Posted on 09/20/2010 10:29:57 PM PDT by Christian Cage
Recently, Christine O’Donnell, a candidate associated with the Tea Party, won the Republican Senate primary in Delaware who among many other things sued a former employer for “gender discrimination” claiming that she suffered “mental anguish”. What O’Donnell is also known for is her views on sex — particularly her anti-masturbation views. O’Donnell appeared on MTV back in the 90′s explaining her views of sex and masturbation which is available here on youtube.
Watch the youtube video and take note of the end. Except for a token guy, it’s a group of women. O’Donnell even says about her presumably future husband masturbating, “If he already knows what pleases him, and he can please himself, then why am I in the picture?” This quote exposes the undercurrent behind anti-masturbation attitudes. It’s not so much anti-masturbation but anti men masturbating. People against masturbation have a fear that men might actually have an alternative to women. The answer to O’Donnell’s question should be obvious. A woman would ideally be providing more than a man’s hand both sexually and not.
When it comes to a woman who can’t/won’t contribute to a relationship non-sexually (a growing group of women particularly among younger women), and who is planning on trying to control a man through providing a minimum of sex, then she has a lot to worry about when it comes to men realizing that their hand will do more for them than a woman will. The obvious answer to this is for women not to be harpies who withhold sex as a means of controlling men, but it’s unlikely they will change in that regard. Instead, we will see more anti-male masturbation shaming language.
(Excerpt) Read more at the-spearhead.com ...
Yes. She recommended it as a way of avoiding the clapner.
I’ll bet this guy has lots of magazines in his lobby now! lol
Liberals hate Rove. Liberals hate O'Donnell. Liberals love Rove for attacking O'Donnell.
Nah, doesn't work either.
Lesson: Don't waste time with logic in dealing with liberals.
Humorous? It’s disgusting.
Liberals hate Rove.
Liberals have hated Rove probably more than Bush and about the same as Cheney for 10 years.
Liberals have no idea who O’Donnell is.
Liberals have a more positive opinion of O’Donnell based on Roves attacks.
Liberals like O’Donnell.
It most assuredly is the case.
I can tell you most definitely that that’s how it’s working with the Ron Paul people.
They hate Rove, Kristol, Krauthammer, the neocons in general, and when they see the neocons attack her, they say, well there’s clearly something especially good about O’Donnell. They had no idea who she was 2 weeks ago.
At least the libertarians are logical about it.
Oh, I think I get what you’re saying. You’re saying that reasoning with Liberals is a fools errand?
I think that O’Donnell did get some $ from Liberals, based on their gut reaction to Rove attacking her. But it didn’t take long to figure out that she wasn’t a liberal. Once that happened, it was time for them all to stop, but it went on too long, I think.
Don’t kid yourself. Masturbation was alive and well long before porn became mainstream and easy to acquire.
He does if he has a sense of humor! LOL!
Doesn't it just crack you up the way "Liberals" (a misnomer of course, there's nothing liberal about these people) get all histrionic about sex, witchcraft, race--anything that suits their purpose?
It's all strategy. They don't give a damn about any of this, but they think/hope that decent people--viz. those who oppose their agenda--will. And their agenda is nothing more than POWER FOR THEMSELVES--POWER AND LUXURIES. Anybody who doesn't see this is willfully blind, stupid, and a fool.
Apparently "Liberals" believe their own propaganda. They think The Resistance consists of bigotted troglodytes. This is projection. The bigotted troglodytes are the so-called "Liberals" themselves.
Yep, meanwhile their own party is made up of the biggest freak show of all...
Can we please put this non-issue to rest already?
Indeed I have tried to do exactly that in my own post. It probably didn’t come across as that, but my real point was not to make some big deal about it. Some loser masturbates and does porn, so what? Just because a religion considers something sinful does not mean that they are somehow interested in imposing it on everyone else. The idea of anyone admitting their beliefs is actually good, as Christine O’Donnell did in this situation. The people who you should worry about are the hypocrites, and the ones who don’t admit as to what is religion to them (i.e. abortionists, AGW, and SSM advocates) because the people who don’t admit what is religion to them turn out bad science and try to impose the view on everyone else.
Porn, or should I say, erotic art, has been around longer than the internet, movies, and photographs have been. Even classical artists admitted to having erotic intentions with some of the paintings and the sculptures that were done.
The pope at one time even censored the statues within Vatican city, considering them erotic.
If a guy does it every day then there’s a real problem.
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.