Posted on 02/13/2007 10:13:12 AM PST by jacknhoo
On a college campus, where diversity is touted as "an indispensable element of academic excellence," diversity of ideology is being squelched. Not wanting to reveal her identity for fear of endangering her job, Dr. Miriam Grossman anonymously wrote Unprotected, a book which provides an unpopular explanation to the epidemic of suicide, depression, eating disorders and sexually transmitted diseases on America's college campuses.
A psychiatrist at UCLA Student Psychological Services, Dr. Grossman says that she was "outed" on Dr. Laura Schlessinger's popular radio program. She is now speaking to organizations and on radio programs that recognize the value of her unpopular analysis of the consequences of the sexual revolution. The Family Research Council recently hosted Dr. Grossman as part of its lecture series to answer questions about her work.
Dr. Grossman speaks - as she describes it - from her experience in the "trenches of the college campus environment." Popular explanations for widespread depression and suicide among college students include parental expectations, bad national leadership, rising tuition and lack of sleep. While psychiatrists are searching for victims to diagnose, Dr. Grossman explains that the majority of her profession is overlooking the "casualties of a radical social agenda."
This "radical social agenda" that she speaks of is the combined effort to normalize harmful sexual behavior, equalize all sexual encounters (as long as latex is used), define individuals by their "sexual orientation" and assume that any desire must be fulfilled (except the desire for fatty foods and cigarettes). Health services on campuses warn students to "use protection" and even provide contraceptives free of charge. What they fail to protect against is the inevitable emotional damage, particularly to women, that results from casual sex.
Television shows like "Sex and the City" and movies such as "The Holiday" present women acting like men when it comes to sex: no emotional attachment and no expectation of commitment. Female college students begin to believe that this is the natural way women should treat relationships. Dr. Grossman explains that the biochemistry of the female body rejects this notion entirely.
Oxytocin is a chemical hormone that is released in women during sexual activity and induces bonding: "Neuroscientists have discovered that specific brain cells and chemicals are involved in attachment. … [T]he same chemical that flows through a woman's veins as she nurses her infant, promoting a powerful and selfless devotion, is found in college women 'hooking up' with men whose last intention is to bond," Dr. Grossman states in her book.
The young women that Dr. Grossman treats do not understand what causes their depression because there is no public discussion about the damage sexual promiscuity generates. It is not politically correct to acknowledge differences between men and women and how they are wired. SNAC, UCLA's Student Nutrition Action Committee, provides helpful information to students regarding how to avoid obesity, eating disorders and other health-related issues. However, there is no comparable service telling young women how to avoid the emotional devastation and depression which results from "sexual experimentation."
Dr. Janice Shaw Crouse, Senior Fellow of CWA's Beverly LaHaye Institute, states the sad truth in her article "Sex and Consequences":
The nation's 17 million college and university students are being denied truth, while their risky behavior is condoned by the prevalent social agenda on campus. Dispassionate objectivity and compassionate concern for an individual's health and well-being have been replaced by social activism.
Fortunately, Dr. Grossman is countering this agenda with "just the facts".
The sinfulness of liberalism.
I recall hearing that the writers of Sex and the City modeled the show on the lives of four Gay men and then made the characters women. Kind of like Nicholson's As Good as it Gets character creating his book's female character by thinking of a man and then taking away any responsibility.
Excellent post. Freedom of speech and intellectual honesty are almost entirely absent in our nation's universities, which are merely incubators of radical PC leftist orthodoxy.
WTF????
Perhaps if the radical Leftist Professors who infest todays universities would quit teaching their own deranged hatred for this Country, these young folks wouldn't be worked up into such a lather.
Also, I don't like this portrayal of women as helpless victims of a predatory culture. Part of the college experience is finding out who you are and what you like. If something doesn't work for you, if you don't like it, then you try something else. If these girls are having this much trouble with hooking-up, then why aren't they taking responsibility for themselves and trying something else?
Two decades ago I knew a (then)young female doctor who performed the same functions at a university as Dr. Grossman has been performing. Though for ethical reasons she would withhold many details, she told me enough of what was going on to make clear the extent of it. It kept her in an ongoing state of depression which she absorbed from her patients. We have permitted a toxic culture to be created in our country that if not reversed will destroy us. Kudos to Dr. Grossman.
The Dr is right on the money,"casualties of a radical social agenda" aka social engineering.Unfortunately i don't think her insight and honesty will endear her with her colleagues.
The "bad national leadership" part of the popular explanations (for teen depression/suicide) miraculously disappears during Democrat administrations, I suspect.
Physically speaking, all woman are wired a certain way. As it states in the article, even the most simple affectionate acts, such as kissing, release the same hormones that breast feeding does. These hormones build affection and connection. The female immune system recognizes a man's semen as foreign and attacks it as such. After certain amount of time, approximately six months, her body ceases its rejection of it and treats it as its own. (this does show that in some physical manner, a husband and wife are one body, but that's a tangent) Women who engage in numerous sexual encounters with differing partners run the risk of lowering their immune system in a manner that it wasn't necessarily intended to. Not all women are going to react the same way emotionally, but they are going undergo the same physiological reactions.
What I got from the article was that all women react the same way emotionally due to the physiological changes that they undergo. I don't agree that that's the case.
Back in the day, my best friend was one of those promiscuious girls. After all, we came of age in 1980, before AIDs when the most you had to worry about was the main two STDs and getting pregnant.
We were different.
She didn't have a problem with a flavor of the week. She used to meet guys and sleep with them if not on the first date, then on the second. She always referred to it as "making love" which it wasn't. She was in this semi-permanent state of dispair because the guys didn't love her and didn't come back or call after three or four meetings. She always had the guys.
I had a problem with being a piece of meat. Consequently, I never had the dates.
She died from AIDs 5 weeks after she turned 30, 5 days before I turned 30. It still sucks.
The culture is against a woman who choses to withold sexual relations in order to develope a loving relationship with a life partner. The women you know , if they are changing boyfriends and having sex every few weeks, I doubt are truly happy. They may be checking out the field. But most women wante a robust sexual relationship with a man they can depend and trust to be there when they are pregnant or getting old. Nobody likes to have multiple fathers for their children. That gets very complicated.
I also know plenty of men who bond emotionally based on what they tried to treat as a casual sexual encounter.
"I think of a man, and I take away reason and accountability." - Melvin Udall
It's not necessary that ~every~ single person on the planet falls neatly into the model. The model can still have meaning and say something important and useful. Generalizations are like that.
These women you speak of may indeed be perfectly happy and unaffected by it all. But they also may be fooling themselves. There's no way to really know in time to do anything about it.
I think what Dr. Grossman is trying to point out is that they don't understand where their trouble is coming from, because of the cultural and mass-media messages that they're bombarded with encouraging them to be promiscuous.
but I am sure our libertarian/liberal/leftist friends will still tell us how pornograghy in magazines, movies and tv and provacative music, and free condoms and free drugs are all VICTIMLESS....yep, that's what they'll say....
and they will also tell us that just because they are supporting immorality in movies and magazines and music, they aren't really the "problem" at all...
(Was this the GOOD Grossman or the BAD one???)
you caught that too!
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.