Posted on 11/09/2001 8:37:30 AM PST by Starmaker
What kind of man is this?
He is fastidious about his appearance, his home and his possessions. He wants as much sex as possible and chooses sexual partners mostly on the basis of appearance. He is self-absorbed and doesn´t want emotional involvement or commitment. He thinks a woman would stifle him and children would be a burden.
Does this sound like gay behavior?
It is also the masculine ideal purveyed by Playboy magazine to men since the 1950´s.
At the End of Time, when they open the envelope labeled “What is the essence of manhood?” I suspect it will say: “Looking after women and children. Men act as G-d´s agent by creating and supporting new life. The family is the cellular unit of human life.” However, in 1972, 3 out of 4 male college students got their ideas about masculinity from Playboy, at an incalculable price to themselves, women, children, and society.
The similarity between the Playboy and homosexual ideal is no coincidence. The Kinsey Report (1948) shaped current mainstream attitudes to sex. It championed unfettered sexual expression and became the manifesto of the counterculture and the sexual revolution. It inspired Hugh Hefner to start Playboy in 1953. Essentially it said that aberrant sexual behavior was so common as to be normal. Thanks to psychologist Dr. Judith Reisman, we now know that Alfred Kinsey and the “Kinsey Report” were frauds. Kinsey, a zoologist at the University of Indiana, pretended to be a Conservative family man. In fact, he was a child molester and homosexual pervert who seduced his male students and forced his wife and associates to perform in homemade pornographic films.
Kinsey´s agenda, in Reisman´s words, was “to supplant what he saw as a narrow procreational Judeo Christian era with a promiscuous “anything goes bi/gay pedophile paradise.” (Crafting Gay Children: An Inquiry, p.4) More than 25% of his sample were prostitutes and prison inmates including many sex offenders. Kinsey, who died prematurely of disease associated with excessive masturbation, said 10 per cent of American men were gay when, in fact, only two per cent were. Kinsey and his team of pedophiles abused 2,000 infants and children to prove that they have legitimate sexual needs. Reisman concludes: “America´s growing libidinous pathologies…taught in schools…and reflected in our fine and popular arts, the press, law and public policy largely mirror the documented sexual psychopathologies of the Kinsey team itself.” (Kinsey: Crimes and Consequences)
Hugh Hefner said the Kinsey Report “produced a tremendous sexual awakening, largely because of media attention…I really view Kinsey as the beginning. Certainly the book was very important to me.” With messianic fervor, Playboy took its message of sexual freedom to the American male who, in the 1950´s and 1960´s, still consecrated sex for marriage. But the freedom was illusory. Playboy´s aim, the aim of all pornographers, was to hook men on the glossy fantasy. To do this, they had to prevent them from finding true satisfaction in marriage. In Reisman´s words, “Playboy was the first national magazine to exploit college men´s fears of women and family commitment. Playboy offered itself as a reliable, comforting substitute for monogamous heterosexual love.” (Soft Porn Plays Hardball, p 47)
Thus “sworn enemies,” Playboy and feminists, found common ground in hatred of healthy heterosexuality expressed in the nuclear family. As a result of the (homo)sexual revolution, society now suffers from epidemics of family breakdown, pornography, impotence, child sexual abuse, sadosexual violence, teen pregnancy, a cocktail of STD´s and, of course, AIDS. The birthrate has plummeted by 60% since 1960 and is now below replacement level. But we must not stand in the way of social progress.
Homosexuality is a developmental disorder caused when a male child fails to bond with his father. Psychologist Richard Cohen, in Coming Out Straight: Understanding and Healing Homosexuality (2000) argues persuasively that, by having sex with men, the adult gay is trying to compensate for father-love denied in adolescence. Cohen was a homosexual himself and is now married with three children. He attributes lesbianism to a woman´s reaction to being rebuffed or abused by her father. He has cured hundreds of homosexuals, but is under constant attack for undermining the gay political agenda, (i.e. redefining societal norms.)
Psychiatrist Jeffrey Satinover has pointed to another cause of homosexuality. A 1990 survey of 1000 gays shows that an older or more powerful partner physically assaulted 37% of them before the age of 19. (Homosexuality and American Public Life, 1999, p.24). In addition, according to Anne Moir in Why Men Don´t Iron, some men may be “born gay” due to fetal hormone imbalances. They seem to be a minority in a minority.
For many decades, gays were told that they were “sick” and cruelly persecuted. Their solution: convince the world that, in fact, it is heterosexuals who are sick. In 1973, they bullied the American Psychological Association into proclaiming homosexuality normal. Together with feminists (who believe heterosexuality is inherently oppressive) gays began to dismantle all heterosexual institutions: masculinity, femininity, marriage, the family, the boy scouts, sports, the military, the education system and our Judeo Christian heritage.
Using their position in the media, gays and their liberal supporters now largely dictate our cultural sensibility. They are responsible for the childish obsession with pornographic sex that pervades television, music videos and the Internet. This state of arrested human development is characteristic of homosexuals who have difficulty forming fulfilling long-term relationships. With straight women acting like men and vice-versa, we have become like them.
Gay liberation manuals talk about “normalizing” their sexuality and “de-sensitizing” straights by flaunting it. I was livid when I took my 10-year-old son to see Adam Sandler´s Billy Madison and heard one teenage male youth in the film casually ask another: ”Would you rather bone Pamela Anderson or a young Jack Nicholson?” Last week, on TV´s “Will and Grace,” Jack who is gay dons an apron that says “Kiss the cook” pretending he thought the second “o” was a “c”. Just as Communists once conned do-gooders to think radicalism was chic, gays define trendy for gullible liberals today.
Gay and feminist activists think traditional morality was invented to perpetuate an unjust status quo. In fact, morality is the accumulated wisdom of mankind regarding what is healthy and ultimately fulfilling. Perversion is deviation from what is healthy. Heterosexual morality places sex in the context of love and/or marriage because it “humanizes” the sexual appetite. It ensures that the most profound and intimate physical act between two people expresses a commensurate emotional-spiritual bond. This is the only way sex can be truly satisfying for both men and women. It is also healthy for society because it provides for the natural and necessary outcome of love, children.
With Hugh Hefner´s help, Alfred Kinsey detached sex from love and procreation. He reduced it to another physical function like urinating. Homosexuals seem to champion anonymous bathroom sex; some fornicate through a hole in a cubicle wall. Most have 10s-100s of partners each year. In less extreme form, this is the model that heterosexuals have adopted. Recently a social columnist at the National Post enviously described straight couples she knows who have just broken up: “they´re out partying, having the time and the sex, it seems, of their lives.”
In conclusion, the “sexual revolution” was really a triumph of perverse homosexual norms and values. The gay-feminist agenda is to redefine healthy as deviant and vice-versa and they have succeeded. In forty short years, almost all sexual constraints have dissolved and heterosexual society is reeling. The cultural and social breakdown will only get worse. We need a counterrevolution.
It's kind of wierd that many seem to go right into the nervous laughter, heh heh heh kind of mode. Great article.
Boys who read "Playboy" growing up are straight because they appreciate the boobilicious magic of a nekkid woman.
I hope the clarifies the situation.
Count me among the perverts then. My wife and I both enjoy porn from time to time, and we're in a healthy relationship (8 years and getting better each day). Kind of throws a whole monkey wrench in the "porn destroys society" dogma, eh?
Sexuality - liberals would rather see many men have sex with many women. According to liberals, sex should be more open, and casual sex, be it heterosexual or homosexual, should be more common. Conservatives would rather see sex confined to married couples.
Child raising - of course, it's hard to separate sexuality and child rearing, since one is the result of the other. Liberals would like to see more kids born out of wedlock, taken care of by the collective (i.e. socialized daycare). According to the panultimate liberal, Hillary, it takes a village to raise a child. What she really means is it takes a "commune", or at least socialized daycare. Conservatives would rather see children raised by families.
Education - liberals are ardent supporters of public schools, even if these schools are failing miserably in their goal of educating our future generations. Conservatives, on the other hand, have no problem with private school vouchers and even home schooling if it comes to that.
Health care - we all know what Hillary would like to do with health care. And we all know that conservatives oppose it very strongly.
Personal finances - liberals favor increasing government control of the economy by higher taxation, which ultimately results in wealth being redistributed amongst the members of the collective. Liberals also favor the collective social security system, administered by the "commune" (the federal government). Conservatives, by contrast, favor lower taxes and private retirement accounts.
So, if you want "the collective" to control everything, be a liberal and vote as such. If you think you can make better decisions about your own personal sexuality, if you think you can raise and educate your children better than "the collective", if you think you are a better financial manager than "the collective", and if you think health care is better outside the controlling hands of "the collective", then you are a conservative.
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.