A new documentary, Oral Sex Is the New Goodnight Kiss, chronicles America's moral decay. Sharlene Azam, a Canadian filmmaker, says, "If you talk to teens [about oral sex], they'll tell you it's not a big deal. In fact, they don't consider it sex. They don't consider a lot of things sex." In the documentary, teenage girls talk casually about their sexual experiences and even their forays into prostitution.
One girl sums up the new attitudes: "Five minutes and I got $100. If I'm going to sleep with them anyway because they're good-looking, might as well get paid for it, right?"
Azam said that this was going on in good homes right under parents' noses: "The prettiest girls from the most successful families [are the most at risk]. We're not talking about marginalized girls. [Parents] don't want to know because they really don't know what to do. I mean, you might be prepared to learn that, at age 12, your daughter has had sex, but what are you supposed to do when your daughter has traded her virginity for $1,000 or a new bag?" ...........
That really interesting, Maria.
ReplyDeleteOf course, you realize that you're citing as a reference Henry Makow, the writer who believes that the world is secretly, Satanically controlled; that the Illuminati and the Freemasons are behind it all, along with a secret cabal of Masonic Jews; and that the Protocols of the Elders of Zion is authentic?
Very compelling source. Most impressive.
Balbulican - the internet is like stepping into a buffet area. Wide and varied choices to suit every palate, and everywhere as far as the eye can see.
ReplyDeleteI am allergic to a number of food items on display, but that does not stop me from entering the dining area and taking my pick of the foods I like.
And, Henry Makow is not the only one who has the info about Gloria Steinem having been a CIA agent. There is ample verification in hundreds of places for those who would prefer to doubt what Makow has to say on Steinem.
The radical feminists have managed to create a system in which women are worse off than they were before these zealots attempted to change society. In their insidious calculations as to how to empower women they forgot to factor in the male of the species. Their attempts to emasculate nearly half the population has worked out fine for the men. They no longer have any responsibilities.
ReplyDeleteTake a good look around. A great many, though by new means all, the partnerships among the younger generation are one way streets. The male latches on to a woman that has a job, moves in, and immediately resumes his relationship with his still single buddies. He does not assume the old style role of the woman. He still leaves the house cleaning, the cooking, and the bill paying to her. And, when she becomes pregnant he moves on to another gal with a job and the ability to support him. The woman is now left with a child and no means to support him. Collecting money from the deadbeat is impossible because he is living off the avails of his latest co-habitee and has no income.
The old system, as one-sided as it was, demanded of the man that he at least support the family unit. Now there is no such requirement. Women now do both jobs.
This, of course, is not the situation in the majority of cases, although the holding down of a job and doing the household chores, still falls predominantly on the woman. Women may have changed their roles, but men haven't necessarily changed theirs. The principal group that suffers the most severe consequences of this system is the children who now are shuffled off to some strangers house or to the tender mercies of the state.
To give you a simple example of how the system is now skewed more in men's favour I offer this first hand experience. I once owned a tanning salon that was across the street from a night club. On Wednesday nights the club brought in male strippers and men were not allowed into the main lounge until after 10:00 PM. My wife used to deliver promotional flyers to the club on these nights and I would accompany her. I, of course, could not go into the main lounge so I would have a couple of beers with the guys in the other portion of the club. The general consensus among the young men gathered there was that this was a great situation. Since the woman were on their own, they had to buy their own drinks. The guys thought this was wonderful since they didn't have to spend money on their girlfriend or pickup for the night. By the time 10:00 rolled around, the gals were half oiled and the guys had a cheap night. In my day, you spent the whole evening plying your girlfriend, or assignation for the evening, with drinks. Obviously, I was born thirty years too soon.
There is nothing wrong with many of the aims of the more reasonable feminists. Their mistake is that, like Obama and health care, you can't change society overnight if half the population doesn't want change. Many of the goals of the feminists are very slowly being realized but, in the interim, a great many females are paying a terrible price for the attainment of these goals.
Powell Lucas - you are absolutely right. I have so many stories to tell from the mishaps and adventures that my young nieces have to go through on how Feminism has spoilt there chances of meeting men who are upstanding and willing to commit to marriage and love. Why will men want to commit when they can find plenty of women only too willing to do their biding at a moment's notice? This has all come about because of the loose morals that modern feminism advocates. Sex is like nothing and marriage is even less so. Children born out of wedlock is the norm of the day.
ReplyDeleteFeminism has actually been a boon for men and these stupid idiotic females who scream the virtues of feminism are so dumb they will never even understand that it is so.
If the best evidence you found to present comes from a psycopath, I see no reason to dig any further.
ReplyDeleteMariaS-Thanks for the comment.
ReplyDeleteI hope your readers don't get the impression that this was an anti-female diatribe. Many of the goals of the feminist movement are valid and worthy. No woman should be denied the ability to exercise her talents to the full limit of her capabilities. In any social structure there are only so many geniuses for a given number of that population. There are only so many exceptionally bright and intuitive people in that population group. There are only so many people with the capability to make advances in civilization that are truly momentous.
Setting aside the fairness question, and viewing it from a purely economic standpoint, it is ridiculous to deny opportunity to those segments of the population on the basis of gender, skin colour, or faith. To do so means that society is utilizing less than half of its potential brainpower. It's ridiculous.
As you surmised, my point is not to deny women a equal role in society, but simply to state that changing thousands of years of social norms cannot be done with a wave of the hand. And to attempt to do so creates a backlash that only penalizes that segment of the population that the radical feminists wish to empower and opens the door for those who would take advantage of the women who, themselves, are confused about their role in society.