Sex Dolls, Robots, and Woman Hating – a Conversation with Author Caitlin Roper (video and other, related material – similar to what Christian Gender Complementarians Teach About Women and Sex)

Sex Dolls, Robots, and Woman Hating – a Conversation with Author Caitlin Roper (video and other, related material – similar to what Christian Gender Complementarians Teach About Women and Sex)

The interview (in the video below) also discusses “pedophile activists” and pedophiles who want “sex dolls” that look like little girls.

There is something terribly, horribly wrong going on with men … and women and feminism are not to blame. And patriarchy and enforced traditional gender roles is not the solution, either (I say this as a conservative).

A lot of what Roper mentions about sex in some of the pieces below (especially this one on ABC) sounds very much like the usual attitude by many complementarian Christian men, such as Doug Wilson
– a lot of complementarian and pro-patriarchal “Christian” men –
continue to falsely teach in their books, blogs, sermons, videos, and pod casts that all men have a need for sex, men are incapable of sexual self control (in distinct contradiction to Galatians 5:22-23, 2 Timothy 1:7, etc), that women are obligated to have sex with men whenever men want sex (especially married women).

On Barnes and Noble:

(Link):  Sex Dolls, Robots and Woman Hating: The Case for Resistance

(Link): Pleasure machines: What sex robots tell us about men and sex

Excerpts:

by Caitlin Roper
December 2017

… The growing popularity of sex robots raises many ethical issues, but it also forces us to ask questions about the very nature of sex.

What is sex? What is it for? Is it merely the “acquisition of pleasure” as Robert Jensen put it, a mechanism for orgasm, or is it something one experiences with another person?

While it’s true that sex does not necessarily involve intimacy or meaningful connection, and it’s certainly not always mutually beneficial – mutuality is a key factor. Sexual relations without mutuality might be more appropriately described as sexual exploitation.

… Some men express their preferences for sex robots over relationships, which require catering to someone else’s needs and “needless drama.” Others, despite being married or in committed relationships, prefer their dolls to their living female partners, who unlike dolls are complex human beings with their own interests, feelings and lives.

Dolls, on the other hand, have no expectation of an equal or mutually beneficial partnership, have no needs to be met and no free will to be exercised.

It is precisely the dolls’ complete lack of autonomy that is the key attraction for many men. “You ALWAYS have their full attention,” said one. “It’s just nice to know that there is someone home waiting on me without the bitching … She can’t talk [but] at least she looks good sitting there watching TV.”

One owner described the bliss of gaming for hours with his devoted sex doll by his side, something his ex-wife “would only do … for a few mins, then find things to be upset about.”

…But what is it female bodied sex robots are providing? What is the appeal?

Rather than simply “better” sex, sex dolls provide men with the means for more selfish sex – sex that is totally one-sided. It is sex predicated on men’s absolute sexual freedom to dominate and use a woman without limitations.

There is no pressure to perform well, no need to reciprocate, no need to consider the other party’s feelings, enjoyment, discomfort, humiliation or pain.

It is sex with a compliant woman that is all about the user’s sexual fantasies – with a woman who never refuses, who can be used over and over again.

Continue reading “Sex Dolls, Robots, and Woman Hating – a Conversation with Author Caitlin Roper (video and other, related material – similar to what Christian Gender Complementarians Teach About Women and Sex)”

The Obnoxious Abuse Survivor Community Is Targeting Julie Roys Again – this time begun by R L Stollar

The Obnoxious Abuse Survivor Community Is Targeting Julie Roys Again – this time the witch hunt was begun by R L Stollar

The “abuse survivor community” has taken their pitchforks out again, and again their pitchforks and torches are for journalist Julie Roys.

This time, the bullying is being carried out by a R L Stollar, a name I’ve seen on twitter off and on in the last few years.

I believe he originally began speaking out against harms caused by Christian homeschooling? Good on him for that (I mean that, that was not snark).

Beyond that, though, I’m not familiar with Stollar. He may have even tweeted a few things in the past I saw shared by others I follow on Twitter that I agreed with.

To Julie Anne (“Defend the Sheep” on twitter) – why are you  participating in this continued pile on?

(Edit: I believe Julie Anne “Liked” some of the comments in that thread, or I saw her share it on her Twitter account, which is how I became aware of it in the first place)

Why are you, Julie Anne, continuing to associate with people who behave this way?
I’m sorry if you feel that Roys did not credit you or friends of yours or whatever on older reportage she did (which she tried to discuss with you), but what is the deal with cozying up to the people singling her out every few weeks?

Anyway. Roys is being bullied online again, and this time it was started by Stollar.

Yes, I said “again” – see (Link): my previous post about this weird, disturbing anti-Roys obsession from the Amy Smiths, Ashley Easters, and other so-called abuse survivor advocates.

If you take note of this obnoxious behavior, as I did, (that is, noting their bullying and mob mentality where they target someone), some of them will erroneously misconstrue you as being a “Julie Roys Stan,” or use that as an ad hominem against you (see embedded tweets below for more on that).

Birth Control Movie

Now, the “abuse survivor community” is targeting Roys for having once appeared in a several years old (conservative created, I believe) movie about birth control and the sexual revolution.

I’ve not seen the movie they are referring to, but I did watch and listen to a clip of Roys presumably from the film (that clip located in a tweet by someone else here), and the comments Roys made were pretty conventional.

There was  nothing “far out” there by Roys in that clip, not unless, I suppose, you’re operating from a faulty, far left liberal paradigm, in which case pointing out that sexual behaviors with little- to- no boundaries can result in things like disease or other harmful ramifications will sound judgmental, fuddy duddy, and stodgy.

Speaking of which:

(Link): Monkeypox virus could become entrenched as new STD in the US – via ABC News (warning: auto-playing video file with audio on that page)

Excerpts:

The spread of monkeypox in the U.S. could represent the dawn of a new sexually transmitted disease, though some health officials say the virus that causes pimple-like bumps might yet be contained before it gets firmly established

By Mike Stobbe AP Medical Writer
July 22, 2022

… So far, more than 2,800 U.S. cases have been reported as part of an international outbreak that emerged two months ago. About 99% have been men who reported having sex with other men, health officials say.
— end excerpts —

Secular Criticisms of Birth Control and the Sexual Revolution

In the past year, a few secular books criticizing the consequences of the sexual revolution (including the role of the advent of birth control pills) have been published
(which I’ve blogged about here (Where the Sexual Revolution Went Wrong by Maria Albano) and here (The Sexual Revolution Has Backfired on Women by S. Moore),
so it’s not only those evangelicals all you hipster “Exvangelicals” despise pointing out the flaws and dangers with no-holds-barred sexual behavior.

In the past few years, more and more liberals and feminists have been speaking out about the excesses and harms of loose sexual behavior; these are just a couple of examples on my blog:

(Link): Why Sex-Positive Feminism is Falling Out of Fashion by S. Greenberg – excerpts via New York Times

(Link): Did Hell Freeze Over?: Liberal Rag Promotes Idea that Celibacy is Acceptable, and a Valid Life Choice / Re: 2016 Study Says Millennials Aren’t Having Much Sex

Progressives / Abuse Advocates Define Christianity to = Democrat Party, Progressive Values and Views

Many of the abuse advocates under consideration in this blog post I am discussing are politically driven (or some have left-leaning sympathies).

They conflate Christianity with leftism, progressive views, causes, and the Democratic Party, and reject anyone who doesn’t agree with all their socio-political views.

Here is my reaction to what got the ball rolling (tweet link – my comment – and here is a link to the original R L Stollar comment I was replying to):

Link to Tweet embedded below.

So this Stollar guy initially did a tweet with a link to this page (also linked to below, with excerpt) at Right Wing Watch – of course he did.

Does Stollar ever follow sites with names like “Left Wing Watch” (i.e., any accounts that are critical of progressive ideology?) – probably not.

Continue reading “The Obnoxious Abuse Survivor Community Is Targeting Julie Roys Again – this time begun by R L Stollar”

First it Was Christian Complementarians Telling Me To Shut Up, Then Trans Activists, and Now, It’s Intersectional Feminist, Black, Pro-Choice Tik Tokers

First it Was Christian Complementarians Telling Me To Shut Up, Then Trans Activists, and Now, It’s Intersectional Feminist, Black, Pro-Choice Tik Tokers

I actually did a post covering similar territory a few weeks ago – I noted in that post how members of the progressive transgender movement constantly tell women to shut up – as did the Christian gender complementarians I grew up with, or whose teachings I was exposed to, as my parents were Southern Baptists, and Baptists push that sexist tripe but claim it’s “biblical.”

I’ve also seen secular (and religious) conservative men either imply all women should shut up, or they suggest that all women should not have the right to vote (I wrote about that here, among other posts I’ve done on the topic)

Now, here we have a black, pro-choice woman on Tik Tok insisting that white women shut up.

I’m part white but also part Native American. I will not shut up. If I have an opinion and want to express it, I will express it.

I don’t allow church, complementarians, progressives, trans activists, pro choicers, or sexist conservatives to silence me or tell me what to do.

(Link): ‘If you value your life…shut the f*** up’: CRAZY MAD TikToker threatens white women over Roe reversal

‘This is what happens when social media gives people who used to take classes in the basement and wear a helmet a platform’

by BlazeTV Staff
June 30, 2022

On the latest episode of “Fearless,” BlazeTV host Jason Whitlock and contributor Shemeka Michelle try to make sense of a very angry TikToker’s racist rant about the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe v. Wade.

“So, we all see what has happened with this Roe v. Wade situation. We already knew this was how it was going to go down,” said the blue-lipped TikToker and self-described “Priestess Warrior.”

“Dear white women, listen. Your only play in this, if you value your life, is to shut the f*** up!” she continued.

Continue reading “First it Was Christian Complementarians Telling Me To Shut Up, Then Trans Activists, and Now, It’s Intersectional Feminist, Black, Pro-Choice Tik Tokers”

Leftist Intersectional Feminism is An Anti-White Woman Belief System: Progressives Once More Blame White Women For How They Voted

Leftist Intersectional Feminism is An Anti-White Woman Belief System: Progressives Once More Blame White Women For How They Voted

Women (and men) who believe in and practice Intersectional Feminism hate white women.

Racism, contra progressives and their dippy neo-Marxist beliefs, is not just about who has power in a culture, but it’s also an attitude – and I see plenty of non-whites who are racist against white people.

It doesn’t take a position of power to harbor racism or sexism against others, anyone is capable of it.

Women can be sexist against men, even though men tend to have more authority in culture.

Furthermore, women (and the men) who advocate for Intersectional Feminism fully accept the misogynistic movement known as “Trans Rights Activism,” which consists of a lot of narcissistic biological men who insist every one call them by female pronouns and be permitted into women’s locker rooms, so they can flash their nude penises at actual women, and so they can have access to women’s prisons if arrested, so that they can rape actual women.

The only white women who go along with any of this glaringly obvious sexism  are liberal white women who allow themselves to be gas-light and are easily lured into guilt trips by “POC” women.

As I’ve long pointed out on this blog, (and though I am a conservative), I’ve noted that both the right and left of the American political spectrum are sexist. Both sides each have their own issues and end up mistreating women.

Earlier today, this editorial by Pamela Paul was published by the New York Times:

(Link): The Far Right and Far Left Agree on One Thing: Women Don’t Count – hosted on The New York Times, July 3, 2022, by Pamela Paul

That editorial, which I’m largely in agreement with (though not on the portion where the author laments the over turn Roe V Wade, since I am pro-life, but I do recognize that many conservatives can be sexist on other topics) angered progressive women.

The author, Paul, was hounded off Twitter; her account was suspended.

Anyway, according to this article on Fox News, progressive women began attacking the editorial and/or the author herself, and some even jumped in to bash white women for some having had voted for Trump back in 2016 – more on this below the link and excerpt:

(Link): Washington Posts columnists slam a New York Times op-ed that criticizing the ‘far left’ for erasing women

July 3, 2022

Fellow progressives echoed her criticism of the New York Times op-ed.

By Lindsay Kornick | Fox News

Washington Post columnist Karen Attiah blasted the New York Times on Twitter Sunday for an op-ed that criticized progressives for erasing women.

The Times published a Sunday op-ed titled “The Far Right and Far Left Agree on One Thing: Women Don’t Count” in which, columnist Pamela Paul argued how the far left’s concern for appealing to a transgender minority is belittling and rebuking women.

“Tolerance for one group need not mean intolerance for another. We can respect transgender women without castigating females who point out that biological women still constitute a category of their own — with their own specific needs and prerogatives,” Paul wrote.

Specifically, she called out the insistence of using terms such as “pregnant people” and “menstruators” to avoid using the general word “women” out of fear of offending a small group. Paul even equated this with what she considered to be “stripping women of fundamental rights” by overturning Roe v. Wade.

Although Attiah did not cite or link the article on her account, she blasted this comparison as an example of “both-sides pattycake.”

“That NYT op-ed equating inclusive language to widespread legislative oppression is a reminder that many white, cis women would rather gatekeep and maintain privilege than work in solidarity with other groups. Patriarchy is crushing us, but y’all wanna play both-sides pattycake,” Attiah tweeted.

She also added “I’m a cis woman who is clearly able to see that we are under a system-wide assault on bodily autonomy and reproductive rights. We will need a politics of solidarity and community building to resist this, which is not something that white women have historically had to do.”

She concluded her thread sharing another Twitter thread criticizing the failures of white women to help their communities.

“This tweet thread on white women and their failures with community building is worth a look. Read, then discuss amongst yourselves,” Attiah tweeted.

Other progressive journalists voiced their support for Attiah’s comments.

The Daily Beast’s Wajahat Ali tweeted “Majority of white women voted for Trump both times and have voted Republican since the 1950s. Whenever someone brings this up apparently its very offensive but those are the receipts.”

… Attiah’s thread was also retweeted by far-left commentator Keith Olbermann and failed progressive congressional candidate Nina Turner.
— end excerpts —

So there we have, once again, white women being shamed and blamed for how they voted by liberals and progressives, an activity which white conservative men also periodically engage in.

Continue reading “Leftist Intersectional Feminism is An Anti-White Woman Belief System: Progressives Once More Blame White Women For How They Voted”

Women Threaten to Go On Sex Strike In Protest Over SCOTUS Overturning Roe V Wade

Women Threaten to Go On Sex Strike In Protest Over SCOTUS Overturning Roe V Wade

So, it takes the overturn of Roe Vs Wade to get secular feminists (and probably some progressive religious ones) to think seriously about celibacy now? Are they for real?

I’m in my 50s, still haven’t had sex because I was waiting until marriage to have sex, never got married, so I’m still a virgin. I have a normal libido. There is no such thing as a “gifting of celibacy,” as so many Christians assume; God, if he exists, did not remove my libido.

I discussed in a previous post a couple years ago why I made the choice I did to sexually abstain, but I will repeat one reason of several from that post: I did not want to get pregnant out of wedlock.

Birth control is not totally effective, it costs to maintain, I didn’t want to see a doctor periodically to get check ups to get birth control, etc.

I realized years ago – even as far back as my teen years – that a possible outcome of consensual sex was pregnancy which I didn’t want to happen. I didn’t want to use abortion as birth control (I don’t believe in abortion).

I managed to live my life practicing sexual self control, and I expect others to be capable of the same.

Any time you have sex with another person, that is a choice you’re making. As I’ve said before, sex with another person is a luxury not a necessity.

Having sex is not a biological necessity for you to stay alive – you will continue to live even if you’re abstaining. You can enjoy life without sex with another person.

If you are a woman thinking you can get or keep a boyfriend by giving him sex, think again. That won’t work, and you’ll only attract manipulative, selfish men who don’t make for good boyfriends anyway.

I just find it ludicrous that now that Roe V Wade was overturned, that all these women (many of whom are probably self-identifying feminists who spent years promoting “sex positivity”) are willing to practice celibacy, probably for the first time.

I’ve been celibate my whole life. I never bought into the hedonistic sex messaging of feminists, not even when I was a teen in the 1980s or a college student in the 1990s.

A lot of the “sex positive” feminists always came across to me as though they are really infuriated that men get to have (in some regards) consequence- free sex but not women; some of these feminists assume that all women want to be just as gross and promiscuous as most men are.

Why on earth would it take limitations on abortion to get a woman to think twice about when to have sex, with whom, and so forth?

Abortion will not be out-lawed in all fifty states going forward. Currently, some states still permit abortion, while others still allow it but with more stipulations.

Things should never have gotten to this point in the first place.
Pro Choice feminists reassured all of us pro-lifers back years ago that abortions would be “safe but rare” if it were legalized, but now I see all these air-headed Gen Z or younger Millennial women screaming and yelling on social media about how “proud” they are that they had an abortion.

Some of them are acting like abortion getting limitations strips them of all birth control – were these sexually active young women not already on the pill, or making their boyfriends use condoms? Abortion should never be used as a form of birth control.

Maybe the best things is to abstain and not have ANY sex with another person, unless and until you marry.

I’ve seen a lot of women in the past 30 years write in to advice columnists broken hearted because they wanted a meaningful, lasting, committed relationship but although they were having sex with men, they weren’t getting the marriage proposals they expected to get, as liberal feminists assured them that having free sex anywhere, at any time, with anyone was “empowering.”

But for a lot of women, all that casual sex, or whatever type of sex prior to marriage (outside of a loving, committed relationship), wasn’t fulfilling or empowering.

I just find it so hypocritical that after years and years of seeing so many people, whether secular feminists, or progressive Christians, mock the concept of sexual abstinence and celibacy (or staying a virgin until marriage)
– and yes, I’ve even seen conservative Baptist and evangelical Christians give up on defending purity until marriage –
to suddenly see all these women advocate for celibacy!

Where were all these bitches for the years I’ve been on this blog advocating for celibacy or virginity-until-marriage to at least be respected as a viable life choice for women (and men) instead of something to mock and ridicule?

A lot of you women out there now having conniption fits and screaming about having a Sex Strike should have given sexual abstinence an honest consideration YEARS AGO, prior to the overturn of Roe V Wade.

By the way, I am specifically talking about consensual sex.
Too many feminists have the dishonest tendency to conflate the topics of consensual sex with rape and then condemn any and all discussion of female (or male) sexual restraint as being cruel or victim-blaming.

Links About Pro Choice Women Going on Sex Strikes

(Link): Sex Strike! Abstinence trends on Twitter in wake of Roe v. Wade ruling

June 25, 2022
By Emily Crane and  Irie Sentner

Big Apple abortion protesters were in support of a sex strike Saturday — as “abstinence” started trending on Twitter in the wake of the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe v. Wade.

“If you’re a man who won’t get a vasectomy, even though it’s reversible, and you’re not out in the streets fighting for my rights, you do not deserve to have sex with me,” Brianna Campbell, a 24-year-old EMT, told The Post.

Caroline Healey, a 22-year-old event coordinator, also questioned why sex was more important than women’s rights.

“I think it’s absolutely valid for us to be withholding the Holy Grail that men seem to think is important,” she told The Post at an abortion protest in Manhattan’s Union Square.

…“If this world thinks that they can oppress women forever, then we close our legs.”

Continue reading “Women Threaten to Go On Sex Strike In Protest Over SCOTUS Overturning Roe V Wade”

The Bedevilments of Sex: Louise Perry’s “The Case against the Sexual Revolution” by Ralph Leonard

The Bedevilments of Sex: Louise Perry’s “The Case against the Sexual Revolution” by Ralph Leonard

According to the review below – a review of Perry’s book ‘The Case Against the Sexual Revolution,’ she, Perry, to bolster her view, appeals to the concept of ‘evolutionary psychology,’ a discipline or worldview I do not agree with.

(In my understanding of it, evolutionary psychology ends up attributing socially conditioned behaviors to hardwired, in-born traits, and is, and has been used, to practice sexism against women, or to try to explain or justify sexist outcomes against women by men.)

I don’t support the history of, and on-going existence of, sexual double standards, where, for example, women get punished for sexual behaviors that men have routinely engaged in.

However, I also don’t support third wave feminist views or sexual excess, where some portions of society advocate for sexual hedonism.

Sexual hedonism, the “there should be no boundaries on sex” type of attitudes promoted by progressives, comes with its own set of problems which hurt people (especially women and children).

(Link):  The Bedevilments of Sex: Louise Perry’s “The Case against the Sexual Revolution” by Ralph Leonard

Excerpts:

June 3, 2022

[The author begins by explaining what by now should be a familiar refrain: the sexual liberation which was supposed to put women’s sexual behavior and choices on an even playing ground to that of men, has in the decades sense, apparently, resulted not in women’s sexual liberation, but in making a lot of women unhappy and straining relationships between men and women and in introducing a whole new set of problems.
The author says this is some of what the new book “The Case Against the Sexual Revolution” by Louise Perry has set out to tackle.]

… she [Perry] questions the notion that the sexual revolution has been a gain or a liberation for women. Quite the opposite. “Women have been conned,” she declares.

The sexual revolution, Perry emphatically argues, didn’t liberate them. Instead, it liberated the libidos of high-status playboys and lechers such as Hugh Hefner and Harvey Weinstein at the expense of women.

… This isn’t your usual traditional religious moralism.

Perry’s thinking is quite secular. It appeals to science (specifically, evolutionary psychology).

But, like religious moralism, which is based on the idea of man as a fallen being, Perry’s use of evolutionary psychology reveals the supposed limitations of our evolved nature.  …

Perry advertises her book as an attempt to reckon with the immense change the sexual revolution has created throughout society and culture. She proclaims that she does not endorse either “the accounts typically offered by liberals, addicted to a narrative of progress, or conservatives addicted to a narrative of decline.”

Instead, she makes the following arguments.

Continue reading “The Bedevilments of Sex: Louise Perry’s “The Case against the Sexual Revolution” by Ralph Leonard”

Actor Ezra Miller, Leftist Identity Politics, Pronouns, and the SBC (Southern Baptists) – Priorities Out of Kilter

Actor Ezra Miller, Leftist Identity Politics, Pronouns, and the SBC (Southern Baptists) Actor Ezra Miller, Leftist Identity Politics, Pronouns, and the SBC (Southern Baptists) – Priorities Out of Kilter

This is sheer lunacy.

Movie actor Ezra Miller has been in trouble for grooming under-aged girls (one of them is now 18 years old), if you’re not aware.

If you’d like more background, you can Google the guy’s name, and here are a few links about it:

(Link): Authorities ‘cannot locate or serve’ Ezra Miller after the actor was accused of grooming a teen, report says

(Link): Ezra Miller taunts police, deletes social media accounts

A string of memes mocking police was the last thing The Flash’s star posted before deleting their Instagram account

(Link): A Protection Order Has Been Issued After Ezra Miller Allegedly Groomed A Teen, But Nobody Can Seem To Locate The Actor To Serve Them 

(Link): Actor Ezra Miller accused of ‘cult-like’ behavior, abuse of indigenous teen 

Progressives on Twitter, though, are currently more concerned that people commenting upon these news stories may not be referring to Miller by “preferred pronouns” of “they” or “them,” which are generally used to refer to groups of people, not an individual (aside from maybe situations where the biological sex of a person is not known, and then “they” is sometimes substituted).

Referring to a person as “he” is not “misgendering,” by the way. “Misgendering” involves acknowledging that there is such a thing as a gender binary (male and female) to start with, which most progressive kooks deny in the first place.

Miller is a biological male, so to call Miller a “she” would be a case of “misgendering.”

The pronoun “they” is not a gender term in and of itself, since it can refer to either a male or female but is usually a plural term used to denote a group of people of one or both (mixed) sexes present; the word is not in and of itself a reference to biological sex either way.

If Miller isn’t comfortable with acknowledging via language that he (yes, I said “he”) is biologically a man, that doesn’t change reality. Miller is still a biological man regardless of what one label slaps on to him. It’s pointless to chuck out perfectly good pronouns such as “he” and “him” that society already has in place.

The woke liberals are more concerned that people refer to Miller as “they” or “them” than they are that Miller is grooming under-aged girls.

Continue reading “Actor Ezra Miller, Leftist Identity Politics, Pronouns, and the SBC (Southern Baptists) – Priorities Out of Kilter”

The Sexual Revolution Has Backfired on Women by S. Moore

The Sexual Revolution Has Backfired on Women by S. Moore

Before I paste in excerpts from the editorial, and though I’m a conservative, I’d like to say that I don’t agree with the usual conservative response to the “sexual revolution.”

First of all, too often, too many conservatives blame “women’s lib,” and the 1960s “sexual revolution” with any and all societal ills – conservatives will blame sexual promiscuity and so on for all that, but sexual promiscuity existed prior to the 1960s, and in other cultures.

Secondly, while I am not opposed to parenthood, the nuclear family, or marriage – or to the notion of waiting until marriage to have sex – too often, most conservatives instruct people that the way out of cultural rot is for everyone to marry, marry by the time they are 23, and have ten children. I disagree – for several reasons.

Marriage and parenthood do not keep people from sin, sexual or otherwise (see examples of what I mean in this post and in this post).

If you’re a Christian conservative, you should be aware that the Bible does not say that a “cure” for the individual or for society is marriage and parenthood – for more on that topic, please see (Link): this post, (Link): this post, and (Link): this post on this blog.

The Bible actually advises that singleness is preferable to marriage (see 1 Corinthians 7), and recall that Jesus of Nazareth never married, never had children, and he actually made some anti-nuclear-family-esque type comments (see posts linked to in the aforementioned paragraph for examples of that).

There are adults – like myself – who are single by circumstance (I had hoped to marry but it never came to pass). Some adults are single by choice, which is fine – nobody should be shamed or guilt tripped for being single by circumstance or for choosing not to marry.

The problem is not one’s martial status.

A person can remain single and celibate over a life time and manage NOT to rob liquor stores, not participate in looting and rioting, not pelt police officers with rocks, and not rape and murder people.

The problems stem from lack of self control and choice – do you choose to be a law abiding citizen or not? Being a law abiding citizen is not contingent on being married or on having children.

Hopefully, the editorial below does not fall back on the usual tropes of, “Oh dear me, if only everyone would marry young, have kids, and form their own nuclear families, society would be crime and sin free” fairy tale.

If women of any age are having difficulties getting a mate, or in staying married, the answer is NOT always or necessarily to return to stifling, sexist, 1950s American “pro marriage and pro nuclear family” positions.

Things are not always mutually exclusive or do not have to be – life for women does not have to consist of only two choices (this is a false dichotomy):

1. be a “sex positive” feminist lady who has sex with any body and every body or 2. be a traditional, stay-at- home wife and mother

You can cook up a third or fourth way of living life.  Life does not have to be lived by only one or the other parameter above. I don’t know why most on the right and some on the left continue to depict life as though only two avenues for women are possible.

I don’t entirely fit into either the left’s or the right’s notions of how women should live, and the older I get, I resent individuals, groups, or organizations (whether right, left, religious, or secular) condescendingly trying to define me or tell me how they think I should live, and at that, based on my biological sex.

There were a few aspects of this I didn’t agree with, but most of it seems okay enough:

(Link): The sexual revolution has backfired on women

Young women today are more sexually liberal than ever, but this could be extremely damaging – as the modern Mary Whitehouse has warned us

by Suzanne Moore
May 31, 2022

Who wants to be thought of as uncool, uptight and no fun? Certainly not young women who have been brought up to be “sex-positive”. This means being open, tolerant and progressive about sex, removing all judgment and shame and believing anything goes as long as those involved consent to it. It’s a beautiful idea: sexual freedom and enjoyment for all and personally I cannot wait for this revolution to happen.

It’s something of a shock, then, to be reminded that we are supposedly living in post-revolutionary times. As feminist author Louise Perry makes plain in her clear-sighted new book, The Case Against the Sexual Revolution: A New Guide to Sex in the 21st Century, what this actually means is a flood of pornography and hook-up culture, where a few swipes lead to casual encounters, “rough sex” is seen as routine, prostitution is viewed as just another career choice and we have the lowest rate of conviction for rape in a decade.

… It certainly is “progressive” for some men, who get to sleep with women who have been taught that all desires are acceptable and transgression is erotic, but the number of young women who tell stories of being choked and spat on or pushed into sexual acts they were not sure of, during what used to be called “one night stands”, is disturbing.

…But there is a case to be made that today’s aggressively sexual culture does not make many women happy; indeed quite the opposite. Some are paying such a high price for our so-called freedom that we might question what it all means.

Continue reading “The Sexual Revolution Has Backfired on Women by S. Moore”

Men Are Actually Blaming All Women for The Misogynic Progressive ‘Transwoman’ Lunacy – and not crediting feminists who’ve been speaking out on the issue for years – Men Like Rufo and Walsh Don’t Seem to Want to Share the Credit with Women

Men Are Actually Blaming All Women for The Misogynic Progressive ‘Transwoman’ Lunacy – and not crediting feminists who’ve been speaking out on the issue for years – Men Like Rufo and Walsh Don’t Seem to Want to Share the Credit with Women

I am a conservative. I am not a feminist.

I do not support the “woke” agenda, which would include things like denying the biological reality that there are two biological sexes, male and female.

I do not support men who “identify as women” (usually referred to as “transwomen”), especially if they have not undergone “bottom surgery,” being allowed into women’s only spaces, such as women’s prisons, bathrooms, and so forth.

Regardless if some of the wacko gender ideology we see today can be traced back to individual women writers of the 1990s or earlier (who were feminists), not all women can or should be blamed for that in particular, or for today’s out-of-control trans-activism.

Today’s trans activism insanity is, by and large, being carried along by MEN.

There are biological men with autogynephilia (a sexual fetish) and a large, first class case of Narcissism, who are hiding under the fig leaf of Gender Dysphoria to claim, “I’m a woman!,” and to also claim victim status and demand special rights.

That position is being helped along by male and female progressives.

But there are also biological women – of whatever political beliefs – who are opposed to biological men being allowed access into women’s only spaces, and some of them having been speaking out against trans activism going back years now.

And I have no idea what it matters if the numbers are more or less -ie, if there are more woman promoting trans activism or less.

No Studies, Polls, or Stats

One doofus or two who were arguing with me on Twitter earlier today (June 12) were blaming all women, women as a class, with no distinction, and saying the “numbers of women support trans activism outnumber those who speak out against it,” but neither individual cited me or linked me to any studies or polls (reputable or otherwise) to back up these assertions.

Based upon my anecdotal experience, I’ve seen a lot of biological women, and a few men, speaking out against progressive trans activism quite a bit the last few years – on twitter, on blogs, and in online magazine articles.

I’ve personally encountered very few biological women defending trans-insanity, and most of the women I’ve seen are opposed to progressive transgenderism, so I just tweeted back at one of those clowns,
“No, the women who are opposed to it outnumber those who support it.”

I’m sure some women who support leftist trans-activism may exist (there are progressive women (and men) crack pots who also support the quackery that is “anti racism” and “BLM,” after all), but I’ve seen far more speaking out against than in favor.

Some women have been speaking out against trans ideology for years, some for decades.

Ultimately, I’m not sure what difference it makes to argue that there may be more women supporting Trans Lunacy than oppose it… because it’s still unfair and inaccurate to blurt out, to suggest, that “women support it.” No, women are not a monolith on this subject.

As to the women who do oppose Trans Lunacy, some of them have been fighting it for years, before conservative men like Rufo and Walsh jumped on the band wagon.

Irreversible Damage by Abigail Shrier

One well known speaker and author against trans-insanity is a woman author, Abigail Shrier, who wrote a book about this issue, Irreversible Damage: The Transgender Craze Seducing Our Daughters, in 2020, and it was banned from a Irreversible Damage Book Coverfew online book stores for awhile, if I recall correctly.

From a review of Shrier’s book on Psychology Today:

The book posits that a sudden surge in the number of teen girls identifying as trans boys is due not to gender dysphoria or transgenderism but rather to girls with other mental conditions who are mistakenly self-identifying as trans because there is social capital built into marginalized identities.
— end excerpts —

Carlson gave Shrier credit for being among the first to discuss this in the United States (show date; June 14, 2022), see the video in the tweet below:

Men Helped Usher In Trans Activism, Too!

In the United States, we have male Presidents (Obama and Biden), and Governors, (and likely some male Congressmen and Senators) who are pushing for bills or laws to allow biological males who identify as women to be allowed into women’s prisons, locker rooms, and so on.

A small sampling:

(Link):  California Dishing Out Condoms To Female Inmates After Democrat Newsom [who is a man] Forces Them To Live With Men By Gabe Kaminsky

(Link): 20 States Sue Biden Administration For Corrupting Title IX With ‘Gender Identity’ Mumbo Jumbo

(Link): Biden’s [Joe Biden, a man] Title IX Rewrite Could End Women’s Sports, Let Men In Locker Rooms 

(There are also a few male (Republican) governors, such as Stitt and De Santis who are pushing against trans ideology.
But we also have male Democrats, such as Joe Biden and others, futzing around on the definition of “woman” so as to make permissible biological males being legally permitted into women’s bathrooms, sports teams, etc.)

Post Modernism and Gender Ideology

Gender ideology is also part of post-modernism and today’s progressive love of neo-Marxism, which biological men helped to usher in.

Karl Marx, who got this bus rolling, was a man. Marx’s belief in group identity and putting everyone into oppressed classes undergirds a lot of today’s far left’s gender ideology and “woke” politics.

Do I then blame all men of today for the lunacy of progressivism, of the neo-Marxist group identity politics, or say, “men are to blame for Marxism”? No, I don’t. Because that wouldn’t be fair or accurate.

In the past 60 or so years, in the United States, there have been both male AND female authors, intellectuals, and pundits who have helped craft ideas that led to CRT, queer theory, and so on.

So I don’t appreciate the clowns I run into on Twitter blaming all women (women as a group) for the actions or views of SOME women, and for causes that are neither wholly attributed to one sex or the other, such as leftist trans-activism.

All Men: Michael Foucault, Pat Califia, Gayle Rubin, Alfred Kinsey, John Money, Erwin Gohrbandt

Feminist women who dabbled in Gender Ideology over 20 years ago were joined by progressive men who love Marxism, who were opposed to the idea of objective truth, who support group identity politics, and Queer Theory (which men (and some women) had a large hand in, such as Michel Foucault, Pat Califia, and Gayle Rubin – again, those are men).

Even Matt Walsh, in some of his videos and commentary about wacko, leftist Gender Ideology advocates, occasionally name drops MEN who have aided and abetted this queer theory, pro-trans-agenda world view, such as Alfred Kinsey and John Money.

According to the person(s) at this Twitter Account, a man is behind the design of the Transgender “pride” flag, and that man (biological man) is named flagTransPride - CopyRobert Hogge but goes by “Monica Helms.”

Then we have John Money. I believe Walsh has mentioned Dr. John Money a time or two.

(Link): Dr. John Money, Father Of Gender Theory, Was A Pedophilia Apologist

Excerpts:

Would it surprise you to know that the normalization of gender fluidity is rooted in the same ideology as Critical Race Theory? You won’t be surprised once you understand the whole story.
— end —

(Link): John Money: The Pro-Pedophile Pervert Who Invented “Gender”

(Link): John Money

Excerpts:

John William Money (8 July 1921 – 7 July 2006) was a New Zealand psychologist, sexologist and author known for his research into sexual identity and biology of gender.
He was controversial for his conduct towards vulnerable patients, including sexual abuse and endorsing conversion therapy aimed at young children.
He was one of the first researchers to publish theories on the influence of societal constructs of gender on individual formation of gender identity. Money introduced the terms gender identity, gender role and sexual orientation and popularised the term paraphilia.
He spent a considerable amount of his career in the United States.

Recent academic studies have criticized Money’s work in many respects, particularly in regard to his perpetration of the involuntary sex-reassignment of the child David Reimer,[3] his abuse of Reimer and his twin brother (also a child) by forcing them to simulate sex acts that Money photographed,[4] and the adult suicides of both brothers.[4]
— end excerpts —

So, some of the key influential figures leading us down the path to today’s current Trans Insanity are all men:
Michel Foucault, Pat Califia, Gayle Rubin, and John Money.

Continue reading “Men Are Actually Blaming All Women for The Misogynic Progressive ‘Transwoman’ Lunacy – and not crediting feminists who’ve been speaking out on the issue for years – Men Like Rufo and Walsh Don’t Seem to Want to Share the Credit with Women”

Biological Males Who Identify as Non-Binary Permitted to Share Showers, Board With Biological Girls at Camp

Biological Males Who Identify as Non-Binary Permitted to Share Showers, Board With Biological Girls at Camp

The progressive, liberal, and Democrat acceptance and promotion of things like gender ideology, intersectional feminism, and “trans rights” have put biological girls and biological women in danger (when not putting them at a disadvantage, with the advantage going to the biological men who identify as “non binary” or as “transwomen”).

(Disclaimer: not all secular feminists agree with all gender ideology.
I myself am not a feminist, but often, other conservatives accuse feminism itself, or all feminists, of making these ideological assaults on girls and women to blame, but not all of them agree with this ideology, and they do speak out against it.)

Here’s another example of left wing gender ideology putting biological girls at risk (reported of by various news outlets):

(Link): California camp sleeping arrangements place biological males with school girls

February 19, 2022
by Jenny Goldsberry

Biologically male camp counselors shared cabins with young girls, fifth graders in California say.

The students from Weaver Elementary School in Los Alamitos, California , attended Camp Pali in San Bernardino for three nights in cabins purportedly separated by gender. Parents reported that they were not made aware of the camp’s policy on sleeping arrangements beforehand.

“I contacted the school and asked them if they were able to confirm that there was not a man actually sleeping in the same cabin as the girls,” parent Rachel Sandoval told local news outlet KTLA. “They were not able to confirm that.”

The camp said it was following state law.

“Per California law, we place staff in cabins they identify with,” Assistant Director of Camp Pali Emmi Teige said.

All staff undergo background checks and boast three recommendations, with “the vast majority” of them over 20 years old, according to the camp’s website . The ratio of counselors to children is 1 to 3, the website added.

(Link): Male ‘Non-Binary’ Counselors Sleep in Cabins With Young Girls at Science Camp; Parents Unaware

Feb. 20, 2022
by Karen Finlay

Los Alamitos, California. A group of parents of students at Weaver Elementary School in Los Alamitos were unaware that male counselors who use th ey/them pronouns slept in cabins with their fifth-grade daughters while at a science camp, until their daughters informed them afterwards.

Girls in fifth grade are typically 10- or 11-years-old.

Continue reading “Biological Males Who Identify as Non-Binary Permitted to Share Showers, Board With Biological Girls at Camp”

Midwifery Students At A University in Scotland Were Instructed on How To Care For a “Birthing Person” Who Has Male Genitalia (ie., Teaching that Men Can Give Birth)

Midwifery Students At A University in Scotland Were Instructed on How To Care For a “Birthing Person” Who Has Male Genitalia (ie., Teaching that Men Can Give Birth)

(Link): University Midwifery Students Taught Biological Men Can Give Birth

 April 29, 2022
by Jeremiah Poff, Education Reporter

Midwifery students at a university in Scotland were instructed on how to care for a “birthing person” who has male genitalia.

The instruction at Edinburgh Napier University was part of an online module on the proper use of a catheter while providing care for a “pregnant or birthing person.” A catheter drains the bladder and is sometimes used by pregnant women while they are giving birth.

“It is important to note that while most times the birthing person will have female genitalia, you may be caring for a pregnant or birthing person who is transitioning from male to female and may still have external male genitalia,” the lesson said.

(Link): Scots midwifery students taught that men can get pregnant as backlash sparked over ‘dangerous advice’

by Paul Rodger
April 29, 2022

Student midwives in Scotland are being taught how to care for pregnant men, prompting a backlash.

Those studying the medical speciality are being shown how to look after biological males who have given birth or are preparing to, including how to apply catheters.

At Edinburgh Napier University, students are being taught about it as part of an online module.

In a change to its advice on catheterisation, Napier switched “women” to “birthing people”.

Continue reading “Midwifery Students At A University in Scotland Were Instructed on How To Care For a “Birthing Person” Who Has Male Genitalia (ie., Teaching that Men Can Give Birth)”

What do Female Incels Really Want? By Kaitlyn Tiffany

What do Female Incels Really Want? By Kaitlyn Tiffany

(Link): What do Female Incels Really Want?

Excerpts:

By Kaitlyn Tiffany
May 12, 2022

“We were all ugly,” Amanda, a 22-year-old student from Florida told me, recalling the online community she found when she was 18. “Men didn’t like us, guys didn’t want to be with us, and it was fine to acknowledge it.”

This Reddit forum was called r/Trufemcels, and she commented there under the username “strangeanduglygrl.” Amanda didn’t post very often, but she checked in every day on the community of self-identified “femcels,” or involuntarily celibate women. (I agreed to refer to her by her first name only, to separate her current life from her former internet identity.)

They came to complain about the superficiality of men and the privilege of pretty women, and to share their experiences moving through the world in an unattractive body, which therefore disadvantaged them romantically, socially, and economically.

They were finding the modern dating landscape—the image-based apps, the commodified dating “market,” the illusory “freedom” to be found in hookup culture—to be unnavigable, and they talked about taking a “pink pill,” and opening their eyes to the reality that society was misogynistic and “lookist.”

Continue reading “What do Female Incels Really Want? By Kaitlyn Tiffany”