A Response to the Editorial “America Needs a New Sexual Revolution” by Melissa Mackenzie

A Response to the Editorial “America Needs a New Sexual Revolution” by Melissa Mackenzie

I guess Ms. Mackenzie drank from the Gender Complementarian Kool-Aid, or something like it.

The complementarian world is a world in which one is taught there are only two options concerning women (I know this because (Link): I used to be one myself for many years):

-either be and live as a traditional values person who believes all women are, or should be, passive, dainty, and delicate and should marry young and have children,
or,
-be and live as a bra-burning, man-hating, liberal feminist.

I present a third option, which is hated by some liberals (when I bring it to their attention), and it’s an option that is never even considered by other conservatives, which is as follows:
I am a right wing woman who rejects sexism, and finds fault in both the left and right wing on some women’s issues, but who also sees some merit to some arguments on either side, depending on the topic.

In this blog post, I am commenting upon this editorial on The American Spectator:

 (Link): America Needs a New Sexual Revolution by Melissa Mackenzie

A foundation of the opening of this editorial rests upon a presupposition that, and to paraphrase my understanding of the author’s perspective:

“Everything that is wrong today in regards to culture, sex, marriage, dating, and women, is liberal, secular, FEMINISM, and feminism is EVIL! One can directly trace the downfall of American sexual morality to the feminism of the 1960s!!”

Such thinking is a common trope in about every right wing publication I’ve ever read on these subjects.

To that point, about feminism supposedly being to blame for all of society’s marital or sexual problems, I would ask you to read this off-site post, which is by a Christian (not by a left wing, secular feminist):

(Link): Perhaps Feminism Is Not The Enemy

What I will do here is provide excerpts by MacKenzie then, under her comments, offer my thoughts.

MacKenzie writes (source again):

There’s a coarsening of relationships between men and women, parents and children, and people with each other.

// end MacKenzie quotes ///

I don’t think secular, left wing feminism was the start of the “coarsening of relationships between men and women” but is a response to it.

One can read the Old Testament of the Bible, which dates back several thousand years, to see men raping their own sisters, owning harems of women (in some cases, women having no choice but to be in a harem, or to be a concubine), and men committing adultery. There was no 1960s, American- style feminism around in Biblical days.

Continue reading “A Response to the Editorial “America Needs a New Sexual Revolution” by Melissa Mackenzie”

Advertisements

Roy Moore Allegations Prompt Reflections on Fundamentalist Culture in Which Some Christian Men Date Teens By J. Zauzmer 

Roy Moore Allegations Prompt Reflections on Fundamentalist Culture in Which Some Christian Men Date Teens By J. Zauzmer 

This article unfortunately (Link): quotes Brad Wilcox. The only positive thing I can say about Wilcox’s contribution to this article: at least he was not defending teen girls dating or marrying 30 year old men.

(Link): Roy Moore Allegations Prompt Reflections on Fundamentalist Culture in Which Some Christian Men Date Teens

Excerpts:

….That courtship of underage girls is especially common in conservative religious communities.

“We should probably talk about how there is a segment of evangelicalism and home-school culture where the only thing Roy Moore did wrong was initiating sexual contact outside of marriage. 14 year old girls courting adult men isn’t entirely uncommon,” Kathryn Brightbill, who works for the Coalition for Responsible Home Education, tweeted Friday, prompting a flurry of responses from other people who also had watched teenagers date much older Christian men.

…The culture of courting that Easter and Brightbill described is one limited mostly to fundamentalist religious communities, including certain Christian groups and those of other religions, such as some Orthodox Jewish or Mormon communities.

For most evangelical Christians, relationships between older men and teenage girls are viewed as wholly inappropriate.

Continue reading “Roy Moore Allegations Prompt Reflections on Fundamentalist Culture in Which Some Christian Men Date Teens By J. Zauzmer “

Dear Abby: As Boyfriend Loses Hair, I Lose Interest

Dear Abby: As Boyfriend Loses Hair, I Lose Interest

Secular culture would have you believe that men care about looks in women, while women supposedly only care about money or emotional support from a man, and to that I say: FALSE.

Christians, specifically, Christian gender complementarians, ratchet this up to really emphasize the point.

I’ve heard or seen so many male Christian complementarians (and occasionally, a few women complementarians) hype up this supposed idea that God created men to be “visual,” so they will shame and badger women to stay skinny, diet, exercise, and wear make-up all the time.

The truth is, women are every bit as “visual” as men are. Most hetero women dig a hot, sexy man every bit as much as some hetero men appreciate a hot, sexy woman.

However, complementarians will seldom lecture or advise men to lose weight, go to the gym and work out, or get a toupee if they’re balding.

I think the differences is that most women are willing to cut men slack where as the reverse is not true.

I mean, a woman may prefer a hot, studly looking man, but, if you’re tubby, bald, or sort of ugly she might still be willing to date you if you bring “something else to the table” – such as a lot of money, a steady income, a great sense of humor, intelligence, dependability, or what have you.

I think most women are more wiling to take trade-offs in the “looks” and sex appeal department than most men are.

Other than that, most of both sexes prefer people who are easy on the eyes, but this sexist, irritating stereotype that only men care about looks and only women care about romance (or emotions) persists.

Here is an example of a woman who is turned off by her male partner’s baldness:

(Link): Dear Abby: As Boyfriend Loses Hair, I Lose Interest

DEAR ABBY:
My physical attraction to my boyfriend has significantly diminished due to his baldness.

I know this may seem shallow, but I have lost all interest in intimate contact with him.

Continue reading “Dear Abby: As Boyfriend Loses Hair, I Lose Interest”

Liberal Native Americans, Racism, Identity Politics, Cultural Appropriation, and the Irish

Liberal Native Americans, Racism, Identity Politics, Cultural Appropriation, and the Irish

Edit 3. My take away after being Tweeted at by people claiming to be Native Americans on Twitter is if you don’t agree with them on political matters (such as “cultural appropriation,” which is, yes, these days, closely aligned to an American liberal cause, not a “Native” one), they will accuse you of lying about your Native American ancestry.

In their world, you cannot be a conservative or right winger with Native American ancestry who disagrees with left wing talking points – only folks claiming Native ancestry who agree with liberals can be considered truly Native American. Good lord, this is pathetic.


I saw a news account (such as CNN or Time magazine) tweet an article about a Native American woman who was shamed and scolded by liberals for having worn a Native American head dress to a Halloween party contest.

I remarked above the tweet that this was nuts. I still think it’s nuts.

Here is the article, this one comes from The Blaze, and it mentions the same story:

Native American faculty member blasted for wearing headdress for Halloween because it’s ‘racism’

A faculty member at the University of New Mexico was blasted for wearing a headdress on Halloween, according to KRQE-TV,

There’s just one catch: The faculty member is Native American.

–(end excerpt)–

DEFINING RACISM

Before I get to discussing that story in depth, I’d like to say I disagree with the liberal definition of “racism.”

Liberals define racism only to mean systematic imbalances wielded by whomever is considered to be in power in a nation. Therefore, your average liberal will argue that only white people can be racist because whites have all the power in the United States.

I say wrong, incorrect, and false.

My understanding of racism is that it denotes an attitude or belief set where a person of any skin color condemns or hates an entire other group of people (say, based on their inborn traits, such as skin color).

This means, for instance, that I regard black people who hate white people as being racist. White people are not the only people who are capable of being racist.

Racism to me is not about who holds or wields most power in a society, but rather is a heart-attitude.

ISLAM NOT A RACE

(Islam, by the way, is not a race. Islam is a socio-political belief set with religious undertones, but it’s not a “race,” yet I often see American liberals refer to criticisms of Islam or criticism of Muslim behavior as being “racism” or “racist.” Anyone can convert to Islam, including white-skinned evangelical Christians.)

NATIVE AMERICAN WOMAN CRITICIZED BY LIBERALS FOR WEARING HEADDRESS

Anyway, after I put my comments above the news tweet about the Native American woman being scolded by liberals and deemed a “racist” by them for wearing a Native American head dress to a costume party, someone on Twitter tweeted me about it, I replied, and he later shared my response on his time line.

There upon, several people, claiming to be Natives, took me to task over my views.

One such Native guy (or woman?) said something to me such as,

“I am skeptical and suspicious of people like you who claim Native American ancestry, yet I see no mention of you being Native American on your Twitter bio. Usually Natives declare their heritage with pride.”

There are several observations I have about this comment, a comment which is so ignorant and makes so many assumptions.

First of all, my SoloLoner twitter account is primarily one where I tweet about topics pertaining to singleness, dating, and marriage, and one where I occasionally opine about hypocrisy I see coming from right or left wingers.

My SoloLoner Twitter account is not one where I tweet about my family ancestry. If I bring up my family background on Twitter (or this blog), it has always been in the context of liberal absurdity over identity politics.

Secondly, there are a lot of things I don’t mention about myself on this blog, or on my Twitter biography or account, but that does not make them any less true about me.

For example, my favorite salad dressing flavor is Ranch, and I am left handed.

I have never before mentioned these things about myself on my blog here, nor do I mention them on my Twitter bio.

The fact that I don’t identify my favorite salad dressing or favored hand on Twitter does not mean I am lying about either one.

Thirdly, I am neutral or ambivalent about my family ancestry. I am neither proud nor ashamed to be partially Native American.

Having full-blooded Native Americans on both sides of my family is just another fact about me, like I am left handed, one of my favorite television shows is The Walking Dead, and I hated math in my school days.

Lastly, I am a right winger, I am a conservative, so am not beholden to, or in agreement with, the left wing penchant and insistence for Identity Politics.

I’m not one of these liberal types who binds up her entire identity in something like my skin color, my family tree, or sexual orientation.

COMMENTS FROM NATIVE AMERICANS ON TWITTER

One or two Natives demanded, DEMANDED!!, to know which “tribe(s)” I come from.

I find that funny, because several months ago, I was reading a page by a liberal Native American who was attempting to educate non-Natives about terminology, and according to this person, it is ‘racist’ or wrong to use the word “tribe.” According to that person, the correct term is “Nation.”

If you must know, both sides of my family inter-married with full-blooded Cherokee and Choctaw.

Part of my family also hails from the Republic of Ireland – some of my family also immigrated to the United States from other European nations, which I shall not list here.

All I will divulge is to mention my family tree consists of, but is not limited to, Cherokee, Choctaw, and Ireland.

I have no reason to lie about any of this.

This is one of the things that kills me about these yea-hoos on Twitter questioning my family tree, as though I am making any of it up.

What do I have to gain about lying about myself on this blog or on Twitter about being a never married, hetero-sexual, partially white, partially Native American, who is left handed, was raised Baptist but who now has doubts about the Christian faith, who loves The Walking Dead TV show, and who has a decades-long crush on movie actor Hugh Jackman?

On this blog, in the several years I’ve been blogging here, I have never, ever claimed to be liberal, Asian, Latina, a man, Democrat, homosexual, Russian, French, Buddhist, or black.

I have consistently said on this blog for a year or more that I am a never-married woman who is part white, part Native American.

I’m sure as hell not making money or friends or gaining fame or anything else positive by discussing things about myself on this little blog or on Twitter.

Nobody is sending me awards or money for sharing things about myself, such as I am part Native American, that I love Ranch salad dressing, and I suffered through college algebra.

Over a year or more ago, in various posts, I already mentioned on this blog I am part Native American and part Irish (among other things, which I won’t delineate).

Now, in November 2017, a few Natives on Twitter were questioning my authenticity on all this.

I don’t claim strong ties to, or deep interest in, my Native American background, or to my Irish ancestry, or my other European ancestry, for that matter.

What do they want me to do, spit in a plastic vial and mail it in to Ancestry.com or  23andMe.com for verification? Please. And, I don’t owe these people any proof or anything else.

As I told one liberal Native who was tweeting at me, I’d say I identify first and foremost as an American.

And I mean simply “American,” not one of those hyphenated formats, such as “Irish-American” or “Native American Indian – American,” or God help me, the long mouthful of “Irish – Native American – (insert other nations from where my ancestors immigrated) – American.”

Edit. I also received this comment from someone recently (link to her Tweet):

(from) heatherfeather‏ @heather28df 

Replying to @sololoner2

Natives have bern talking about cultural appropriation for a long time so when you label us as “liberals” you’re erasing Native voices.

(end quote)

I am partially Native American, and I’m writing my views on my blog here and on Twitter, so no, Native voices aren’t “being erased.”

Her voice, “Heather Feather’s” voice, is not being erased, either (I take it she considers herself Native American). She’s using Twitter to amplify her views, just as I am – nobody’s voices is being silenced or erased.

As I told her on Twitter, complaining about cultural appropriation and the like is a Liberal cause, (or is now synonymous with American political liberalism), and it’s been an American Liberal pet cause that has become trendy or popular the last few years.

Edit 2. I just blocked her. The obnoxious cow was accusing me of lying about my heritage, that I am just trying to “look or sound” cool.

Er, no, sweetie, as I’ve outlined above, some Europeans married and had sex with full-blooded Cherokee and Choctaw in my family (on the paternal and maternal sides) down through the years.

My god, I have no reason to lie about this sh-t. I cannot help who boinked whom in my family tree, either.

She wanted to know “what tribe” I am from.

As I told her:

BTW, “tribe” is politically incorrect. As a liberal, you should know that. Are you SURE you’re Native? I am doubting that you are.

(end quote)

That’s right, according to liberal Native Americans I’ve seen elsewhere online, the word “tribe” is not politically correct and is offensive to Natives, but here she is using it with me, while in the midst of dressing me down.

Liberals and Liberal Natives cannot agree among themselves on any of this:

(Link):  Native American name controversy

The Native American name controversy is an ongoing discussion about the changing terminology used by indigenous peoples of the Americas to describe themselves, as well as how they prefer to be referred to by others. Preferred terms vary primarily by region and age.

As indigenous people and communities are diverse, there is no consensus on naming, aside from the fact that most people prefer to be referred to by their specific nation or tribe (terms which are themselves contentious).

(end excerpts)

See also:

(Link): Setting the Record Straight About Native Languages: Squaw

(Link): The Word Squaw: Offensive or Not?

NATIVE AMERICAN CLOTHING

Even if I did not have partial Native American ancestry in my family tree, my opinion would remain the same and be just as valid: there’s nothing wrong with non-Natives wearing Native American paraphernalia.

I don’t deem it “racist” for a non-Native to wear some piece of Native American clothing to a costume party. It doesn’t bother me.

If you’re a Native American who doesn’t like that sort of thing, I think it would be more suitable to use terminology such as “inappropriate,” “tacky,” or “insensitive,” but “racist”?

None of that is to say I’d necessarily agree that a non-Native person wearing something like a headdress is tacky or insensitive.

By the way, I wonder, do these rules apply equally to non-whites? If a black guy, a Latino, or an Asian, for instance, wanted to wear a Native American headdress, would it still be bad? Why or why not?

I just do not get worked up over things like white people (or black people, Asians, or others) wanting to wear Native American clothing.

I don’t take it as an offense.

COMPLIMENTARY

TEAM MASCOTS

As a matter of fact, I would regard a lot of what liberals negatively deem “cultural appropriation”  to be complimentary.

The reason some football teams refer to themselves as “Red Skins,” or in some other Native American terminology, is because they like or admire Native Americans.

You’re not going to name your professional or college team after something you perceive as weak or stupid, like “The Fierce Boogers and Snots” or “The Wimpy Losers.”

I would take it as a positive thing if a football team wanted to use part of my culture as their name-sake or logo, not as a put-down.

LEFT VS RIGHT WING

I am curious – are there any Native Americans who are right wing or Republican out there?

Do most to all of them tilt liberal or Democrat?

Where do the left wing Native Americans get off dictating to everyone else, including those of us with Native ancestry who are right wing, who can and cannot wear Native American items? I don’t see where I, or others, have to bow to their opinions on these matters.

Edit. I found this:

(Link):  Conservative American Indian Republicans

(Link): A Republican Native American? How Can That Be?

(Link): Appealing to the conservative Native American voter

So, apparently not all other Native Americans are liberals, vote Democrat, or presumably buy into the wacky world of liberal identity politics.

WHITE MASCOTS

THE FIGHTING IRISH

Some high schools I or my siblings went to as kids had mascots such as The Patriots, The Buccaneers, Raiders, and so on.

As someone who is partially white, should I object to the use of such white people as team mascots? I’m not offended by them. I don’t care.

(Link): Native Americans are crying foul at this poll saying native people don’t find the name ‘Redskins’ offensive

I’m part Irish, yet I’m not offended by Notre Dame’s “Fighting Irish” moniker or mascot.  (View the Notre Dame Fighting Irish mascot and logo or view it here)

I don’t remember seeing any Irish people screaming and yelling about the Notre Dame Fighting Irish mascot and claiming it’s “racism” and “cultural appropriation.” If there have been, they are just as nuts.

THE IRISH

Speaking of the Irish.

Some native born and raised Irish are arrogant little jerk weeds about Irish ancestry.

They get their noses bent out of joint, or mock, Americans of Irish ancestry who are proud of their ancestry and who celebrate it.

When Irish-Americans celebrate St. Patrick’s Day in the United States, for instance, some of the Irish in Ireland ridicule them for it.

Native-born Irish refer to Irish-Americans with the derogatory term “Plastic,” which is short for “Plastic Paddy.”

Perhaps there are some native Irish who use that term with affection, but it’s my understanding that the indigenous use it as a negative term to describe Irish Americans who celebrate their ancestry.

More here:

Wiki: (Link): Plastic Paddy

And here:

(Link): Tired of being mocked and called a “Plastic Paddy” in Ireland?

Excerpts:

… the stereotype has taken hold among many [Irish] – Irish Americans come from LaLa land.

The abuse comes mainly from Irish-born who feel that the only true Irish identity is that you have to be born on the island of Ireland.

…It seems our culture, heritage, and history is no longer to be prized but sneered at by many. It’s time to shout stop.

…It is an incredibly narrow perspective to believe that the only authentic Irish experience is to be born and live in Ireland.

(end excerpts)

I am neither proud of or ashamed of my European ancestry (which includes but is not limited to the Irish). I am largely “meh” about who is in my family tree.

To reiterate, I primarily consider myself American, not Irish / European or Native American.

However, considering the awful attitude some Irish have towards Americans with Irish ancestry, how would they feel, I wonder, if I repudiated the Irish in my family tree and said I’m ashamed of it and spit on it? Would that make them happy?

I would like to think that people born and raised in Ireland would be happy to see Americans with Irish ancestry openly proud of their Irish heritage. I don’t get the animosity or mocking over it.

CLOSING

I, of partial Native American background, do not get upset or offended by Non-Natives who’d like to wear Native American clothing or dress up as a Native American for parties, or who’d like to use Native American typology for football team graphics.

I also do not care if a Native American from Nation X would like to wear clothing items from Nation Z, nor do I consider any of this offensive, insulting, and it’s certainly not “racism.”

Related:

Via National Review:

(Link):  The Liberal Fantasy of Cultural Appropriation

Via Daily Beast:

(Link):  You Can’t ‘Steal’ a Culture: In Defense of Cultural Appropriation

What began as a legitimate complaint has morphed into a handy way of being offended at something that should be taken as a compliment.

…But over time, the concept of cultural appropriation has morphed into a parody of the original idea.

We are now to get angry simply when whites happily imitate something that minorities do. We now use the word steal in an abstract sense, separated from any kind of material value.

…It used to be that we said that imitation is the sincerest form of flattery. But now there is new way to see the matter: Imitation is a kind of dismissal.

(end excerpts)

(Link): What Chuck Berry Taught Us About Cultural Appropriation 

ITALIAN AMERICANS AS NATIVE AMERICANS

By the way? The actor who depicted a Native American in the 1970s PSA about pollution was actually of Italian descent. LOL.

More here:

(Link): The True Story of ‘The Crying Indian’

(Link):  Iron Eyes Cody (born Espera Oscar de CortiApril) 

Italian-American actor. He portrayed Native Americans in Hollywood films.

(Link): video link: Keep America Beautiful – (Crying-Indian) – 70s PSA Commercial

That’s right, this “Indian” is actually a guy of Italian descent:

(this post had been edited several times to add more commentary and/or links)


Related Posts, This Blog:

(Link): Liberals and White People

On Offering Up Prayers and Thoughts – and how it annoys Liberal Christians and Atheists

On Offering Up Prayers and Thoughts – and how it annoys Liberal Christians and Atheists

I had been thinking about doing a post about this subject for the past one to two years but never got around to it.

This has become a really big pet peeve of mine, and I see it all the time from liberal Christians, ex Christians, and atheists: criticizing people of faith who publicly offer up prayers or thoughts for people, especially after a national tragedy, such as a mass public shooting or a natural disaster.

Continue reading “On Offering Up Prayers and Thoughts – and how it annoys Liberal Christians and Atheists”

Many Christians Really Do Prefer to Use Sexual Failures as Role Models As Opposed to Success Stories – The Tullian Tchividjian Come back

Many Christians Really Do Prefer to Use Sexual Failures as Role Models As Opposed to Success Stories – The Tullian Tchividjian Come back

I believe I’ve blogged about Tchividjian before – he’s a preacher who has admitted to having a series of affairs (more like CSA, Clergy Sex Abuse). Here as of late, several spiritual abuse blogs have noted that Tchividjian is making a comeback – when he should be permanently retired from the pulpit.

One spiritual abuse blog quoted this from another blog, by Mark Jones (source); I think the entire blog post is worth a read, but this is the most pertinent part for this blog’s purposes:

We can also look at Zahl’s article [about restoring Tchividjian to the pulpit] and come away with an almost shocking revelation, namely, that sin is actually a resume enhancement, not a resume killer. The Scriptures go to great lengths to speak about the personal piety of pastors.

Continue reading “Many Christians Really Do Prefer to Use Sexual Failures as Role Models As Opposed to Success Stories – The Tullian Tchividjian Come back”

Stop Asking People Whether They’re Married – Even As An Icebreaker

Stop Asking People Whether They’re Married – Even As An Icebreaker

Another suggestion: if you’re meeting someone over age 35, and they’re alone, do NOT assume they have been previously married or have had kids (don’t ask them, “So, how long has it been since you divorced”).

A lot of church people are bad about that. Any time I’ve walked into a church post age 35, they always ASSUME I am divorced (I have never been married, so this really annoys me).

(Link): Stop Asking People Whether They’re Married – Even As An Icebreaker

Excerpts:

by Bella DePaulo and Joan DelFattore

…. But what one of you probably would say before long is, “Are you married?” It’s seen as the most natural of ice-breakers, as if it’s the first thing strangers need to know about each other.

We, and dozens of people we’ve asked about this, encounter the question everywhere. Even random strangers sitting next to us in a train or plane will ask, “Are you married?”

Sometimes the questioner assumes you’re married— like the car dealer who asks if your husband is with you, or the job interviewer who says, “Do you need to talk it over with your wife?” When setting up online accounts, security questions such as “Where did you go on your honeymoon?” or “What is your maiden name?” seem inescapable.

Cue the music from the Twilight Zone, because what we have here is a time warp.

Continue reading “Stop Asking People Whether They’re Married – Even As An Icebreaker”

Sex Robots Are Being Made to Look Like Customers’ Dead Wives

Sex Robots Are Being Made to Look Like Customers’ Dead Wives

I do not find this touching. It’s gross and weird.

(Link): Sex robots are being made to look like customers’ dead wives… and one firm insists it’s the best way to help with their grief

by G Harrison

For many people, the social aspects of owning a sexbot are far more important than the physical side of things

SEX robots have become so lifelike that bereaved men are flocking to order dolls designed to resemble their dead partners.

Continue reading “Sex Robots Are Being Made to Look Like Customers’ Dead Wives”

How Single Men and Women are Making Politics More Extreme by Ed West

How Single Men and Women are Making Politics More Extreme

I’m a single woman, but I’ve never been liberal.

(Link): How Single Men and Women are Making Politics More Extreme

….The more freedom we have, the more there will be very feminine and masculine subcultures too, and this might explain a great deal of recent political developments — in particular the campus identity politics movement and the alt-right.

The former is heavily female, while the latter is overwhelmingly male — in fact, not just male, but populated by men who seem to have difficulties with women.

…Single women tend to be politically very liberal, voting for the Democrats in huge numbers….

Generally speaking, the culture wars are far more intense between women because women have to make more sacrifices — whether children or career — and this inevitably influences their worldview.

Continue reading “How Single Men and Women are Making Politics More Extreme by Ed West”

The Dangerous Risks of Putting Motherhood on a Pedestal by C. Millard

The Dangerous Risks of Putting Motherhood on a Pedestal by C. Millard

The Dangerous Risks of Putting Motherhood on a Pedestal by C. Millard

Excerpts:

…Note the double-edged sword of motherhood here. Attracting the praise of being a “good mother” was always accompanied by the threat that you might fall from the perch at any moment and cause devastating harm to your child.

Hence the amplification of mechanisms of control, censure, and punishment that go hand in hand with the valorization and surveillance of parenting. Deep within the medical and psychological frameworks promoting motherhood in this period, there lurks male anxiety over female power and influence.

Continue reading “The Dangerous Risks of Putting Motherhood on a Pedestal by C. Millard”

Study:  Big Gaps in Age Can Turn A Marriage Sour in Just Six Years

Study:  Big Gaps in Age Can Turn A Marriage Sour in Just Six Years

I generally do not support May-December relationships, as I’ve written about before.

(Link):  Study:  Big Gaps in Age Can Turn A Marriage Sour in Just Six Years

Age DOES matter in relationships: Big gaps can turn a marriage sour in just six years as partners struggle to agree and have different viewpoints

August 2017

    • Study found men who are married to younger wives were initially most satisfied
    • But the marriage can go can sour in just six to ten years, researchers found
    • Similarly-aged couples are better at dealing with difficult decisions, study found
    • Marriages with large age gaps are less resilient in during economic downturns

Marriages with a large age gap are less likely to work than when the couple is a similar age, according to new research.

Although men might be happier with a younger wife in the early stages of marriage, it can sour in just six to ten years, the study found.

Similarly-aged couples are better at dealing with difficult decisions as they are more in sync and will do much better in the long-run.

Continue reading “Study:  Big Gaps in Age Can Turn A Marriage Sour in Just Six Years”

Penis Enhancement Surgery Results In Death For The First Time Ever

Penis Enhancement Surgery Results In Death For The First Time Ever

(Link): Penis Enhancement Surgery Results In Death For The First Time Ever

by Cara Sprunk

…A description of the case in the Journal of Forensic Sciences explained that surgeons had finished the elongation portion of the surgery [on the man] and were in the enlargement part, which involved injecting the patient with two fluid ounces of his own fat cells, when things went wrong.

The fat leaked into his veins and traveled to his lungs, which resulted in a lung embolism, rupturing his blood vessels. The patient, who was found to have no prior heart conditions, ended up having a heart attack on the operating table. Despite attempts from doctors to perform CPR, the man passed away two hours later.

….A 2017 scientific review in Translational Andrology and Urologyshowed that “the majority of men seeking penile elongation treatment have a normal penile size, which is functionally adequate.”

Woman Forwards Man’s Unsolicited D-ck Pics To His Mother

Woman Forwards Man’s Unsolicited D-ck Pics To His Mother

(Link): Woman Forwards Man’s Unsolicited D-ck Pics To His Mother

…Frustrated single woman Madi Kohn, a college student living in Arizona, was sick of receiving random penis pics on Tinder.

She updated her bio on the dating application to make it clear that any unwanted snapshots of a man’s junk would be forwarded to his mom.

And when a man she didn’t know filled her inbox with a self-portrait of his penis, that’s exactly what she did.

Continue reading “Woman Forwards Man’s Unsolicited D-ck Pics To His Mother”

Pastor Actually Questions, in the Year 2017, If It’s Acceptable for Mothers to Work Outside of the Home.

Pastor Actually Questions, in the Year 2017, If It’s Acceptable for Mothers to Work Outside of the Home.

I cannot believe we are in the year 2017, and Christians are still asking about this sort of thing and pontificating about it. To even ask and muse about this in 2017 is just sexist.

In regards to this story linked to below, Dee of Wartburg Watch asked on Twitter, something along the lines of, how much money does preacher Todd Wagner earn so that his wife (assuming he has a wife and kids) is able to stay at home all day to watch their kids?

How many of the women in Wagner’s church congregation (who may even be mothers themselves) have jobs outside the home, part of whose job income are paid to him in tithes, so that he can afford to have his wife stay at home and be a stay at home mother?

(Link): Does the Bible Say It’s OK for Moms to Work?

Excerpts:

July 28, 2017

by Sheryl Lynn

The pastor of a multi-site church in Texas [Watermark Community Church] recently responded to a question on whether the Bible says it’s OK for moms to work.

While it’s not forbidden, Todd Wagner questioned the motive behind a mother choosing to work over being at home with her children.

// end excerpt

“While it’s not forbidden.” – Yes, you can end it right there. Anything beyond this is Wagner’s opinion.

Continue reading “Pastor Actually Questions, in the Year 2017, If It’s Acceptable for Mothers to Work Outside of the Home.”

25 Women Reveal Their Biggest Dating Profile Dealbreakers

25 Women Reveal Their Biggest Dating Profile Dealbreakers

It seems to me that most of the real-life examples listed below are by 20-something singles.

I would hope to god that nobody over the age of 35 is behaving in the manner that some of these women are describing.  Though I personally have seen men on dating sites, age 40 and up, guilty of a few of these (below this list, I’ll paste in and comment about a few of the over age 35 morons I ran into on dating sites).

(Link): 25 Women Reveal Their Biggest Dating Profile Dealbreakers

Excerpts:

….In a recent AskReddit thread, women shared examples of the biggest dating profile dealbreakers that they’ve come across, and their responses are super enlightening for anyone who’s nervous that their bio is scaring off potential matches.

But remember: even the most seasoned online dating vets make mistakes and experience rejection sometimes, so there’s no point in beating yourself up over a failed relationship attempt.

All you can do is make sure you’re putting your best virtual foot forward, and wait patiently until you meet someone you really connect with.

Here are 25 examples of things some women don’t want to see in dating profiles.

….Gross Sexual Usernames

Having usernames like “big dick” or “likes to lick”

Badmouthing Your Exes

If your entire profile is a rant about how much you loathe your ex, we’re going to assume you’re not really over them.

Insulting Women on the Site

Anything that insults women or implies they see themselves as the majority of women on there. That might be the case (doubtful) but just don’t swipe away if you’re not interested.

“Where are the nice girls on here”

“Duck faces and posers need not apply”

“Sick of girls on here who aren’t genuine”

On a similar note, insulting your potential matches by making assumptions about them (as if all women on dating apps are the same) is a huge red flag.

Laying Out All Your Baggage

“I’m not trying to get hurt anymore. Seems like all the good guys get treated like shit. My last girlfriend was cheating on me so I’m a little insecure right now. Please don’t be one of these fake girls who’s just gonna hurt me and fuck my friends behind my back.”

Uhhhhhhh, your baggage is way too heavy. I can just picture getting back to back text messages round the clock if I don’t respond immediately and getting called out of my name if I want to go out with friends

Continue reading “25 Women Reveal Their Biggest Dating Profile Dealbreakers”

Five Signs The Person You Are Dating Is Using You by L. Rose

Five Signs The Person You Are Dating Is Using You by L. Rose

I’m only going to provide excerpts, so if you want to see all five reasons, please use the link to visit their page.

(Link): Five Signs The Person You Are Dating Is Using You

Here’s what you need to look out for.

2. They make you feel small.

And actually, feeling good with the person is also a sign that you are not being used.

The person you’re with should build you up, make you feel happy and like life is better than it is without them.

Continue reading “Five Signs The Person You Are Dating Is Using You by L. Rose”

Teen Vogue Magazine Promoting Anal Sex (2017)

Teen Vogue Magazine Promoting Anal Sex

One wonders if this teen magazine ever offers celibacy or virginity as choices for teen girls? Probably not. Liberals generally do not support a girl or woman’s choice to sexually abstain, but will mock it.

I don’t think the vast majority of women want to have anal sex with a man but are usually pressured into it by a boyfriend. Ditto on oral sex and other non-missionary style forms of sex. (But perhaps the article was aimed at LGBT individuals.)

If you are a teen girl (I cannot imagine why a teen girl would be reading my blog, but regardless…) you can do with your body as you please. If you do not want to have any sex at all, then do not have sex. If you do not want to have anal sex, then do not have anal sex.

Do not allow feminists, boyfriends, magazines, or Hollywood pressure you, shame you, or guilt trip you into doing sexual activity you feel conflicted about or don’t want to participate in.

If you have a boyfriend who is pressuring you to have sex or to engage in a particular sex act you’d rather not perform, please realize it is better to be single than to stay in a relationship with a guy who guilt trips you, uses threats of breaking up, or whatever, to get his way with you sexually.

If a guy does not respect your boundaries and wishes in the area of sexuality, break up with him!  Please stop wasting your time with him. You will eventually get another boyfriend later. There is nothing wrong with being single.

(Link): Teen Vogue’s Bizarre Anal Sex Article Shows Women Are Still Being Defined in Relation to Men

Excerpts:

The supposedly progressive piece, intended for teenage girls, refers to women as ‘non-prostate owners’, ignores the organ for female pleasure and fails to mention any potential dangers

Defining women by the men around them is an issue feminists have sought to address, and correct, for years.

…It would stand to reason that we could assume that in 2017 any work aimed at women would be sure to avoid such regressive patterns.

However, in (Link): Anal Sex: What You Need To Know for Teen Vogue, sex educator and feminist activist Gigi Engle managed to harp back to a time where women were defined by their relationship to men.

…Not only is any potential pleasure a woman may feel during anal sex reduced to the lack of male body parts (she is a “non-prostate owner”) but the clitoris, the actual hub of female sexual pleasure, has been removed. The lack of a male body part is the focus of what defines the female body, and what is actually there isn’t identified at all.

What is this teaching the audience of a magazine aimed at teenage girls? It tells them their identity is not “woman”, but rather “non-man”.

It tells them that should they consent to anal sex, their body is just a hole for the man to penetrate, and the part of their body that is most sensitive and reliable for the female orgasm is so irrelevant that it doesn’t even warrant a label.

It tells them that consenting to anal sex is not about their pleasure, but about their partner’s.

What it fails to tell them is the potential dangers of anal sex. The possibilities of fissures and tears which can become infected very easily due to contamination by faeces, severe enough to need surgery, or lead to anal abscesses which increase the chances of catching HIV.

By treating anal sex as an equivalent to vaginal sex, you increase the chances that your audience will not understand the potential damage they can do to their own or their partner’s body, and in turn increase their chances of becoming seriously ill.

(Link): Parents outraged over Teen Vogue anal sex how-to column (but magazine still defends it)

Teen Vogue is defending its decision to publish a graphic tutorial to anal sex for children and teenagers – (Link): calling critics homophobic.

“This is anal 101, for teens, beginners and all inquisitive folk,” author Gigi Engle wrote in “A Guide to Anal Sex.”

… (Link): The original article did not include any references to practicing safe sex – but was later amended to include a line about condoms being “non-negotiable.”

“Here is the lowdown on everything you need to know about butt stuff,” the writer declared.

Parents across the nation became enraged upon learning that Teen Vogue wanted to turn their children in sexual deviants.

Continue reading “Teen Vogue Magazine Promoting Anal Sex (2017)”

Christian Virginity Peddlers Vs Muslims Who Molest Girls and The Liberals Who Look the Other Way 

Christian Virginity Peddlers Vs Muslims Who Molest Girls & The Liberals Who Look the Other Way 

I intended on making this blog post the other day but forgot. As I noted in one of my (Link): last posts, I have not visited SCCL (Stuff Christian Culture Likes) Facebook group since early June 2017 for reasons that are explained in that post.

A couple of weeks ago, someone in my Twitter shared a link to (Link): this page titled“Jodi Heckert Pledged to Protect His Daughter’s Virginity, Now in Prison For Child Molestation”

If you scroll to the bottom of that page, there is a line that reads:

“H/T Stuff Christian Culture Likes.”

[Hat Tip to Stuff Christian Culture Likes]

So, I take it that Stephanie Drury, maintainer of SCCL Facebook group, posted a link to that news story on her group for her members to mock and cluck in worry over. This same, group, though, which is largely comprised of liberals, does not like for Islam to be called out for infractions against girls, women, or for anyone, really.

When I mentioned in one of (Link): my other posts critical of SCCL that about any time I see a terrorist mentioned on the news, the terrorist almost always turns out to be a Muslim (yes, it’s true, (Link): most of them are), several of Drury’s SCCL readers had temper tantrums.

Before I continue, allow me to quote from liberal, atheist, and Democrat Camille Paglia here:

But today’s liberalism has become grotesquely mechanistic and authoritarian: It’s all about reducing individuals to a group identity, defining that group in permanent victim terms, and denying others their democratic right to challenge that group and its ideology.

… The reluctance or inability of Western liberals to candidly confront jihadism has been catastrophically counterproductive insofar as it has inspired an ongoing upsurge in right-wing politics in Europe and the United States.

Citizens have an absolute right to demand basic security from their government. The contortions to which so many liberals resort to avoid connecting bombings, massacres, persecutions, and cultural vandalism to Islamic jihadism is remarkable, given their usual animosity to religion, above all Christianity.

…Right now, too many secular Western liberals treat Islam with paternalistic condescension…

Source:

(Link): Camille Paglia: On Trump, Democrats, Transgenderism, and Islamist Terror

Paglia is one of the few left wingers I’ve seen who comprehends.

Islam is notorious for sexism. Many of their Imams teach it is acceptable for husbands to beat wives. Honor killings, where Muslim families will stone girls or women to death for being rape victims, are not uncommon. In some Islamic nations or cultures, women are not allowed to ride bicycles, wear skirts, or obtain educations. (Examples with links to news stories of all those mentioned (Link): here)

Continue reading “Christian Virginity Peddlers Vs Muslims Who Molest Girls and The Liberals Who Look the Other Way “

Stuff that Stuff Christian Culture Likes Facebook Group Likes

Stuff that Stuff Christian Culture Likes Facebook Group Likes

Stephanie Drury, owner of SCCL Facebook group, doesn’t care about victims.

Drury may thinks she cares about victims, and she may even want you to think she cares about victims, and you may even mistakenly think she cares about victims or other wounded people, but-

From what I’ve witnessed on her Facebook group and Twitter behavior, what Drury really cares about is pushing a liberal agenda. (I will discuss this a little more below the list.)

In the past, owner of SCCL Facebook group, Stephanie Drury, linked to a few of my posts on this blog, with the motive of having her group of Flying Monkeys mock and ridicule my posts or me.

I used to be a regular visitor to Drury’s SCCL group, for a period spanning approximately four years. I always lurked, never posted, because I spotted several red flags with her group.

Over the last 2 or 3 years, I at times tweeted Drury with stories I thought she would find interesting, and sure enough, she would share some of those links on her SCCL Facebook group.

I tried to be on friendly terms with her on Twitter, but I guess that doesn’t matter to her.

Around the first week of June 2017, Drury once again shared a link to one of my blog posts with her SCCL Facebook group. In the past, I said nothing when she did this with other posts of mine.

This time, however, I tweeted her to let her know I saw her post a link to my blog post on her group.

After that, she tweeted me a few times, but so too did some of her fans on Twitter, and none of it was nice.

Continue reading “Stuff that Stuff Christian Culture Likes Facebook Group Likes”

Mutual Exclusivity on Social Issues by Liberals, Atheists, and Some Moderate Christians

Mutual Exclusivity on Social Issues by Liberals, Atheists, and Some Moderate Christians

Over the past two years on twitter (and on some blogs), I keep seeing some people – usually liberals, but sometimes atheists and moderate Christians – engage in this game of mutual exclusivity as concerning social issues.

They also seem to have a blind spot or two. They will point out the “sins” committed by Christians, Republicans, or conservatives all damn day long, but then ignore those very same sins when committed by liberals, Democrats, or Muslims, atheists – or whatever other special interest groups they usually pander to.

TRANSGENDERISM

For example, if you speak out in concern against CIS men using transgender bathroom policies to rape CIS women, trans-activists will say you should be more concerned about churches who harbor child sex abusers.

I think I may have addressed that argument in this post:

(Link): Conservatives, Christians, Transgenders, and Bathrooms – Addressing Libby Anne’s “Love, Joy, Feminism” Post About Transgenders

The fact that so many churches harbor child rapists, or handle child sex cases improperly, does not automatically make it acceptable to allow CIS men into women’s bathrooms or locker rooms under the guise of being “trans friendly.”

The two are separate topics.

Therefore, I am against this argument from some people that everyone should be more, or only, concerned about child safety at churches than they should be with child welfare at public rest-rooms or public fitting rooms.

It is not a mutually exclusive concept.

An individual can be concerned about CIS men exploiting trans-friendly bathroom rules to rape CIS women, and that same individual can also be concerned about predators using churches to victimize children.

Yes, it’s possible to care about more than one issue at a time.

Continue reading “Mutual Exclusivity on Social Issues by Liberals, Atheists, and Some Moderate Christians”