL and NATURAL BORN population.

And, just as it already has in Great Britain and continental Europe, with those increasing numbers will come increased political and social power.

And with that will surely come a foreign theology and law system.

And that foreign theology – that’d be Islam— and law system – that’d be Sharia — DOES NOT TOLERATE HOMOSEXUALITY and regards WOMEN AS CHATTEL WHO HAVE NO PERSONAL RIGHTS LET ALONE THE SORT OF FREEDOM TO WHICH THE FEMINISTS ARE ACCUSTOMED.

The bottom line, gays and ladies? You will either fall under the sword (put to death for you government school folk) or confined to the house unless your “man” – who will beat you periodically – wants to take you out, in which case you will be garbed from head to toe. And, only HE can drive the car.

Here’s a short video clip of the reward your PC destruction of traditional American values will bring you.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wlyeT1MBEzE

A number of years ago, a writer posited that there was a “War Against Boys” within and without the government school system. He opined that little boys were being psychologically and emotionally emasculated by millions of female teachers and others in the America of John Wayne.

We have now entered the era of the feminized “metrosexual” (one now occupies the White House) where boys are discouraged – often prohibited — from playing games with toy plastic guns, rubber knives or other weapons. Feminists, if it hadn’t been for millions of young men with REAL guns venturing forth from time-to-time to face down very rough folks with designs on this country – and YOU — your freedom (albeit shrinking thanks largely to our having become the Metrosexual States of America) to promulgate your radical worldview would not exist.

So there you have it.

I’d urge you to think about these things while there MIGHT still be time to alter course.

PS: I had to get this out of my system BEFORE the new, improved congress passes the pending legislation making it a crime to post ANYTHING on the web that could in any way cause ANYONE emotional distress. Would it matter that it was factual? Nope! While it’s probable that the Supremes will rule it a violation of the First Amendment, I’d rather not squander my kids’ small inheritance on lawyers bringing the case.

Dick Bachert
5/6/2009


18 posted on 12/01/2009 9:06:18 PM PST by Dick Bachert
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Dick Bachert

Yea, I agree.


19 posted on 12/01/2009 9:09:27 PM PST by BobL (Real Men don't use Tag Lines)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Nik Naym

That’s Betty Friedan. She was a movement Communist (no joke) and the first head of NOW. She makes Helen Thomas look like Phyllis Schlafly.


20 posted on 12/01/2009 9:20:18 PM PST by fieldmarshaldj (~"This is what happens when you find a stranger in the Alps !"~~)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: infowarrior
In Jan 1973, I was yet to turn 18. How is it that I am held responsible for Roe vs Wade. When it was decided, I had yet to be able to vote at all...

And you were decades from having a position of power in America, at no time have the 2 year olds and the teenagers run this nation.

21 posted on 12/01/2009 9:32:46 PM PST by ansel12 (Scozzafava/Romney 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

Comment #22 Removed by Moderator

To: TonyRo76

Except for that one on the left front.


23 posted on 12/01/2009 10:35:57 PM PST by ansel12 (Scozzafava/Romney 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Dick Bachert

Is there any anger toward women here?

That is the root of a lot of problems that have led women to sexualize themselves.

And I believe these problems will be corrected only when more conservatve women, like Sarah Palin, run and are elected to public office. Young women need more positive role models. I would not want to be a young woman today, with all the pressure put on women to “perform.”

Another thought — saw an old movie with Shelley Winters recently, where she played somebody’s wife. How long has it been since you’ve seen a man under 60 with a fat wife?

Probably a while. Is this the concern of men or women?


24 posted on 12/01/2009 11:12:05 PM PST by malkee (Actually I'm an ex-smoker--more than three years now -- But I think about it every day.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: thecodont
I HATE HIPPIES!


25 posted on 12/01/2009 11:32:58 PM PST by packrat35 (Ron Paul is a turd!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: cycle of discernment

I am 43 and I despise what the 60s generation did to my generation. They tore up all the maps of the society and said, “ look we freed you”!
Well, maybe we liked those maps, who asked you to tear them up? Thanks for nothing D!ck heads.


26 posted on 12/02/2009 3:51:38 AM PST by Walkingfeather
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cycle of discernment

I am not Catholic, but this was predicted by this excellent document in 1968.
Humanae Vitae - Encyclical Letter of His Holiness Paul VI on the regulation of birth, 25 July 1968. A must read for everyone at least once.


27 posted on 12/02/2009 3:57:04 AM PST by momincombatboots (There are times to fight on my knees & times to fight on my feet! I am fully prepared 4 both!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Walkingfeather

The hippies wanted to destroy everything they misunderstood. Useful idiots then and now.


28 posted on 12/02/2009 3:59:59 AM PST by Broker (Darwin's gods are dangerous men.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: BobL

I don’t know that it’s so much that where the males dominate, society thrives, but it’s that where males are allowed to be males without having to apologize for it and where women who don’t act like whores and spread their legs at the slightest provocation are still considered to be desirable that society thrives.


29 posted on 12/02/2009 6:24:46 AM PST by cammie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Broker

It is the basic hubris of the young, and it is the one of the basic tenets that fuels the ideology of the left -

“we know better than those who invented those arbitrary rules, simply because we’re alive and living it NOW.”

Simply a fact - societies in which sex is condoned ONLY within the institution of one man/one woman marriage for life are the only societies in which women are truly empowered.


30 posted on 12/02/2009 6:29:38 AM PST by MrB (The difference between a humanist and a Satanist is that the latter knows who he's working for.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: cammie

Read “Truth and Transformation” - it’s a real eye opener.
As I posted previously, and worthy of a repost, if I say so myself:

societies in which sex is ONLY condoned within the institution of one man/one woman marriage for life are the only societies in which women are truly empowered.


31 posted on 12/02/2009 6:31:34 AM PST by MrB (The difference between a humanist and a Satanist is that the latter knows who he's working for.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: momincombatboots

As you can tell by my screen name, I am Catholic, LOL. I read that for the first time when I was 28 (2001). Words cannot describe how much that letter changed my life and my perspective for the better. At least a couple of my kids probably would not be here today if my thinking had not been changed.


32 posted on 12/02/2009 6:39:04 AM PST by Hoosier Catholic Momma (Arkansas resident of Hoosier upbringing--Yankee with a southern twang)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: cammie
I don’t know that it’s so much that where the males dominate, society thrives, but it’s that where males are allowed to be males without having to apologize for it and where women who don’t act like whores and spread their legs at the slightest provocation are still considered to be desirable that society thrives.

I would say it's the opposite, cultures in which FEMALES dominate by demanding that men are productive, act honorably, and live up to their responsibilities.

I don't think your average feminist understands exactly how much "power" she threw away, all in the vain attempt to be like men. Cultures where women are used like pieces of meat (even if they convince themselves they are "free" and enjoying it) seem more common in the 3rd world. THOSE are the "patriarchies."

33 posted on 12/02/2009 6:46:08 AM PST by Trailerpark Badass (Happiness is a choice!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Hoosier Catholic Momma

I read it just a coupla years ago, so to me it was prophetic. Definitely God speaking to us all. I was born the year it was written.


34 posted on 12/02/2009 6:46:20 AM PST by momincombatboots (There are times to fight on my knees & times to fight on my feet! I am fully prepared 4 both!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: narses
There is a good novel that was published recently by One More Soul titled Fatherless by Brian J. Gail.

It does a fantastic job of catechesis within a fictional novel framework regarding the Church's teaching on contraception, and the link between the Pill and breast cancer, stroke, etc.

35 posted on 12/02/2009 7:17:10 AM PST by Brian Kopp DPM
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: malkee

As guy who has been married to the same lady for 47 years, has a 40+ year-old daughter and 4 granddaughters, the only thing approaching anger here is that far too many western women have allowed themselves to be diverted from the most important job on God’s green earth: The keeping of the home and the nurturing and raising of the next generations.

The leftists/feminists who launched this crap knew precisely what they were about when it started: Destroy the family unit by taking the woman out of her vital and traditional role and the resulting conflict and confusion would provide fertile ground for reshaping — or destroying — the entire culture.

That it worked so well for them should make angry anyone who thought through to the end-game. We’re getting close to that point and may not be able to turn it around.


36 posted on 12/02/2009 8:39:43 AM PST by Dick Bachert
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Trailerpark Badass

I think that we’re probably both saying the same thing - societies where women don’t give it up for free are better off.


37 posted on 12/02/2009 11:01:31 AM PST by cammie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: ansel12; infowarrior

I am pre-boomer by a few years. My children are post-boomer. The boomers, whether they were 2, or 22, at the moment when sexual liberation and feminaziism swept the nation had a lot to do with its success because they accepted immediately and popularized the new order — free sex, drugs, multiple sexual partners, etc. — and made it the norm.

Voting had nothing to do with R v Wade. That was a Supreme Court decision.

My generation was more cautious, although some of us had a lot to do with it too by being quiet and watchful. The Boomers were at the forefront of experimentation with the new order, while the Friedans and the Germaine Greers sat back and raked in the money from their followers. My generation (formerly called the “Silent Generation”) sat in stunned silence for years. Those of us who are still alive have found our voices now, however.

Hear us roar!


38 posted on 12/02/2009 1:42:09 PM PST by afraidfortherepublic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Dick Bachert
...far too many western women have allowed themselves to be diverted from the most important job on God’s green earth: The keeping of the home and the nurturing and raising of the next generations.

Absolutely. There are a lot of factors there:

Repressed salaries for men
Divorce and the subsequent single parent households
Increased tuitions and need for moms to work
Desire for all the latest gadgets
Pushing the kids to take up every conceivable sport, musical instrument, dance, etc.

I'm sure that I could think of many more, but it's all so depressing. Thank God all of my 11 grandchildren have been raised by their own moms. One family had a part time nanny, but that is because my daughter operated a piano studio in her home, and the nanny was there to entertain my grandchildren to keep them from interrupting lessons.

39 posted on 12/02/2009 1:52:34 PM PST by afraidfortherepublic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: afraidfortherepublic

Abortion was legalized in a number of states by the time roeVwade was decided, your generation was the Jane Fonda, John Denver, Jim Morrison, Jimi Hendrix, Peter Paul & Mary, Grace Slick, Neil Young , Beatles, Van Morrison, Joan Baez, Jerry Garcia, Pete Townsend, Joe Cocker, Judy Collins, Jimmy Page, Janis Joplin, Bob Dylan, Williams Ayers, Chicago Seven, Rod Stewart,etc, etc, etc, the crowd that ranged in age from 15 to 35 in 1960. They created and popularized the new order — free sex, drugs, multiple sexual partners, etc. — and made it the norm. Older than them were the people running the nation into the ground with legislation and court activism.


40 posted on 12/02/2009 4:25:16 PM PST by ansel12 (Scozzafava/Romney 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: ansel12

Wrong. Those creeps were all a couple of years younger than I. Baez married a kid who had been in my younger cousin’s Cub Scout Den, David Harris. Peter, Paul, & Mary were probably older, but they’d lived a fast life in the East.

Younger, younger, younger — but oh, so precocious and rebelious. Kids in my class (and I went to UC Berkeley) were all much more conservative than those who were 4-5 years younger. Much. Berkeley was all “I Like Ike” when I was there.

I moved back to Berkeley as a young married woman a few years later, and I didn’t recognize the place. And yes, I sent my first (and last) telegram at the behest of my church opposing Ronald Reagan when he was considering signing the Bill to legalize abortion. I couldn’t believe he actually did it.

But, then (after a taste of Johnson and Carter) I forgave him when he acknowledged that signing that Bill was the biggest mistake he ever made and that he’d never sign such a Bill again. Of course, by then it was a moot point because the US SC had decided R v Wade.


41 posted on 12/02/2009 7:26:19 PM PST by afraidfortherepublic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: afraidfortherepublic

Not wrong at all, all of those people and many more were born 1925 to 1945, that is the silent generation, the Boomers are those born from 1946 to 1964, according to the United States Census Bureau and GAO.

The silent generation, the one you said that you belonged to were the 15 to 35 olds in 1960.


42 posted on 12/02/2009 7:43:17 PM PST by ansel12 (Scozzafava/Romney 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: cycle of discernment

“it has been wrecking the lives of women ever since”

Starting with the women created because of it.


43 posted on 12/02/2009 8:28:25 PM PST by the OlLine Rebel (Common sense is an uncommon virtue./Technological progress cannot be legislated.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cycle of discernment

“...dismissed as prudes suffering from a permanent moral panic-attack.”

And it has so captured the public that even “conservatives” declare the same things.


44 posted on 12/02/2009 8:31:14 PM PST by the OlLine Rebel (Common sense is an uncommon virtue./Technological progress cannot be legislated.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BobL

“As we’re seeing with Islam, where the males dominate, the society thrives”

Doesn’t fly. In truth, MOST societies are “male-dominated”, and that includes backward, primitive, nasty cultures.


45 posted on 12/02/2009 8:37:06 PM PST by the OlLine Rebel (Common sense is an uncommon virtue./Technological progress cannot be legislated.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: ansel12

“everything in the sixties was done by the previous generations, none of it was created or led by the kids”

Yes, but it was the “kids” who lock-stock-barrel FELL for it. They were the WATERSHED generation, if you will, that wholesale bought and promulgated it.

No question in my mind about that.

After all, they were raised on Dr. Spock, which said they could do any damn thing they wanted without (real) consequence.

Obviously, there were Beatniks and other communist losers amongst the elders who pushed their ideas; but it wasn’t until the hippie (NOT the disco side, which really has nothing to do with the early part of the “Boomer” division) generation that the majority of society seemed unable to say “I love America”, at least without qualification and “...but...” At that point and then on, there has been amongst other things, a real cynicism and downright hatred of their own birthright in society as a whole, whereas before the ‘60s, the rule was “America is great”. (That’s just an example of the attitude change.)


46 posted on 12/02/2009 8:46:17 PM PST by the OlLine Rebel (Common sense is an uncommon virtue./Technological progress cannot be legislated.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: the OlLine Rebel

The sixties are the people listed in post 40 and Walter Cronkite and Lyndon Johnson and college Presidents and the record managers etc, not the babies and the five year olds and the ones barely old enough to vote in the first election of their life in 1968.

Can you imagine someone trying to sell that nonsense today, everyone would laugh, yeah right, we aren’t running America, the ten and twenty year olds are.


47 posted on 12/02/2009 8:54:43 PM PST by ansel12 (Scozzafava/Romney 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: the OlLine Rebel

By the way, I don’t know how much you love America, but almost 9 1/2 million boomers served in the military, and in 1972 the 18 to 29 year old vote went for Nixon by a wide margin.


48 posted on 12/02/2009 8:57:43 PM PST by ansel12 (Scozzafava/Romney 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: the OlLine Rebel

“Doesn’t fly. In truth, MOST societies are “male-dominated”, and that includes backward, primitive, nasty cultures.”

It depends on your definition of “thrives”...to me it means that there will still be a lot of people of the same culture, with the same values, in 100 years (as we thrived for hundreds of years). In 100 years, white Europe will be DEAD, much of free Asia will also be DEAD. America may or may not be around, and Islam will cover at least half of the world (barring major wars).


49 posted on 12/02/2009 9:27:00 PM PST by BobL (Real Men don't use Tag Lines)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: Dick Bachert

My point, I guess, is that all the blame is placed on women. Women bear a large share of the responsibility, yes. But men are part of the culture, too. And ultimately, women will become what men expect and want them to become. Or else they’ll give up men, which has happened to a lot of women who refuse to have illicit sex. Men often refuse to take responsibility for illicit sex, and it does take two to tango. And women are usually more damaged by these relationships men.

One more sore point - men who buy into the abortion argument that “women should have a right to do what they want with their own bodies.” I love to take on men who give this argument. It usually leaves them speechless.

And —the cultural and family message that — you can be whatever you want doesn’t help. Usually, you can’t.


50 posted on 12/02/2009 9:34:19 PM PST by malkee (Actually I'm an ex-smoker--more than three years now -- But I think about it every day.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-53 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson