Sex-obsessed lefty horrified by 'toxic purity culture',
Posted on 02/24/2014 7:19:00 PM PST by ReformationFan
Hey, gals, want to avoid being raped? Put away that Lady Smith 38. No need for pepper spray. Self-defense classes? Not necessary. The solution is simple. The best defense against rape is to just cast away your "deeply troubling" Christianity and become a secularist slut.
So goes the advice of one Katie McDonough, Salon.com assistant editor, fertile fount of millennial wisdom and – well – and whatever else.
In an article published at Salon Feb. 20 titled, "The right's warped 'purity' culture: 4 ways evangelical views of sex took over America," Ms. McDonough provides an unvarnished glimpse into the profligate mind of the postmodern "progressive." (Yes, you read that right. Purity is warped and biblical sexual morality has taken over America.)
In what amounts to little more than an anti-Christian hit piece on Patrick Henry College – or "God's Harvard" as the evidently prone-position-prone journo pejoratively pokes – Ms. McDonough says that it's time for American women to reject all those biblically imposed "gender complementarian" norms and do away with our "toxic purity culture" once and for all. (Because, just look around. That dang ol' toxic purity is everywhere. What America really needs is more debauchery.)
It gets better.
Christianity causes rape, McDonough asserts, warning us that we suffer a "convergence of rape culture (whatever that is) and evangelical culture."
Get that? In this woman's "progressive" mind, when the lady says, "I'm saving myself for marriage," the bad guy hears, "Come and get it!" Still, Ms. McDonough does have this much right: It can't be rape if you're giving it away like peanuts on the plane.
She goes on: "While it may be tempting to draw a red line around Christian fundamentalist views on gender and sexuality to distinguish them from supposedly evolved 'secular' culture, there is considerable, uncomfortable overlap between the two." (The cognitive dissonance: It hurts!)
So, if I'm understanding her right – and, admittedly, Ms. McDonough's screed is borderline coherent – what she's essentially claiming is that, when it comes to sex, both secular America and Christian America are really just one big ball of puritanical prudery.
In fairness, I suppose she could actually believe this. It's all relative with the relativist. For the "anything goes"-type, Miley Cyrus may well be indistinguishable from the Virgin Mary. When you're colorblind, everything looks kinda gray.
She continues: "Evangelical Christianity makes visible – through purity pledges and doctrine assigning women the role of man's 'helpmate' – the norms and expectations about female virginity and subservience that so often remain hidden in the secular world." (Ooh. Loves me some man-hate.)
So, get it? Purity and virginity bad. Impurity and promiscuity good. I'll give Ms. McDonough this: She calls it like she sees it.
She goes on to make the same tired "war on women" claim we've heard so much of lately, warning the would-be chaste that biblical sexual morality is really "only about reproduction and male entitlement."
She then mocks columnist Susan Patton as "a joke" for "arguing in mainstream publications that women who have sex outside of marriage are setting themselves up for disaster and heartbreak." (Yeah, and?) This is in response to Patton's observation in a recent Wall Street Journal column that, "The grandmotherly message of yesterday is still true today: Men won't buy the cow if the milk is free." To which, with indignation, McDonough sneers: "This is purity culture passed off as 'common-sense' wisdom, which was published in a 'serious' and secular paper. In 2014." (So now "secular" is synonymous with slutty?)
McDonough's advice? Girls, give away that milk now, ya hear! (To which the frisky-frat-boy "bro-choice" choir sings: "Amen!" Hey, "pro-choice" gals, you do know that most "pro-choice" guys only support your so-called "abortion rights" so that you'll put out, right?)
Secular-"progressives" like McDonough have been working to deconstruct traditional sexual morality for generations. And today – more than at any point in history – they're having success in spades. Despite her wincey whines to the contrary, Ms. McDonough knows this to be true.
And so do you.
The goal is to impose – under penalty of law – the left's own moral relativist, sexual anarchist worldview. Hence, we see a flood of unelected liberal judges, for instance, arbitrarily ramming counterfeit "gay marriage" down the throats of millions of Americans, complete with the threat that Christians either join the delusion – and pretend that sin-centered "same-sex marriage" is real and right – or suffer the consequences.
Another example is Obamacare's despotic HHS abortion mandate that unconstitutionally requires Christian organizations to cast aside millennia-old church doctrine and get with the postmodern, pro-abort program.
The list goes on.
All of which makes McDonough's central declaration her most ludicrous: "[O]ne point remains clear," she proclaims. "Conservatives want to enshrine religiously defined norms about sexuality into law."
No, Ms. McDonough. The only people "enshrining sexuality" into law are "progressive" social engineers like Barack Obama, Justice Anthony Kennedy and the rest of you godless lefties – hell-bent on taking the screws to America.
Now that is "rape culture."
Please don’t include Islam i\with Christianity and Judaism.
My post was not about my inclusion of Islam, but her failure to include it
But your point is acknowledged
Yeah, it’s just that too many people think that C, J and I are all one big common faith.
Shoot, I used to think that, too, since that is what the Vatican 2 documents say... then I got saved and learned that Rome is often wrong.
“This woman deserves to be turned into a pillar of salt”
No need...she is already a pile of feces.
The other part of this is that sex can feel so good. The women become wired in a loop between feeling momentarily great (the orgasm or the power over the guy) and feeling empty.
To leave that loop means you are not only left empty, but are left to face the incredible, willful evil you’ve encouraged while bringing down the men and women who have been in your circle of influence.
Agree; thing is, that if it’s about power, the power is only insofar as much as the man wants sex. Once he is done, he ends up satisfied and happy and ready to leave. Then the woman is in the position of supplicant and often abandoned.
“What is a “rape culture”?”
A culture created by their broken psychologies. They live in this mental world where women are under constant attack, under constant threat of attack, all the while, they wish it would happen to validate their incessant paranoia.
That is often why women get worked up; it’s not outrage, but excitement since it validates their psychosis. They then demand the victim (genuine victim) join their world of craziness and actually try to brainwash victims into hating all men and blaming everyone but the actual attacker.
I could be wrong but I read somewhere that a common reaction to rape is to avoid any kind of sexual contact with men because it reminds them of their traumatic experience. That makes more sense to me.
liberal translation: “lie back and think of england”?
You are describing the other, much less destructive, outcome that can happen.
My bet is on this woman having been raped. It’s obvious she fits all the rest of my comments.
A Joan Walsh starter kit...perfect for Salon.
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.