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”

Twitter Continues To Suspend Any Person or Group Who Mentions Rachel Levine’s Actual Biology or Original Name

Twitter Continues To Suspend Any Person or Group Who Mentions Rachel Levine’s Actual Biological Sex (Which is Male) or (His) Original Name (Which is “Richard”)

Since I first published this post, Twitter has gone on to suspend yet another individual over the biological male, Rachel “Richard” Levine. Post edited below with new link(s)


I already have a post or two about this subject.

I myself was suspended from Twitter over a year ago for pointing out that Richard Levine (who goes by “Rachel”) is a man who makes for one unattractive woman (which is true; he’s not an attractive person whether he presents as a man or a woman).

Since that time, Twitter continues to suspend or block any person or group who makes similar comments on their platform.

Progressives (other than Twitter) just do not like it when anyone disagrees with their leftist views of biological sex or their views on sexuality.

In the past week, Twitter has suspended conservatives Tucker Carlson, Charlie Kirk, and right leaning satire account The Babylon Bee for stating the truth: Rachel Levine is actually Richard Levine, a biological man who likes to wear skirts, lipstick, and his hair long.

As for me, I am a conservative, but I don’t really like Tucker Carlson or Matt Walsh and a few other conservatives across the board. These are conservatives who I do agree with on some topics while I disagree with them on others. Concerning the left’s lunacy in regards to transgenderism, though, I am in agreement with Walsh and Carlson.

For all the conservative men who keep asking, “Where are all the feminists?”

I’m not a feminist, I’m a conservative, but I loathe sexism, I follow several feminist social media accounts, and yes, some feminists have been calling out the Transgender movement for well over a year now, but they don’t receive much attention.

Such feminists are drowned out by the useful idiots (ie, feminists who support transgenderism). Transwomen refer to the feminist women who speak out against the radical trans agenda as “terfs” (trans exclusionary radical feminists).

Here is a round-up of the latest commentary or news articles about who Twitter has of late suspended for referring to Rachel Levine as being a man named Richard:

update: The Christian Post recently responded:

(Link): Disagreement is not hatred. Censorship is. (by The Christian Post editorial board)by Christian Post editorial board)

Excerpts:

March 29, 2022

The Christian Post was (Link): canceled last week by Twitter, over referring to Biden administration official Rachel Levine with an unsanctioned but arguably accurate descriptive pronoun.

It was both unsurprising and surprising; unsurprising since CP regularly covers the controversy surrounding trans-identified individuals and surprising since Twitter thought this particular story was more “hateful” than other stories, and warranted suspension.

CP appealed, and so far Twitter has been silent. It actually brings a Pink Floyd lyric to mind:  “Welcome to the Machine.”

There is much to say in arguing that our pronoun was accurate, but the larger question is: who is the hater here? Eliminating the voice of a publication because of a description that likely more than half of the world’s population would not object to is, in fact, hating that segment of the world.

Granted, Twitter is a private company and can play by the rules it establishes within the confines of the law. But if we are having a conversation about hate, how is it kind to eliminate a voice that disagrees, especially if there is no rancor involved?

Excerpt:

Twitter censored Breitbart News senior writer John Nolte after he made a joke about transgender Health & Human Services Assistant Secretary Rachel Levine.

Nolte was locked out of his account for 12 hours for tweeting that there should be a “Tweet Rachel Levine is a Guy Day.” He is the latest in a growing group of prominent conservative commentators who have been censored by Twitter this week for drawing attention to Levine’s real gender.

In an automated message to Nolte, Twitter informed him that he had violated the Twitter rules and would have to delete his tweet to regain access to his account.

(Link):  BREAKING: Charlie Kirk suspended from Twitter after naming Rachel Levine’s biological sex

“Everything I said was precisely accurate, and yet, Twitter still suspended my account. That should terrify every American, even those who disagree with me,” Kirk said.

Charlie Kirk, founder of TPUSA, talk radio host and outspoken conservative commentator, was suspended from Twitter on Tuesday after identifying President Joe Biden’s assistant health secretary in the Department of Health and Human Services as a man.

“Richard Levine,” Kirk wrote, “spent 54 years of his life as a man. He had a wife and family. He ‘transitioned’ to being a woman in 2011, Joe Biden appointed Levine to be a 4-Star Admiral, and now USA Today has named ‘Rachel’ Levine as a ‘Woman of the Year'[.] Where are the feminists??”

(Link):  Twitter is Punishing Another Account [Babylon Bee] Over Rachel Levine 

Excerpt:

by Rebecca Downs
March 20, 2022

On Sunday night, Babylon Bee CEO Seth Dillon shared over Twitter that the social media platform informed him that the account for the satirical news site “has been locked for violating the Twitter rules,” when it comes to “hateful conduct.”
The problematic tweet in question is from March 15, and links to a post from that same day proclaiming “The Babylon Bee’s Man Of The Year Is Rachel Levine.”

Continue reading “Twitter Continues To Suspend Any Person or Group Who Mentions Rachel Levine’s Actual Biology or Original Name”

Conservatives In Civil War Over Whether or Not Porn Stars Can Be Considered Conservative or Should Be Permitted To Attend Conservative Events

Conservatives In Civil War Over Whether or Not Porn Stars Can Be Considered Conservative or Should Be Permitted To Attend Conservative Events

I am a conservative, I don’t support pornography, but I’m not sure if I agree with other conservatives who have been saying lately that pornography movie actors cannot be conservatives.

It’s my understanding that some conservative type symposium sponsored by TPUSA (Turning Point U.S.A.), aimed at high school and college aged students, recently invited or permitted to attend, a porn star named Brandi Love, in Florida.

Ever since, conservatives have been feuding about this.

Some are saying, yes, porn actors should be permitted into the “conservative tent,” (or into conservative functions) while other say, “no way!”

My opinion is that yes, even porn stars can be politically conservative if they like, but I’m not sure it’s wise for one to actually attend an event for college students – and some said that while she was in attendance, she wore some kind of name badge with her “porn name” on it, to advertise her porn site or something(?)

I don’t think conservatives should defend porn, because porn is ultimately harmful to society and to women in particular – defending sexual hedonism and perversion is the province of liberals and leftists.

I see some overlap here and among the Christian faith, because a lot of Christians and churches used to defend the practice of remaining a virgin until marriage  (as they should), but in years past, they have begun defending sexual impurity and saying sex outside of marriage is no big deal.

Some churches, when having a “pro sexual purity” or “pro celibacy” event during church hours have been known to hire known fornicators – I’ve done posts about this subject in the past.

The Christians will never ask or hire an honest- to god- adult virgin to give a “sexual purity” lecture, no, they’d rather hire a person who FAILED at sexual purity.

It would be like hiring a food-addicted, 600 pound adult to give a “pro healthy eating” lecture at a church. It makes no sense.

Cancel Culture?

Some people are trying to market this move – of TPUSA of revoking her day pass – as cancel culture, but I’m not so sure.

If conservatives were trying to “cancel” Brandi Love, they’d be trying to ruin her entire career; there would be an on-going Twitter campaign by conservatives to “dog pile” and harass her on Twitter (which is not going on, AFAIK).

(If conservatives are harassing her, they should knock it off. I did read that some conservatives are defending her on Twitter.)

So far as I am aware, there are no conservatives writing to any of Love’s employers and demanding that she be fired and never allowed to work ever again – that would be the sort of thing that “cancel culture” leftists do.

Also note Love was not banned from the political conference due to differences in political opinion – the left always cancels people over political dissent. This banning was more over morals, not over a difference in view points.

Here is some material about this conservative feud:

(Link):  Conservative porn star Brandi Love fumes on Twitter about ‘cancel culture’ after she’s uninvited from GOP student event

I’m not sure if I agree with all of this essay or not:

(Link): About Porn Stars and Conservatism

Excerpts:

by B. Morse

…Now, the conversation has begun on the internet (read flame war) about where pornography fits into the big tent of conservatism after a right-leaning porn star, Brandi Love, showed up and was subsequently booted from a Turning Point USA event due to her profession.

This sparked a debate about whether or not Love can actually be a “conservative” and be a porn star with many of conservatism’s big names saying she can and others saying she can’t.

Continue reading “Conservatives In Civil War Over Whether or Not Porn Stars Can Be Considered Conservative or Should Be Permitted To Attend Conservative Events”

Matt Walsh V. Marriage Idolaters Such as Bradford Wilcox and Mark Regnerus

Matt Walsh V. Marriage Idolaters Such as Bradford Wilcox and Mark Regnerus

So, hyper conservative Matt Walsh tweeted this out in regards to a lady (I think she’s a model or actress? – her name is Julianne Hough) who says after she married her husband (who is a biological man) that she is “not straight” (which I assume means she is attracted to women – as well as to men(?)).

Here is Walsh’s tweet on the matter:

Oh so she lied to her husband and married him under false pretenses. What an inspiration.
—-

I’ve been a conservative for the duration of my life, but conservatives (who usually claim to be “Pro Family” and “Pro Marriage”) are often hypocritical about these topics, or hold some pretty odd, troubling views.

Many conservatives, especially ones who promote Male Headship Complementarianism, and the ones who are members of pro-family organizations and think tanks – such as Bradford Wilcox of the Institute For Family Studies – promote marriage at the expense of singleness (they regularly slam, insult, and put down singleness), or they promote some unethical, unbiblical views, as I’ve outlined in previous posts on my blog.

Continue reading “Matt Walsh V. Marriage Idolaters Such as Bradford Wilcox and Mark Regnerus”

Christian Gender Complementarians, Target Removing Gender Store Signs, Women and Motorcycles, Social Science Doesn’t Confirm that Men Are From Mars / Women From Venus

Christian Gender Complementarians, Target Removing Gender Store Signs, Women and Motorcycles, Social Science Doesn’t Confirm that Men Are From Mars / Women From Venus

I discussed on an older post how, since girlhood, I have really liked motorcycles and still do. I was a tom boy when I was a kid.

I was not into most girly hobbies, but my mother, who was a traditional Christian, tried to pique my interest in girly things by buying me dolls when I was a little girl.

My mother later relented a bit and bought me Evel Knievel toysI was a big fan of Evel Knievel back in the day, and I loved motorcycles.

Evel Knievel
Evel Knievel

I still maintain an interest in motorcycles but have never owned one. I was also into other people, things, or hobbies that were considered more boyish.

Should you wonder: I am a heterosexual woman who does not act or look “butch.” I can wear jeans with chucks and turn around and look damn stunning in short skirts and high heels the next. Men flirt with me and ask me out on dates.

Me being interested in motorcycles and things considered boyish since childhood did not result in me becoming terribly unfeminine or a lesbian.

I mention this because I think one reason some Christians assume if they can make little boys and girls adhere to narrow parameters of what they consider “manly” and “womanly” (which is almost always built on secular cultural stereotypes), that they can keep kids from becoming homosexual later in life.

I’ve written a little bit more about some of these subjects in an older post here:

I have discussed before how the conservative, gender Christian gender complementarian approach to gender has been a big turn-off to me, and how it’s one factor of many that makes it difficult to remain in the Christian faith.

Though I will say that Christians who teach and promote Christian gender egalitarianism are a source of encouragement, such as (Link): Christians For Biblical Equality, or (Link): these guys.

I was raised as a gender complementarian – both my parents are Christians who are into traditional gender roles, and my mother encouraged me to be a typical girly girl. (My mother has since passed away.)

For years and years, I felt and believed that the Bible does endorse the Christian gender complementarian view, as is promoted by CBMW (Christians for Biblical Manhood and Womanhood organization. They have a web site. I hesitate to link to their site from my blog. I really hate linking to their site).

As I grew older, I began suspecting that GC (gender complementarianism) is not true, based upon a closer look at the biblical text itself, which has examples in both Old and New Testaments of women, with God’s stamp of approval, leading and teaching men and killing men. I later totally abandoned the GC perspective.

I still remain a right wing, socially conservative, Republican-voting individual who is, by and large, on board with traditional values. Therefore, and contrary to what GCs fear and promote, jettisoning their position on gender is not a slippery slope; it does not always or necessarily turn a person into a liberal, a Democrat, pro-choicer, or a militant secular feminist.

Several days ago, some writer at CBMW, Grant Castleberry,  wrote a paper about how Target stores are removing signage that says “Boys” and “Girls” from their toy sections. Here is a link to that page, hosted on CBMW:

There were several rebuttals to this CBMW post (most of these written by Christians), such as:

(Link):  Target Is Not Trying to Destroy Gender by Laura Turner

(Link):  Why is the Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood Targeting My Kids? by Tim Fall

(I have disagreed with Tim Fall on a previous topic, but he’s a good egg, and I agree with him more often than not. I certainly agree with him on this Target story)

(Link):  I’m a woman, and God created me to do math and build robots

(Link):   Bigots Lose It Over Target’s Boy Toy Policy by S. Allen

Excerpts:

  • Target’s move toward gender-neutral toy aisles has us celebrating. But some unhappy people are threatening to boycott the store.
  • …And after (Link): Breitbart falsely reported that Target would be “getting rid of the words ‘boys’ and ‘girls’ on clothing” in addition to toys, many on Facebook are under the impression that the company will be removing all gender-based signs from its stores. The original post made it clear that keeping gender-based signage for apparel sections “makes sense” due to “fit and sizing differences.” Target has since (Link): reiterated to several customers: “We are not making any changes to our Men’s, Women’s, Boys’, Girls’, or Baby sections.”
  • …“I have news for [Target] and for everyone else,” he wrote. “God created two different genders.”
  • Fox & Friends found (Link): a psychotherapist who said that the decision went “overboard” and implied that children might “question what their gender is” if they were taken into a Target store without gender-based signage. The caption on the segment: “‘Sign’ of the Times.” Nothing like some light Second Coming humor to kick off your morning.
  • (Link): Blaze contributor and self-declared “professional truth sayer” Mike Walsh blamed Target’s decision on “a few hypersensitive, hyperliberal parents” in a provocative post headlined, “Yes, Target, I Do Want My Daughter to Conform to Her Gender.”
  • Wrote Walsh: “I won’t attempt to defend every gender stereotype or ‘gender norm,’ but I do subscribe to the radical theory that boys and girls are different and distinct from one another in complex, concrete, and important ways, and many of the dreaded ‘norms’ are, well, normal and biological.”
  • Walsh conveniently lays bare the fundamental internal contradiction in the anti-Target outcry: If gender is a universal, biological, and God-ordained constant, then why do children need cultural reinforcement from a retail chain to figure it out? In the bizarro world of far-right logic, gender is at once the strongest force on the planet and the most fragile.
  • The God of Genesis may have created male and female but unless Target puts these words on signs for action figures and Barbie dolls, all of His hard work will be undone.
  • The protests seem to be motivated by the paradoxical fear that children will grow up genderless without Target’s help even though their biology should supposedly guide them into pink and blue aisles without any intervention.
  • But Target is not attacking gender itself, only the outdated idea that girls and boys should play with certain shapes and colors of molded plastic and not others.

Continue reading “Christian Gender Complementarians, Target Removing Gender Store Signs, Women and Motorcycles, Social Science Doesn’t Confirm that Men Are From Mars / Women From Venus”

Christians Teaching That All Sexual Sins Are Equal – Thoughts and Reflections

Christians Teaching That All Sexual Sins Are Equal – Thoughts and Reflections

I found out that Janet Mefferd, (Christian personality – she had her own radio program until April 2015) – wrote this the other day, or today:

(Link):   Predators, Dangerous Deviants & J.D. Hall by Janet Mefferd

Here are a few excerpts:

  • You know the story by now, so I won’t rehash it. But on social media, I’ve been quite clear about my position on this rallying cry of:
  • Don’t judge Josh! He’s forgiven! Aren’t we all sinners? There but for the grace of God go I!”
  • To this simplistic mentality, I have said: “There’s more to this than just that.” Josh Duggar may have been forgiven by God, but he also got away with his sex crimes at the civil level. Read the online news reports for more on how that happened.
  • And a truly repentant sinner both repents before God and accepts the full legal consequences for any crimes he has committed, without equivocation, cover-up, excuse or carefully worded PR statements.
  • So again, I called for evangelicals to stop all this cheap-grace garbage and start addressing the problem of sexual abuse in our circles with more screening, more reporting and more compassion for the victims.
  • Now in airing my views on Josh Duggar out on social media, I apparently made some people mad. Par for the course; I am used to it. But soon, the barbs moved in a direction that really shocked me.
  • Some people actually started telling me that we’re all basically sexual predators at heart.
  • One follower informed me that “All 14-year-old boys want to molest girls.”
  • He went on to tell me, “We have all committed sexual assault, if only for a second, if only in the heart.”

Before I continue, I would like to say that no, I  personally have never, not once in my life, thought about, considered, or fantasized about raping or sexually assaulting another human being.

Me saying that I’ve never fantasized about sexually assaulting another person is not the same as claiming, “I am totally without sin and have never sinned.”

The Bible says that everyone sins and shows that they do so in their own way.

However, the Bible does not teach that all people are guilty of the same exact sorts of sins, or of every sin, or that all types sins are as equally severe as other types of sins.

I suppose the “Christians” saying these things – the ones claiming that everyone fantasizes about rape – must think they sound very pious, but they sound troubled and like lunatics. I do seriously think a lot of them probably need to visit mental health professionals.

You can visit that page ((Link):  Predators, Dangerous Deviants & J.D. Hall by Janet Mefferd) to get a better, more thorough idea of what’s going on, but in a nut shell, we have examples of Christians – and there are a lot of them, ever since the  (link): Duggar story and (link): Village Church story broke – who equate all sins.

As of late, on social media and on blogs, you can find some Christians saying off-the-wall things, such as, all Christian men think about rape, fantasize about raping women.

Continue reading “Christians Teaching That All Sexual Sins Are Equal – Thoughts and Reflections”