Posted on 02/16/2015 7:56:55 PM PST by Citizen Zed
50% of millennials have an IQ under 20. Gender is irrelevant and is emotionally based. It is illogical to base one’s “identity” on something so capricious as emotions. Sex is biological, tangible, and cannot be altered. Wake up and face reality, morons. Too many people live in a fantasy, thinking that you can make everything fit your own twisted expectations. Too bad. Real life will catch up to you one day.
“Previous generations were not so apt to invent trouble.”
When a society starts inventing problems and ignoring the real ones, you know that it is too privileged. Stuff like this and “manspreading”, for example.
Twisted Expectations Dating Service satire ads would be a riot
Since 100% of these idiots live inside their “smart” phone, I don’t believe that they have a clue what gender means. Those that do are too busy taking “selfies” that they don’t have the time to explain it to the clueless.
Real men and real women tend to be conservative, but even Barack Obama is a man (just not very good at it), and even Rosie O’Donnell is a women (more or less). There is no in between other than the one in ten thousand with a medical issue.
Yes, and sort of like the same thing placing Islam in the ‘spectrum of religions’.
The head of Disney in recent years was a homo.
The Weather Underground engaged in partner swapping and homosexual relations too. “SMASH monogamy” “SMASH the patriarchy” “SMASH the State”.
Break down society. Break down morals.
Viva la revolucion.
Marxist Feminism’s Ruined Lives
Frontpagemag.com ^ | 9-2-2014 | Mallory Millett
“When women go wrong men go right after them.” – Mae West
“Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy; its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery.” Winston Churchill wrote this over a century ago.
During my junior year in high school, the nuns asked about our plans for after we graduated. When I said I was going to attend State University, I noticed their disappointment. I asked my favorite nun, “Why?” She answered, “That means you’ll leave four years later a communist and an atheist!”
What a giggle we girls had over that. “How ridiculously unsophisticated these nuns are,” we thought. Then I went to the university and four years later walked out a communist and an atheist, just as my sister Katie had six years before me.
Sometime later, I was a young divorcee with a small child. At the urging of my sister, I relocated to NYC after spending years married to an American executive stationed in Southeast Asia. The marriage over, I was making a new life for my daughter and me. Katie said, “Come to New York. We’re making revolution! Some of us are starting the National Organization of Women and you can be part of it.”
I hadn’t seen her for years. Although she had tormented me when we were youngsters, those memories were faint after my Asian traumas and the break-up of my marriage. I foolishly mistook her for sanctuary in a storm. With so much time and distance between us, I had forgotten her emotional instability.
And so began my period as an unwitting witness to history. I stayed with Kate and her lovable Japanese husband, Fumio, in a dilapidated loft on The Bowery as she finished her first book, a PhD thesis for Columbia University, “Sexual Politics.”
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.
To me, this sounded silly. I was enduring culture shock after having been cut-off from my homeland, living in Third-World countries for years with not one trip back to the United States. I was one of those people who, upon returning to American soil, fell out of the plane blubbering with ecstasy at being home in the USA. I knelt on the ground covering it with kisses. I had learned just exactly how delicious was the land of my birth and didn’t care what anyone thought because they just hadn’t seen what I had or been where I had been. I had seen factory workers and sex-slaves chained to walls.
How could they know? Asia is beyond our ken and, as they say, utterly inscrutable, and a kind of hell I never intended to revisit. I lived there, not junketed, not visited like sweet little tourists — I’d conducted households and tried to raise a child. I had outgrown the communism of my university days and was clumsily groping my way back to God.
How could twelve American women who were the most respectable types imaginable — clean and privileged graduates of esteemed institutions: Columbia, Radcliffe, Smith, Wellesley, Vassar; the uncle of one was Secretary of War under Franklin Roosevelt — plot such a thing? Most had advanced degrees and appeared cogent, bright, reasonable and good. How did these people rationally believe they could succeed with such vicious grandiosity? And why?
I dismissed it as academic-lounge air-castle-building. I continued with my new life in New York while my sister became famous publishing her books, featured on the cover of “Time Magazine.” “Time” called her “the Karl Marx of the Women’s Movement.” This was because her book laid out a course in Marxism 101 for women. Her thesis: The family is a den of slavery with the man as the Bourgeoisie and the woman and children as the Proletariat. The only hope for women’s “liberation” (communism’s favorite word for leading minions into inextricable slavery; “liberation,” and much like “collective” – please run from it, run for your life) was this new “Women’s Movement.” Her books captivated the academic classes and soon “Women’s Studies” courses were installed in colleges in a steady wave across the nation with Kate Millett books as required reading...
The millenials were instructed in this insanity by the educrats and ‘scientists’ from previous generations.
And a very large dog at that. You win.
Sex positive advocates don’t CARE about the ‘why’. The “born that way” meme is just to roll over the opposition, “well, if they can’t help themselves....”
The sex positive agenda seeks to end ALL moral judgment over sexual pairings of any kind regardless of sex, age, relation, marital status, number, or species of partner(s). They seek to see everyone sexually active at every age (orgasm is a birthright to be experienced and shared by everyone).
They see abstinence as ‘unhealthy’ because they see it as (counter to their worldview and) a suppression of sexual desires.
Do it with your neighbor’s wife. Do it with your cousin. Do it with your dog. “It’s nobody’s business but your own”
AMEN! It is so ironic that conservatives are considered to be ignorant and uneducated because they realize that the facts do not support the existence of global warming and that evolution is just a theory that does not prevent a belief that the hand of God created the world.
On the other hand, biologists have known since the early 20th century that sex is genetically determined by two chromosomes, X and Y (XX=female and XY=male). This is determined AT CONCEPTION, not what the child may "feel" at around 4 or 5. Undergoing "transition" from one sex to another has NO effect on the chromosomes. Even if a person surgically changes their body parts, genetically they are still the sex that they always were. Liberals who deny this are the actual ignorant ones!
“Ignorant” and “delusional” are not quite synonyms.
Ages 18 through 34, that’s creepy, because I thought even pro-abortionists would define between birth and death as personhood.
Brains filled with mush.
Or X and Y, if you ask a geneticist.Leave it to a liberal to make even the most simple question complicated.
Let's also see how many that breed animals agree that gender is a broad-spectrum affair....
The ones who went through the Depression and before.
“Dont invent trouble where there isn’t any” is good advice to live by, but instead we seem to have this corrosive busybody thing going on with everyone up everyone else’s butt.
I think it just means everyone is simultaneously up each other’s butt and hog-tied by political correctness. A little more minding your own business and a bit less dishonesty and butt-hurtedness would go a long way.
“Manspreading” is a perfect example. Instead of just politely asking somebody to move his leg a little if it’s in the way people will just apparently sit there stewing.
Now on the other side of that, the Western tradition of celebrated strong women (from prairie farm wife to English queen) is being relabeled “man a in woman’s body” basically from archetype to oddball.
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.