Posted on 02/16/2005 7:35:13 AM PST by MisterRepublican
If you watch a lot of cable television, you've probably seen the ads, especially late at night or early in the morning. The "Girls Gone Wild" videos promise to show you coeds behaving badly on the beach during Spring Break or getting down and dirty at Mardi Gras. The formula is simple: find a group of nubile young things drunk out of their heads and induce them to pull up their T-shirts or pull down their shorts and expose themselves to anyone willing to fork over $19.95 for the privilege. The most recent incarnation features gangster rapper Snoop Dogg hawking fresh, young flesh.
Call me old-fashioned, but I just can't imagine what these girls were thinking when they agreed to "show off their assets," as one knock-off video boasts. These young women aren't pros -- they are not part of the pornographic underworld -- but ordinary teens and twenty-somethings who one day will be wives and mothers. One young girl, who was 17 at the time she allowed herself to be photographed topless, has already sued the producers of "The Guy Game," a video game featuring females in various stages of undress. Her suit claims she did not give a "valid or enforceable consent or release" for photos to be used by the video game makers. "Plaintiff is still a teenager and wishes to attend college, develop her career and be active in her community and church." Good luck.
What is most shocking about this phenomenon is that we're not all that shocked by it. Modesty used to be considered a natural female attribute. No more. Just take a look around next time you're at the mall.
(Excerpt) Read more at humaneventsonline.com ...
I'm younger than you and I notice it.
Look around you at the black people living in America today. The vast majority have some "white" features. Why do you think that is?
If you think that white slaveowners and their male friends and family weren't enjoying their female slaves, you're hopelessly naive.
NYC, mid 1800's tenanements.(sp)
I think that number is too high.
I imagine daddy, his sons, visiting male family members and assorted male guests were all free to sample the pleasures of the female slaves of the the household.
No, I don't think the antebellum South bore quite that much resemblance to your college dorm.
My daughter loves her Barbie's, but thinks the Bratz are "yucky" which is just fine by me. I have no problem with the Barbies.......I played with them until I was 10 or 11...and so did all my friends.
I'm inclined to agree with you regarding your friend. while daddy is generally who brings the Barbie accessories home (he has 2 nieces, so lots of experience) I would venture to say a Bratz would get thrown out the door by him!!!!!
A good start.
Today, 1 in 3 pregnancies ends in abortion.
Sanity is a beautiful thing. :-)
I see the obstacle to the extended family as one of space in the house, AND desire. It is difficult to have mother/father in the same house as you are on the prowl for either "good time"s or husband/wife number "X".
I see too much sick humor about being nice to your kids because they pick your nursing home. I have also personally seen the nightmarish nursing homes, not good for animals let alone humans.
Of course if a builder was REALLY smare they would start building homes with TWO or THREE masters suites. (iow each with seperate bathroom and REALLY good soundproofing.)
Think of it this way- the title to a car is owned by the father in a family of 5. Though there is only one legal owner of the car, all 5 family members derive a benefit from that car. Same thing with slaves.
No, I don't think the antebellum South bore quite that much resemblance to your college dorm.
I guess it's just a strange quirk of nature that so many of the descendants of slaves in this country have at least some "white" physical traits not shared by their contemporaries in West Africa.
Laws against miscegenation didn't stop anything. Imagine what you will but when men know they have free liberty they will take it. A woman of color had no rights and a white man didn't need to be a slave owner to have a white wife and a little brown sugar on the side.
There is a wide valley between sex toy and pedestal goddess who should giggle and blush at the thought of sex.
Womanly virtue is a myth of history. People should face facts.
We've become too mobile as a society for that to work. Few people spend their entire lives in the same place anymore.
I can imagine plenty of reasons that are a far cry from the constant bachelor party atmosphere that you imagined. Consider that a single serial rapist could impregnate dozens of black slaves all by himself without the societal approval that you imagine. And once you have mixes-race children in the pool of slaves, those white genes will get passed around. And I do note that most place people living in America today, while they often have some European heritage, rarely seem to have anything close to the European heritage that your constant sex party scenario would produce.
You are also ignoring another reason why many blacks have white genes. Black people and white people, gasp!, actually married each other from time to time. In fact, one of my Jamaican friends in nearly as Scottish as I am and it was entirely through marriage (his grandmother on one side and great-grandmother on the other side were both white) and he has, gasp! married a white woman. But thanks to the "one drop" rule of race, all of those mixed-race children wind up being considered black so they will go on to marry blacks and keep those genes in the black gene pool.
If you think that white slaveowners and their male friends and family weren't enjoying their female slaves, you're hopelessly naive.
Do you have any evidence that this was as widespread as you are suggesting? If not, then I think you are simply making up facts to support your position. I call that "hopelessly grasping at straws". Really, this is exactly what the feminists tried to pull when they claimed that more women were beaten on Superbowl Sunday than any other day of the year without any evidence to support that assertion. I suppose you are going to claim that what really matters is that you are "raising awareness", right?
Womanly virtue was applied hypocritically. It's the whole madonna/whore thing. Guys have always wanted the bad girl to party with, but they wanted to marry a virtuous virgin. I always considered that to be BS. I never had a problem with dating, and eventually marrying, a woman who enjoyed a good time.
Similarly, men have always been less bound by standards of virture than women. A mistress, as long as she was maintained discreetly, has always been a common thing for men of means.
There's no question that it happened. It happened a lot. Wives hated it, they said so. (cf Mary Chesnut's diary) Of course, much of the hanky-panky was probably conducted by unmarried teenage sons, who had less to lose if they were discovered. (Well: nothing to lose, really.)
The idea that the ordinary Southern plantation functioned as a sexual smorgasbord for visitors isn't too accurate, though.
But do you even hear yourself? You're appealing to the behavior of slaveholders, of all people, to prove ... what? That sexual immorality has always existed? No, really? Anyone who reads the Bible already knows that. That it's okay for people to misbehave today because slaveholders did it? Slaveholders ... ???
Look, slaveholders treated black women like cattle because slaveholders treated black people like cattle. What else is new?
You'll be "old" someday too 8-)
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.