Posted on 12/13/2016 4:26:26 AM PST by Kaslin
"So why do so many women - and men - call Trump a misogynist?This reminds me of something I heard Prager say years ago. It was in reference to a couple of college professors who were animal rights movement fanatics. They stated and taught their students that there was absolutely no difference between a human baby and any other animal's young - that they were absolutely equal in both value and rights and that killing an animal was the moral equivalent of murdering a human being. They made it very clear they saw a newborn child as no more deserving of special consideration than any kitten or baby snake.Because he has so often described women in sexual terms. Because, as the charge goes, he "objectifies" women.
Now, before responding to that, it is worth noting that this clearly disturbs college-educated women and men far more than it does those who did not attend college, which either means the college-educated are wiser on this matter, or the non-college-educated are wiser.
As in most matters, my position is that college makes most people less wise. You have to go to college to think that men who see women they find attractive as sex objects hate women. Throughout history, women understood that men sexually objectify women, that this is male nature and has nothing - repeat, nothing - to do with hatred. Only the well-educated equate sexual objectification with hatred."
Prager's response to hearing this was classic and I've never forgotten it. It seems applicable in so much of what we hear from the Left and the SJWs on daily basis nowadays.
Dennis Prager: The foolishness of that statement I can only attribute to higher education. You have to have gone to college to say something that stupid.
At my fitness club, many, many women would look more attractive in those sweat pants rather than in stretch yoga pants that were not designed for their figures.
Only “real” men view women as sex objects.
That picture of Chelsea looks like Howdy Doody in drag..
If asked that question, my response is, "I'm looking at exactly what you are trying to get me to look at."
Good article. Thanks for posting it all.
If it was all about height, they’d be wearing comfy platforms.
High heels are painfully angled to make the legs look longer, the butt stick out and the walk more delicate. All traits of female attractiveness
True. Yoga pants are much better.
Every single high school to early 20’s guy can attest, it’s not her body but her mind that they are initially atteacted to...
Don’t know if I could say the same for girls thinking but the chubby guys at that time always seemed to be by themselves.
Prager superbly stating the obvious.
It matters not how many reasons Liberals have for avoiding reality; the point is they avoid reality by creating a notion of reality that suits their dogma.
That observation led me to my Liberal Theory. The basic premise of the theory is that Liberals lack the human genome that allows humans process reality.
It is true that one can reality but it is also true that one cannot avoid the consequences resulting from reality avoidance.
A couple of adages come to mind when discussing the relationship between men and women.
Men see women as sex objects whilst women see men as success objects.
Women give sex to get love whilst men give love to get sex.
Trump’s words bring this reality to the surface; women like sex with successful men. What is sad about this observation is that it was previously unknown by Liberals. Now they know but they can’t accept the reality. Perhaps they lack a gene?
Is that Monica? Her hand is in the correct shape, and her mouth is open.
“If it wasn’t for the sex, really, how many men would have anything to do with a women? If it wasn’t for babies, how many women would have anything to do with a man? Our society is cuckoo. Fleshbots and artificial insemination, brave new world ahead...”
Many women are unstable and hate men due to the trauma/confusion of being truly objectified. Especially if it happened as a child.
If casual sex is made irrelevant via machines, females and males would act very differently toward one another.
If a man can get virtual sexual gratification from impossibly hot females at the touch of a button, real females around him will no longer appear as sex objects.
I think virtual sex would benefit society overall and make people far less obsessed with getting sex from others. Females and males would become friendlier. The negative is some would get addicted and never go outside...
Oh, that’s a Bieber concert. I thought from all the crying, anguished faces it was Hillary HQ on election night.
If it weren't fer that thang, there'd be bounty on 'em.
You forgot that your mother is a woman. Do you hate her too, as it’s obvious by your comment that you hate women.
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.