Posted on 09/09/2014 8:00:31 AM PDT by wagglebee
Re post 5. WTF is that? A man?
Really? When? Who will lead it? NO ONE, that’s who. It will be a Twitter, Facebook, Pinterest quasi-cyber revolt (those three are already revolting, IMO).
That was my conclusion.
I didn’t quite follow this sentence: “I was always amazed about how we got laws against domestic violence negating consent of the abused not applying to some of the vile sex acts depicted.”
I’m not sure which clauses go together there. Could you unpack that in a few sentences?
here’s the thread you mentioned...
Marxist Feminism’s Ruined Lives
Frontpagemag.com ^ | 9-2-2014 | Mallory Millett
http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3200158/posts
It was 1969. Kate invited me to join her for a gathering at the home of her friend, Lila Karp. They called the assemblage a “consciousness-raising-group,” a typical communist exercise, something practiced in Maoist China. We gathered at a large table as the chairperson opened the meeting with a back-and-forth recitation, like a Litany, a type of prayer done in Catholic Church. But now it was Marxism, the Church of the Left, mimicking religious practice:
“Why are we here today?” she asked.
“To make revolution,” they answered.
“What kind of revolution?” she replied.
“The Cultural Revolution,” they chanted.
“And how do we make Cultural Revolution?” she demanded.
“By destroying the American family!” they answered.
“How do we destroy the family?” she came back.
“By destroying the American Patriarch,” they cried exuberantly.
“And how do we destroy the American Patriarch?” she replied.
“By taking away his power!”
“How do we do that?”
“By destroying monogamy!” they shouted.
“How can we destroy monogamy?”
Their answer left me dumbstruck, breathless, disbelieving my ears. Was I on planet earth? Who were these people?
“By promoting promiscuity, eroticism, prostitution and homosexuality!” they resounded.
They proceeded with a long discussion on how to advance these goals by establishing The National Organization of Women. It was clear they desired nothing less than the utter deconstruction of Western society. The upshot was that the only way to do this was “to invade every American institution. Every one must be permeated with ‘The Revolution’”: The media, the educational system, universities, high schools, K-12, school boards, etc.; then, the judiciary, the legislatures, the executive branches and even the library system.
It fell on my ears as a ludicrous scheme, as if they were a band of highly imaginative children planning a Brinks robbery; a lark trumped up on a snowy night amongst a group of spoiled brats over booze and hashish.
I was always amazed about how we have laws against domestic violence negating testimonies including the consent/recant stories of the abused, but that the blatant pictorial evidence in porn is not used to prosecute some of the vile sex acts depicted.
Again, abortion culture favors pimps. Supposedly she is not a dependent when doing pornographic acts... it is her free will... and that marriage is not empowering her to free will.
I say bull sht on that.
We know a government tyranny is favored in that set up.
Untrue. The concept originated in the 1330s with Petrarch and was well developed by humanists in the Renaissance before the Reformers came along.
The idea is self-flattering, of course, as it refers to the "dark" period between classical civilization and its rebirth, midwived by the humanists, in the Renaissance.
The term itself was invented by Baronius, a Catholic historian, around 1600. "The new age (saeculum) which was beginning, for its harshness and barrenness of good could well be called iron, for its baseness and abounding evil leaden, and moreover for its lack of writers (inopia scriptorum) dark (obscurum)."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_Ages_(historiography)
That was just last century but even hundreds of years ago it was the same, sexual degeneracy and leftism went hand in hand.
How do the laws against domestic violence negate testimonies?
Indeed. It is not a new thing. I believe in the time of Plato groups blaming money and dreaming of a moneyless businessless society such as these were depicted.
Thats it! Thanks!
Bookmark
The jury is asked by the prosecution and judge to invariably ignore the abused woman’s story when she says she was the one attacking or when she changes her story.
Domestic violence laws which make the State the plaintiff bypassing the need to wait for the woman to bring up charges has essentially taken women into their direct custody, but not so when the woman is having abortions or doing stuff “on her own” outside marriage.
Why, the State counts on its welfare recipients to be its dependents, providing them through the pimps their sexual needs and repressed life as low level animals in need.
The Pill kicked it into overdrive but falsified research “studies” by Kinsey, Reich, Mead, and others gave “scientific permission” to cast off Western civilization’s moral code.
The problem is that there really are women who participate freely in such activities. I'm sure many of them are severely messed up emotionally and mentally, but the government just isn't qualified to override a person's statement and determine that her actions aren't "really" consensual.
If you don't believe me, the evidence is remarkably easy to find. Some of the tamer stuff can be found in discussions of "domestic discipline," many of the blogs by women who approach the subject from the idea that it's an application of Christian principles of headship.
From there, it heads off into some really, really dark stuff. It appears, surprisingly, that there are a lot more people who want to be sexually dominated and abused than there are people who want to do the dominating. Hence a thriving and profitable market for the professional dominatrix.
Should also have mentioned the astonishing success of 50 Shades of Grey, S&M porn that isn’t even very well written.
Almost entirely among women. It very obviously strikes a deep chord in many of them.
Some coincide it with the degradation occuring after the rise of Islam.
How does Planned Parenthood defend teaching BDSM concept to minors including “safe words because ‘no’ doesn’t ALWAYS REALLY mean ‘NO!’”?
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.