This is something I have been deliberating and turning over in my head for the past whole year. I just have not been able to articulate it into a coherent essay until now.
This whole mess needs to go crashing down. It should crash and crumble, but hopefully only causing absolute minimal damage. Then it needs to be wiped and scrubbed clean away, it needs to extricate itself from people's lives so that it does not cause any more social depravity. Then social order and decorum needs to be restored.
This is when I shook myself awake and realized, wait a minute. I am doing the exact same thing. I read/heard several female characters in movies and stuff, or pop culture icons that have definitely had sex.
And I thought, "Oh that’s good, they pass muster because they are definitely not virgins. They are on par with the general rhetoric of modern day." I was watching a Charlie Rose interview of a playwright author. She wrote a play called "Dirty Blonde" centering around Mae West's life, one of those actresses from the early days of hollywood. At one point in the interview she remarked that mae west "had been with a lot of men. A lot of men. Which I think is a good thing." I remember being inexplicably cheered by that.
They always complain and moan and groan about how the religious right-wing conservatives, “How dare the conservatives pass judgment on wmn that have had sex!” They squawk and spew, “How dare those evil judgmental conservatives judge women for having sex!!! They're so evil!!!!”
These irritating, self-proclaimed liberals complain because religious conservatives assert that a woman's only worth is based in her sexuality.
They might have a semi-solid congealed argument -- if they didn't do the exact same thing. For all their hemming and hawing about how the conservative religious zealots judge women based on sex, liberals do the exact same thing. Only the liberals approach it from a slightly different angle.
The liberals also fervently believe that a woman's only worth is surrounding her sexuality. There is abundant overwhelming evidence toward this fact. They are every bit as culpable.
These liberals keep saying that conservatives butt into women's personal private business. Oh, but <they> sure as hell don't seem to have any problem worming their way into women's personal, private business.
Liberals are always spewing preachy, didactic crap about how a woman is NOT worthy of attention if she IS a virgin. They judge women for NOT having sex.
Actually, they do even worse than that. They actually go a couple rungs lower. They go so far as to say that unless a woman is a slut, that she is not worthy of their brand of "respect." (Guffaw.) They are every bit as judgmental as the conservatives. Only in their skewed, warped sense of morality, they judge a woman as being somehow less of a woman if she has NOT had multiple sex partners.
They complain that religious conservatives do not approve of a woman if she has sex. But shockingly, liberals do not approve of a woman if she has <not> had sex.
They don't even necessarily bring up the topic of virgins specifically. According to them, if a woman is not a full-fledged slt, then she is automatically deemed a prude. Unworthy of acknowledgment, not worth recognition as a whole human being.
In the grand scheme of things, sex before marriage per se is not really that big of a deal. I get that. There are much more pressing concerns to deal with in life. Many people have had sex with their boyfriend or girlfriend before they actually walk down the aisle.
However, it is not just a matter of females or males having sex. That is not "good enough" for the perpetrators of those aggravating women's mags. They concern themselves with sheer numbers. And they insist, absolutely insist, that staggering numbers alone is what determines the degree of strength/independence/etc. of a woman in today's modern world.
Read one of those stupid women's magazines. They accuse women of being a prude if she simply possesses some self-respect, and would rather prefer not sleep with anything on two legs. (Or three or four, whatever.) look at TV -- Will and Grace, Friends, Sex and the City.
It sure as hell ain't just the women's magazines. It is teeming, festering the airwaves all over creation.
that if they do not drown themselves in the pool of filth__
__that if they do not suffocate themselves in prnnn and striging and prostituion, and if they do not shout from the mountaintops that it is empowering.
if they do not abjectly smother themselves into the__
They lob accusations at her that she is not being "free" with her body. They hurl [[[__putative ]] that she does not have this silly, notorious, ubiquitous, and incorrectly-defined (I'm pretty sure) "body confidence" that has been popping up all over the airwaves like weeds.
They accuse her of not being a strong capable woman in charge of her own life. They accuse her of being ashamed of her body. They claim that she is somehow unable to navigate this modern world as a strong, capable, independent being that is able to take care of herself in this day and age. (By the way, do they sound like broken records to anyone else? They keep using that asinine phrase "strong capable woman in charge of her own life" so much that it has lost any meaning whatsoever.)
The liberals wring their hands and concern themselves with whether or not women have had sex -- just as obsessively as they accuse conservatives of doing. They have made it their personal duty_____
And if a woman has not, then she does not earn the liberals' approval.
Never mind the fact that sex is an extremely personal, private issue. These liberals, simply by dint of being liberals, think that they have the -[[[[[unridled, unabashed___no no.... they should be un___ like when govt. can go in and just infringe on people's inalienable rights.]]]]] right to___
This whole mess needs to go crashing down. It should crash and crumble, but hopefully only causing absolute minimal damage. Then it needs to be wiped and scrubbed clean away, it needs to extricate itself from people's lives so that it does not cause any more social depravity. Then social order and decorum needs to be restored.
This is when I shook myself awake and realized, wait a minute. I am doing the exact same thing. I read/heard several female characters in movies and stuff, or pop culture icons that have definitely had sex.
And I thought, "Oh that’s good, they pass muster because they are definitely not virgins. They are on par with the general rhetoric of modern day." I was watching a Charlie Rose interview of a playwright author. She wrote a play called "Dirty Blonde" centering around Mae West's life, one of those actresses from the early days of hollywood. At one point in the interview she remarked that mae west "had been with a lot of men. A lot of men. Which I think is a good thing." I remember being inexplicably cheered by that.
They always complain and moan and groan about how the religious right-wing conservatives, “How dare the conservatives pass judgment on wmn that have had sex!” They squawk and spew, “How dare those evil judgmental conservatives judge women for having sex!!! They're so evil!!!!”
These irritating, self-proclaimed liberals complain because religious conservatives assert that a woman's only worth is based in her sexuality.
They might have a semi-solid congealed argument -- if they didn't do the exact same thing. For all their hemming and hawing about how the conservative religious zealots judge women based on sex, liberals do the exact same thing. Only the liberals approach it from a slightly different angle.
The liberals also fervently believe that a woman's only worth is surrounding her sexuality. There is abundant overwhelming evidence toward this fact. They are every bit as culpable.
These liberals keep saying that conservatives butt into women's personal private business. Oh, but <they> sure as hell don't seem to have any problem worming their way into women's personal, private business.
Liberals are always spewing preachy, didactic crap about how a woman is NOT worthy of attention if she IS a virgin. They judge women for NOT having sex.
Actually, they do even worse than that. They actually go a couple rungs lower. They go so far as to say that unless a woman is a slut, that she is not worthy of their brand of "respect." (Guffaw.) They are every bit as judgmental as the conservatives. Only in their skewed, warped sense of morality, they judge a woman as being somehow less of a woman if she has NOT had multiple sex partners.
They complain that religious conservatives do not approve of a woman if she has sex. But shockingly, liberals do not approve of a woman if she has <not> had sex.
They don't even necessarily bring up the topic of virgins specifically. According to them, if a woman is not a full-fledged slt, then she is automatically deemed a prude. Unworthy of acknowledgment, not worth recognition as a whole human being.
In the grand scheme of things, sex before marriage per se is not really that big of a deal. I get that. There are much more pressing concerns to deal with in life. Many people have had sex with their boyfriend or girlfriend before they actually walk down the aisle.
However, it is not just a matter of females or males having sex. That is not "good enough" for the perpetrators of those aggravating women's mags. They concern themselves with sheer numbers. And they insist, absolutely insist, that staggering numbers alone is what determines the degree of strength/independence/etc. of a woman in today's modern world.
Read one of those stupid women's magazines. They accuse women of being a prude if she simply possesses some self-respect, and would rather prefer not sleep with anything on two legs. (Or three or four, whatever.) look at TV -- Will and Grace, Friends, Sex and the City.
It sure as hell ain't just the women's magazines. It is teeming, festering the airwaves all over creation.
that if they do not drown themselves in the pool of filth__
__that if they do not suffocate themselves in prnnn and striging and prostituion, and if they do not shout from the mountaintops that it is empowering.
if they do not abjectly smother themselves into the__
They lob accusations at her that she is not being "free" with her body. They hurl [[[__putative ]] that she does not have this silly, notorious, ubiquitous, and incorrectly-defined (I'm pretty sure) "body confidence" that has been popping up all over the airwaves like weeds.
They accuse her of not being a strong capable woman in charge of her own life. They accuse her of being ashamed of her body. They claim that she is somehow unable to navigate this modern world as a strong, capable, independent being that is able to take care of herself in this day and age. (By the way, do they sound like broken records to anyone else? They keep using that asinine phrase "strong capable woman in charge of her own life" so much that it has lost any meaning whatsoever.)
The liberals wring their hands and concern themselves with whether or not women have had sex -- just as obsessively as they accuse conservatives of doing. They have made it their personal duty_____
And if a woman has not, then she does not earn the liberals' approval.
Never mind the fact that sex is an extremely personal, private issue. These liberals, simply by dint of being liberals, think that they have the -[[[[[unridled, unabashed___no no.... they should be un___ like when govt. can go in and just infringe on people's inalienable rights.]]]]] right to___