Unavailable for comment.
Your temporal bigotry is evident. I belive that every non-retarded progenitor in history understood that intercourse = procreation. Yes, it so easy a caveman could understand it.
Posted on 01/15/2007 8:04:12 AM PST by shrinkermd
The Sixties generation thought everything should be free. But only a few decades later the hippies were selling water at rock festivals for $5 a bottle. But for me the price of “free love” was even higher.
I sacrificed what should have been the best years of my life for the black lie of free love. All the sex I ever had — and I had more than my fair share — far from bringing me the lasting relationship I sought, only made marriage a more distant prospect...
And I am not alone. Count me among the dissatisfied daughters of the sexual revolution, a new counterculture of women who are realising that casual sex is a con and are choosing to remain chaste instead.
I am 37, and like millions of other girls, was born into a world which encouraged young women to explore their sexuality. It was almost presented to us as a feminist act. In the 1960s the future Cosmopolitan editor Helen Gurley Brown famously asked: Can a woman have sex like a man? Yes, she answered because “like a man, [a woman] is a sexual creature”. Her insight launched a million “100 new sex tricks” features in women’s magazines. And then that sex-loving feminist icon Germaine Greer enthused that “groupies are important because they demystify sex; they accept it as physical, and they aren’t possessive about their conquests”.
(Excerpt) Read more at timesonline.co.uk ...
Many forms of it are. In this instance, I was referring to Catholicism, which I know is quite repressive, from personal experience.
Not sure therapy by todays standards is gonna help.
That's why I used the word 'maybe'. Besides, unless you were in the session, you don't really know what was said, perhaps this particular lady heard what she wanted to hear. Many people go to counseling to be further confirmed in their erroneous views.
It calls to mind that old joke: "How many psychologists does it take to change a light bulb?" Answer: It can't be done, the light bulb has to want to change.
Let's not overstate it. The basic incongruence that many of these women are finding out later in life is that if they spend a decade not valuing their own sexuality, by what legitimate claim can they expect anybody else to value it?
Something given away cavalierly tends to have a lower perceived value.
Ultimately, women (and men) who go down this road have no legitimate expectation for anyone else to value their sexuality.
Let's not overstate it. The basic incongruence that many of these women are finding out later in life is that if they spend a decade not valuing their own sexuality, by what legitimate claim can they expect anybody else to value it?
Something given away cavalierly tends to have a lower perceived value.
Ultimately, women (and men) who go down this road have no legitimate expectation for anyone else to value their sexuality.
OK, but that doesn't disprove my point. In fact, withdrawal is perfectly analogous to binging and purging. We all recognize the latter as intrinsically evil, but not the former. I suspect that there is some rationalization going on.
Masectomies are particularly effective. ;)
A vasectomy is a form of maiming. Nothing more. It certainly has no medical or health value.
That's what I meant.
You're the 1 who had to pontificate on the woman who wrote the article.
Indeed, it would. But I'm not trying to make any money off of a book, or ask people here to validate my sexual choices. I'd go to DU for that!
No Noah did not. But Lot slept with his two daughters after the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah (Genisis 19).
Your temporal bigotry is evident. I belive that every non-retarded progenitor in history understood that intercourse = procreation. Yes, it so easy a caveman could understand it.
Correlation is not causation. You know how the Pill works, don't you? It fools the body into 'thinking' it is already pregnant, mimicing what happens during real pregnancy, when ova are not released into the Fallopian tubes.
On balance that's true, but also note that women tend to start feeling love for men they are just having sex with. I'm reminded of an article I read about sex on college campuses. A young woman was enjoying a 'friends with benefits' relationship with another guy. At first it is noted how she describes it as 'cool,' and no emotional entanglements - they are just friends who have sex.
Well, that is until he decided to be 'friends with benefits' with a friend of hers - not in addition to, but instead of. This threw her into a state of depression and she needed serious counseling.
Well, I'm glad she wasn't emotionally involved! In fact, she was only getting good at lying to herself. The whole thing was a sham, but that wasn't surprising to anybody paying attention.
I think these scenes are not uncommon.
Interesting theory. So, that would mean if we forced them to act heterosexually, and marry, then those genes would be passed on to future generations? That's another good reason to let them have each other, and keep straight people from accidentally marrying a homosexual. Of course, this all goes out the window with lesbians with turkey basters...
>>A vasectomy is a form of maiming. Nothing more. It certainly has no medical or health value.<<
It also prevents you from siring children.
Ya know what? I think many Christians actually fall into the stereotype that liberals use to describe them: that we are sexual prudes. Yet my wife and I really LOVE The Song Of Solomon.
We are not pure animals. We only occupy animal type vessels. We need food to live, yet unlike animals, it is more than instinct. We have made it very pleasurable - with God's blessing. Refuelling can be fun. I love Pizza, nachos, and oysters on the half shell. And Zucchini soup - mmmmm.
Likewise with sex. For animals it is mearely instinctual and required for procreation. For us humans, it is also a major pleasure activity - within the confines of marriage. And then, just like cake is not eaten for it's nutritional value, it is not always pursued for its raw purpose of procreation. It is FUN and also very much enhances the intimate relationship between a husband and wife far beyond the physical.
But apparently some Christians really ARE the prudes that so many liberals think we are.
I'm not one of them. My wife and I celebrate our relationship - often - and not because we want more kids. If God wants us to have more kids, we are not going to be successful at stopping Him!
I am the conservative, pro-life balance in university teaching. Instead of using the common terms, I just ask what's wrong with babies and say, "I love babies." I tell them how much my grandchildren mean to me, how much fun we had with our children, even though two had the same terminal illness.
Her real name is Dawn Eden Goldstein.
I apologize for what seems like an insult. I do actually like men and prefer them generally to women; I myself am a "tomboy" who can't relate to most "woman things". But that doesn't stop me from recognizing what's generally true of men, any more than this article itself says "women are different from men".
Of course, I could also note that men on FR even are great for poking fun at and complaining about women (when not lusting after them) and "broad-brushing" all kinds of things about them.
Apparently her mother filled in the blanks.
All's good then...
:)
"Human interaction" is not "human nature". Human interaction is something you do. Human nature is what you are.
Maybe you're unconsciously parroting the utilitarian lie that what you are and what you do are the same thing. That's another fallacy that you won't find orthodox Christians accepting.
I offer as proof the fact that even traditional religionists have changed the old rules when they saw fit. Forty-two years ago, people were wondering if someone who married a divorced person (Nelson Rockefeller's wife had been divorced) were fit to be President.
Last time I checked, traditional religion didn't address the qualifications for the U.S. Presidency.
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.