Corrupted purity.

MarcusD pointed out a recent article by Samantha Pugsley:  I Waited Until My Wedding Night To Lose My Virginity And I Wish I Hadn’t.  Salon published the same article under the title My Christian virginity pledge nearly destroyed me.

This is of course catnip for feminists (Christian or otherwise), who have been diligently inverting the very concept of sexual morality.  According to this new view, teaching sexual morality is immoral.  It is considered immoral because in the feminist view it disempowers women, especially young women.  Not surprisingly, an essential part of Pugsley’s “healing” is to remember that sex is only moral when it is miserly:

When I have sex with my husband, I make sure it’s because I have a sexual need and not because I feel I’m required to fulfill his desires.

Most of this is exactly what it seems, a rationalization for sexual immorality by women and feminists.  With that said, there is something creepy about the modern purity movement.  However, the perversion in modern Christianity is not teaching women (or men) virginity until marriage, but the often unspoken belief that women should delay marriage. Sexual desire isn’t presented as bad or dirty in the Bible. The biblical solution to sexual desire is to marry and have sex, but the vast majority of modern Christians are horrified at the idea of young marriage, especially for women. As a result of trying to teach purity while being hostile to traditional marriage, we end up with the perverse replacement of the father for the groom (scroll down to see all of the photos), the groom he is keeping her from marrying.

But make no mistake, the perversion isn’t in teaching virginity until marriage, but the accompanying hostility to women marrying in their late teens or early twenties.

This entry was posted in Frigidity, Miserliness, New Morality, Ugly Feminists. Bookmark the permalink.

132 Responses to Corrupted purity.

  1. Ra's al Ghul says:

    “it’s because I have a sexual need”

    It is because I want it.

    ME!

    What he wants, is not relevant, it is beneath her to dignify it with anything other than dismissal.

    Its not just miserly, its not just selfish.

    It narcissistic.

    I have come to the conclusion that what feminism and modern society is pushing is an environment where people with personality disorders have free reign.

    You can’t even call a person that is in fact crazy, crazy without being accused of abuse.

  2. Guy Incognito says:

    From the article;

    “When I have sex with my husband, I make sure it’s because I have a sexual need and not because I feel I’m required to fulfill his desires.”

    Yeah, I’m guessing this article would never have been written if the author were still attracted to her husband.

  3. HawkandRock says:

    What if a husband said: “When I give my wife money, I make sure it’s because she is buying something that I need and not because I feel I’m required to provide for her needs.”

    Now tell me the fundamental difference between what this powerful modern woman says and what the hypothetical husband says.

    Both are self-centered a-holes who really shouldn’t be married at all.

  4. donalgraeme says:

    There is a lot pseudo-gnostic nonsense out there, especially in Churchian circles. Not that it is anything new, really. The Church has been fighting off heresy about sexuality for millennia.

    I do agree about the purity movement being off the rails. It seems to be a mostly Protestant thing, from my perspective, but perhaps I just missed it. Any Catholics or Orthodox who’ve seen it in their churches?

  5. {Margery} says:

    Donal, this article was discussed in a Catholic women’s circle I stalk online. The consensus was that this is a Protestant thing. Being a baby Catholic myself I can’t comment but that observation is not just one you made.

  6. jf12 says:

    “Sexual desire isn’t presented as bad or dirty in the Bible. The biblical solution to sexual desire is to marry and have sex”

    This is all I’ve ever heard explicitly. I cannot vouch what old women are telling young women.

  7. desiderian says:

    Of course it’s creepy. But it does still beat the usual willful ignorance of what your kids are doing sexually that has become the standard for American fathers. Shows just how corrupt that standard is.

    Anything that can be done, even things that should be done, can be done, will be done, badly. That’s the nature of fallen humanity.

    The only way to avoid ever being pathetic is to be apathetic. We’ve had enough apathetic fathers already.

  8. desiderian says:

    “I cannot vouch what old women are telling young women.”

    This batch of old women came up with the bright idea that its none of their business.

    Except of course the progs and fundies.

  9. JDG says:

    Its not just miserly, its not just selfish.

    It narcissistic.

    And it is feminism in a nutshell.

  10. jzb says:

    I don’t think we can dismiss the psychological struggles this woman has had with the purity thing.

    I’m all for people being virgins, but I think we all can admit that the church sucks at life on a lot of issues, and that the church succeeds quite often at fucking up the psychological/emotional well beings of its members.

    Churchianity sucks dicks.

  11. “I don’t go to church anymore, nor am I religious. As I started to heal, I realized that I couldn’t figure out how to be both religious and sexual at the same time. I chose sex.”

    I wonder if she realizes how sad that sounds.

  12. colonelpopcorn says:

    The red pill goes down hard…..
    Girls will continually talk about ‘the one’ being a nice Christian guy they can settle down with, and then they promptly proceed to disqualify any nice Christian guys by putting on their purity rings and becoming ‘married’ to their future spouse, dad, God, etc. What they really want is a guy who doesn’t care about respecting the institution of marriage and will initiate romantic contact with her despite her wearing a symbol of life long commitment.
    I gripe because most of the purity rings I see are worn on the ring finger of the left hand, a spot normally reserved for a wedding band.

  13. theasdgamer says:

    OT but important field report

    Panera’s is apparently the new Sunday morning night club. Especially those near churches.

    It was unbelievable. I don’t expect readers to believe this. I wouldn’t unless I had seen it with my own eyes and heard it with my own ears.

    A shy, pretty Asian engineering major approached me as I was reading a sci fi book. Maybe I could pass for 40 if someone wasn’t looking very hard. Anyway, she sexualized early by hiking up her dress to show a seven-inch-long scar on her thigh. What???? I led her on a bit (sexualized subtly and built comfort) to see how far she would go. Numbers were exchanged. I am repulsed at the whole mess and saddened. I am an observer, not a judge, though.

    Must be that Eau de Retired Pickup Artist that Roissy has been selling that attracted the college chick. Gotta laugh or I’ll cry.

    Unbelievable! What the hell is this world coming to that a shy, nerdy college student approaches an old fart like me with sexual antics? This is now twice in a couple of months that a woman has hiked up her dress to me.

    TFH, it’s like shooting fish in a barrel.

  14. theasdgamer says:

    @ jzb

    …the church succeeds quite often at fucking up the psychological/emotional well beings of its members.

    Churchianity sucks dicks.

    Meh, the people who report this anti-sex message are conveniently misremembering the message. I’ve lived in the Bible belt for a long time and have never heard this message. I don’t believe that churchianity is pushing this message, much as I love to throw rocks at churchianity.

  15. mustardnine says:

    I value the Biblical concept of virginity; respect it; teach it.

    But the “value” of virginity can be taught to daughters in an unhealthy way. Here’s how, by the All-too-common Christian Mom:

    Mom: Daughter, there’s something I have to tell you, now that you have started menstruating. Virginity is something that you LOSE. You LOSE it only once, and you can NEVER GET IT BACK. Before I married your father, I was a virgin good girl. On our wedding night, he TOOK it from me. It hurt. I cried. Pretty soon I was pregnant with your older brother. I had morning sickness. Your father has never understood how much he OWES me, how often he bosses me around and expects me to do stuff. You’ve seen how he treats us all. Men are a lot of trouble. Still, if you want children, and I know you will, that’s what YOU’LL HAVE TO SACRIFICE for. Lord knows that’s what I had to do. And I don’t care how long you live with your husband, YOU’LL NEVER GET YOUR INNOCENCE BACK. That will be something that is GONE FOREVER. (Your husband will OWE you a DEBT that he will never be able to repay. Just like your father and I.)

    Get the frame? In my neck of the woods, variations of this have been taught to church-going Christian girls for 100 years. By their mothers and aunts, not necessarily in the official doctrines of the Church, mind you.

  16. Bee says:

    Samantha Pugsley now says she is bisexual.

    She also says she married a feminist man.

    She says Purity Churches don’t advocate men also being virgins! FALSE. A lie from Pugsley.

  17. jf12 says:

    @tasdg, it does seem to be the life choice of too many women that sex is something for outside of marriage, but it’s not good to lead them on.

    I do think Dalrock is correct that the fault is the church’s insofar as young people aren’t being taught/ordered/cajoled into marrying as young as feasible. The impurity pipeline that I have seen escalating over the decades is mid-teen girls suddenly becoming more worldly and dropping out of church in order to be sexually impure with older bad boys not in church. By the later teens, most of the church boys have given up on any church girls being interested, and drop out too. By the early-mid twenties, many of the girls return, mildly repentant, as often as not with a tot or two or three in tow as single moms, and when their assortative equals return once in a while, they are encouraged to “man up and marry those (repentant) sluts”. But make no mistake, that manning-up speech is caused by the slutting up earlier, not vice versa.

  18. The Brass Cat says:

    Yes, those photos are indeed creepy with the father standing in the groom’s place. (It doesn’t help that they’ve been altered with photo effects to look faded.) But getting past the creep factor, the photos are also sad because the girls are being crushed between the competing interests of delayed marriage and chastity while the fathers stand by, quite impotent to act. They’ve been given the wrong solutions for so long that they can’t even imagine anything else.

  19. theasdgamer says:

    @mustardnine

    Your husband will OWE you a DEBT that he will never be able to repay. Just like your father and I.

    Hamsterlation: Your father and your future father were unattractive betas who didn’t deserve our sexual attention. Hence we will hold them accountable for taking what we would have been overjoyed to throw at Harley McRockbanddrummer without ever regretting it.

  20. theasdgamer says:

    @ jf12

    @tasdg, it does seem to be the life choice of too many women that sex is something for outside of marriage, but it’s not good to lead them on.

    Not good–agreed. Necessary, sometimes. Always with self-awareness and self-control. Dangerous, always.

  21. What is the statistic?

    95% of all people, including Christians, have sex before they’re 30?

    I can see why purity is pushed, but in some circles it is made into an idol.

    Obviously, as has been stated, the correct thing to do is earlier marriage.

  22. theasdgamer writes: “Panera’s is apparently the new Sunday morning night club. Especially those near churches. . . . ”

    Well good heavens! I wish I’d learned this last night. Time to take up my soup habit again.

    At least it wasn’t a seven inch tattoo; but still I’m wondering if this was the result of some sort of self-harm. Certainly the uninvited exhibition was very odd. Was this a “pink sci-fi” book, btw?

    All the same, if you’re not presently claimed, and the young lady has taken a fancy to you– and numbers WERE exchanged– you might as well try whether this fragile soul is susceptible to healing.

    –I’m indulging vicarious Sensibility, of course. It would make an interesting experiment to park in a booth with, say, the ESV Study Bible, and see what swims into view. Or the Divine Comedy, for ambiguity.

    I don’t think I’ve been completely cold-approached by a girl (a memorable one, anyway) since I was seventeen. Ayn Rand-reading stoner chick. theadsgamer earns props.

  23. mrteebs says:

    Ms. Pugsley seems confused on multiple levels.

    She is bisexual so is obviously confused about that.
    She believes the Bible holds men guiltless for fornication so is obviously confused about that.
    She believes that first penetration would not have been painful had she and her painful because of her chastity vow, so is obviously confused about that.
    She was not able to discern whether having her breasts fondled and looking at each other naked was “crossing the line” sexually so is obviously confused about that.
    She felt soiled and dirty for losing her virginity on her honeymoon so is obviously confused about that.
    She hated sex with her husband so is obviously confused about who and what she loves.
    She is convinced that virginity is a contrived concept used to control women’s sexuality so is obviously confused about that.
    And, she thinks that sex before marriage would have been the panacea to all of the above so is obviously confused about that.

    And the confusion does not seem to have remained confined to her. Her feminist husband was “horrified” that she had allowed him to touch her ever when she wasn’t in the mood. It seems she is still married, as she speaks of him in present tense, and cheerfully notes her bisexuality in her bio. Takes being cuckoled to a whole ‘nother level.

  24. Pingback: Morena District Travesty « SD Rostra

  25. mrteebs says:

    Dang. Can’t edit a comment once left.

    Meant to say “She believes that first penetration would not have been painful had she and her husband not honored her chastity vow, so is obviously confused about that.

  26. donalgraeme says:

    @ Margery

    Thanks.

  27. RichardP says:

    God saw that Adam had no help proper for him, and so made him a wife. That is God’s expectation for this current creation of his: every man is expected to have the kind of wife that God gave to Adam. Now, go study Genesis 3 to find out exactly what kind of a wife God made for Adam. He could have made Eve to be however he wanted her to be. And so he did.

    “For the life of a creature is in the blood, and I have given it to you to make atonement for yourselves on the altar; it is the blood that makes atonement for one’s life.” (Leviticus 17:11; niv) “… without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness (of sin).” (Hebrews 9:22; niv)

    God’s expectation for this current creation is that we will be redeemed, not perfect – reconciled to him through our belief in the efficacy of the final sacrifice God himself gave – the shed blood that we can point to when we call on God for forgiveness. God’s expectation is that we (male and female) will sin, not that we will be perfect (elsewise, there would be no need for the final sacrifice).

    If God intended this current creation to be imperfect (a valid assumption, since he could have made it otherwise), and to need the covering of the final sacrifice, why should we expect otherwise from ourselves and others? Rather than encouraging their children to be perfect, parents would do well to teach them that they can’t be perfect, that they should look to the final sacrifice as a covering for that imperfection, and to recognize the Holy Spirit’s call to repentence when it comes, and to yield to that call.

    Men are fooling themselves when they expect a wife different from the one God gave to Adam.

  28. “What if a husband said: “When I give my wife money, I make sure it’s because she is buying something that I need and not because I feel I’m required to provide for her needs.””

    Better yet, “wife of mine, I don’t feel like going to work and earning money today. I have a headache. Maybe if you did some housework that would rev up my engines and get me in the mood to earn money.”

  29. How does she know she’s bisexual if she’s still married?

  30. Novaseeker says:

    The purity stuff indeed results from the very odd combination of simultaneously insisting on chastity AND late marriage. It’s a disastrous mix, but no-one in the churches wants to admit that because most of them are “all in” on the new life script for their daughters. So you end up with creepy substitution like that.

    Donal, I haven’t seen that in the Orthodox churches, but we are very small and less prone to some of the more mainstream stuff. I do not entertain any illusions, however, that young Orthodox women are more chaste than young women in other churches prior to marriage.

    As for this: When I have sex with my husband, I make sure it’s because I have a sexual need and not because I feel I’m required to fulfill his desires.

    Well, I guess that goes for him as well — sex is there to satisfy his sexual needs, and not to fulfill *your* desires, Samantha. Selfishness for both. I guess that’s equality, huh?

  31. Novaseeker says:

    Either they have an “open with people of the same sex” arrangement, or she’s talking about attraction, and admits that she is sexually attracted to women.

    The latter would be my guess because situations like the former are not common. In any case, claiming to be bisexual is all the rage in some segments of the herd today. I think women have a higher incidence of tending towards some kind of bisexuality (without labeling themselves as such, generally — surveys and studies consistently indicate very few women self-identify as bisexual), but in almost all cases it is not acted upon.

  32. greyghost says:

    The husbands response would be
    “I don’t have a stay at home wife she works. She pulls her own weight. I don’t spend any of my money on her unless she’s been good in the sack then I might take her out to dinner. Last week end we went to a swingers party and I put some tires on her car”

  33. Sluttiness and Frigidity are two sides of the same coin; often the one will flip into the other at the drop of a hat. Just look at the pro-sex feminists who label everything as rape, and the ex-churchian girl who becomes a complete tramp halfway through college.

    Chastity lies between the two extremes; it’s about having sex at the right time. The Purity movement is nothing but the celebration of frigidity, the idolization of the fact of virginity, rather than the choices which lead to sex with the right person at the right time. Honest to God, the porn industry is more responsible with their treatment of their actresses than the Purity Movement churches are.

  34. greyghost says:

    What is really getting under the skin of the feminist is that the girls look into it and are proud of their fathers. That is why they think it is creepy. Something must be wrong with them to actually like a beta family man. Feminist spend all of their time and energy encouraging the world to hate those same men.

  35. MarcusD says:

    @Guy Incognito

    “When I have sex with my husband, I make sure it’s because I have a sexual need and not because I feel I’m required to fulfill his desires.”

    Yeah, I’m guessing this article would never have been written if the author were still attracted to her husband.

    Which happens to be part of the reason I suggested that her article was driven by a regret of not hopping onto the carosello.

    @Deep Strength

    What is the statistic?

    95% of all people, including Christians, have sex before they’re 30?

    According to the GSS, it’s 95.4% by age 28 for females (2000-2012). 94.1% for unmarried female respondents.

    For males, it’s 92.8% by age 28, and 91.8% for unmarried males.

  36. embracing reality says:

    Having suffered adolescence in the mega churches of the pentecostal/charismatic movement It was understood by the young men that most of the attractive and moderately attractive females were penetrated early on by the first bad boy that asked. The bad boys usually didn’t attend church. I remember quite a few teen and twentysomething tramps in church with babies in tow. It’s amazing how free flowing the grace with extra gravy was for sluts. I don’t remember seeing the slightest bit of repentance or humility from the sluts in question or the slightest bit of accountability applied to them from anyone especially the pulpit. I can only thank God I had the good fortune not to ‘man up’ and marry up a slut. I’ve seen the results of that bad decision second hand, it looks like hell on earth to me.

  37. theasdgamer says:

    @ Lucius

    At least it wasn’t a seven inch tattoo; but still I’m wondering if this was the result of some sort of self-harm. Certainly the uninvited exhibition was very odd. Was this a “pink sci-fi” book, btw?

    It looked like a real surgery scar. The exhibition was uncommon, to be sure. There was another unveiling within the last couple of months–at a night club. The book was a collection of short stories by Fritz Leiber.

    if you’re not presently claimed

    Ah, I have taken vows….

    the young lady has taken a fancy to you– and numbers WERE exchanged– you might as well try whether this fragile soul is susceptible to healing.

    Perhaps I can refer her to another “healer.”

    I’m indulging vicarious Sensibility, of course. It would make an interesting experiment to park in a booth with, say, the ESV Study Bible

    and studying select passages of the Song of Solomon. [wink]

    I don’t think I’ve been completely cold-approached by a girl (a memorable one, anyway) since I was seventeen

    This is the second time in the last month for me and third in the last three months. I wonder if there is some sort of sea-change in the works in the SMP. Maybe I’m the canary in the coal mine.

    theadsgamer earns props.

    Thanks, but I think that I just showed up and didn’t screw up by pedestalizing or supplicating. Rember the Brady Rules:

    1. Be attractive.

    2. Don’t be unattractive.

    3. Be attractive.

  38. redacted_jr says:

    Here’s a fun one. I swore this was the Onion, until I saw otherwise.

    http://nypost.com/2014/08/13/nyc-career-women-gather-at-egg-freezing-party/

  39. Carmack says:

    Saw this linked on Facebook and thought it worth posting. A Christian wife/mom who had premarital sex responds.

    http://savannahartman.com/?p=690

  40. RobJ says:

    She calls herself bisexual, so by definition, her “feminist husband” cannot satisfy all of her “needs,” no matter how nice he is. Feminist Checkmate!

  41. The Brass Cat says:

    @greyghost

    What is really getting under the skin of the feminist is that the girls look into it and are proud of their fathers. That is why they think it is creepy. Something must be wrong with them to actually like a beta family man. Feminist spend all of their time and energy encouraging the world to hate those same men.

    That’s probably a big factor for them. But the, um, creative application of a filter definitely strikes a creepy tone. I suppose doctoring up photos is par for the course.

    I’m an outsider looking in so I might not have all the details, but these chastity dances come across to me as last ditch efforts that are bound to fail. Is the plan for the daughter to live with the parents until a suitable groom is found? Because that’s what it would take… don’t let her out of site for a minute.

    It’s natural that Feminists would be enraged about anyone attempting to defy the Sexual Revolution or even entertain the idea of saving oneself for marriage. They attack gleefully in fact because there are no consequences, as far as they can tell. Feminists habitually light fuses then become confused when a bomb goes off. Part of their problem is fundamentally misunderstanding human behavior/nature . . .

    I knew an old Feminist (IRL) in her 60s who lamented how the “young women don’t respect themselves today” in response to young women’s trashy taste in fashion and vulgar language. It was her generation that gave us the Sexual Revolution but she couldn’t connect that with her observations of modern behavior. Cognitive dissonance much? I’m thinking back to that now and seeing how she fundamentally did not understand human behavior. She must have thought that “liberating” women from societal constraints would allow their innate goodness and beneficence to flow forth to elevate all mankind. Quite confusing when instead they dress like prostitutes and curse like sailors. She was never able to put 2 and 2 together.

  42. The Brass Cat says:

    @embracing reality says:

    Having suffered adolescence in the mega churches of the pentecostal/charismatic movement It was understood by the young men that most of the attractive and moderately attractive females were penetrated early on by the first bad boy that asked. The bad boys usually didn’t attend church. I remember quite a few teen and twentysomething tramps in church with babies in tow. It’s amazing how free flowing the grace with extra gravy was for sluts. I don’t remember seeing the slightest bit of repentance or humility from the sluts in question or the slightest bit of accountability applied to them from anyone especially the pulpit. I can only thank God I had the good fortune not to ‘man up’ and marry up a slut. I’ve seen the results of that bad decision second hand, it looks like hell on earth to me.

    ER, you are missing the point! Those young ladies, angels from Heaven!, purity incarnate!, their only sin was being too innocent, they were TRICKED by wicked, filthy boys! And they were so gracious as to not fight back lest they injure a wayward boy.

    Maybe the churches should start handing out condoms. You know, just in case.

    I have to admit it is still a bit shocking to read about the amount of sluttery the churches are allowing in the midst. I don’t go to church, but a lot of my family is very involved, and I come from a very religious area. I’m coming to realize that they are in fact Churchians.

    I was sufficiently Red Pill when I heard that my cousin’s wife cheated on him that I wasn’t really surprised. The more surprising news was how HIS mother (my aunt) tried to cover it up. Those in-the-know pretend like nothing happened.

  43. Ra's al Ghul says:

    @embracing:

    “I’ve seen the results of that bad decision second hand, it looks like hell on earth to me.”

    It doesn’t look like hell on earth. It is hell on earth. (NAWALT and all that but . . .)Guys that marry single moms (or divorced moms) have selected their own personal demon tormentor for the most intimate relationship of their life.

  44. theasdgamer says:

    @ Carmack

    From the link:

    I felt that way with someone who I didn’t love, who didn’t love me, and who used my innocence and vulnerability against me. Someone who I found out later slept with me and was sleeping with about a half-dozen other girls around the same time.

    Post-coital regret/hamsterization from a carousel-rider.

    Honeymoon sex is awkward for everyone. It’s a new thing, a private thing, with crazy expectations and ideas about what it will be like. The idea of standing naked for the first time in front of someone is daunting and nerve-racking for anyone. So don’t be so hard on yourself. I bet lots of women have had that experience and even cried after, but it shouldn’t bring shame. Shame and embarrassment are different.

    Yeah, on honeymoon night, all the brides have to stand naked in front of their husbands to be leered at. Absurd, much? Brides lose their inhibitions about modesty as they become aroused, as married men come to learn. It works for virgins, too. Standard escalation stuff.

  45. “I’m all for people being virgins, but I think we all can admit that the church sucks at life on a lot of issues, and that the church succeeds quite often at fucking up the psychological/emotional well beings of its members.”

    This is where we have to draw the line between religion and a relationship with God. The former is a list of do’s and don’ts created by men, while the latter urges us to throw out Legalism and trust in Christ.

    This is a subject that has interested me personally because sexual Legalism can affect young men, too. (Of course, since most of the blogs that discuss it are Feminist-centered, this fact never gets mentioned.) As a man who got ensnared in it for years, and as someone who always did very well in his Psychology classes in school, I can’t help but shake the feeling that some of the Purity Movement’s biggest cheerleaders (Joshua Harris, Bill Gothard) were at least partially motivated by a Pharisee-istic urge to impose their failures and sexual repression on others. Judging from what I’ve read, they succeeded. Harris’s book “I Kissed Dating Goodbye” has sold well over a million copies, and he was 21 when he wrote it. I guess it never dawned on anyone to ask themselves what a 21-year-old kid knew about long-term relationships, or anything else.

  46. Joe Katzman says:

    Comedy is an excellent antidote to stupidity. For the marry late crowd, I offer this. Coating in estrogen to make the swallowing easier:

  47. Bucho says:

    I clicked the link and skimmed the article, then I saw that the author states that she is bisexual. Methinks that there were some other issues going on prior to her marriage….

  48. Feminine But Not Feminist says:

    This post inspired one for me, one meant to teach younger women. I’ve got a question for the men here, please… http://befemininenotfeminist.wordpress.com/2014/08/17/asking-men-what-do-you-really-think-of-young-women-that-have-premarital-sex/

  49. Fish-Man says:

    Dalrock,
    I have been having this small discussion on attraction, sexless marriage, and women’s fears over at the Generous Husband. I am “Gonfishing.” We are talking past each other, apparently. Is it the case that some women have fears that override attraction? Paul Byerly is very much on the side of the idea that society and even the church confuse people on sexuality. I am not sure what the “Forgiven Wife” thinks–I have not read her out completely on her blog. Your thoughts would be interesting to me. ( Let me say that I do have respect for these people. They are not being flipplant I want to keep the dialogue respectful).

    http://www.the-generous-husband.com/2014/08/16/sex-shes-hurting-too/

    Much obliged. Fish-Man

  50. Anonymous Reader says:

    The original article looks to be a hit piece at xojane. Applying reason and thoughtful analysis to it seems … excessive (and futile). Note the key phrase early on, “my body, my choice”. Do the purity-ball people really talk like that? Really? They use a standard phrase from 2nd stage feminism, seriously? Color me “skeptical”.

    Perhaps it is my lack of trust in certain groups, but this whole thing smells of disinformation. Has anyone looked at the back story of the authoress, for example, to confirm any details? Or is it yet another in the long series of feminist / leftist / progressive “composites” that are just like reality, except for the parts that are made up out of nothing.

  51. greyghost says:

    I’m an outsider looking in so I might not have all the details, but these chastity dances come across to me as last ditch efforts that are bound to fail. Is the plan for the daughter to live with the parents until a suitable groom is found? Because that’s what it would take… don’t let her out of site for a minute.

    Girls are naturally sluts just the way it is.
    http://www.rooshv.com/the-most-reliable-way-to-tell-if-a-girl-is-a-slut
    Even you at a level of common sense that would never openly say all women are naturally sluts understands it and are correct. A woman that is not a slut is civilized and is special. They are the only women in todays society to even consider marrying. There is more to it than getting some sap to marry them the greatest gift a loving father can give to his daughter is to see to it she can remain in “love” with a working provider type family man such as himself. If her hypergamy and status comes from a long term relationship in marriage it is a win win for her and her husband. The difference is dying with a great grand child reading you a story or dying in a diaper filled with your body waste at an old folks home alone.

  52. jf12 says:

    @Fish-Man re: link. “Women do not say no to sex because they get a perverse kick out of saying no.”

    Incorrect. That is indeed why women say no to loving husbands: the women are perverse.

  53. jf12 says:

    @FBNF, re: nonvirgins.

    None of the churched young men I know would consider marrying a nonvirgin.

    I’m not as young any longer, but my first wife at age 20 was definitely virgin, and my second wife at age 39 was almost a virgin (one husband, short marriage, long story). I *would* have considered marrying any widow.

  54. whorefinder says:

    This article sounds very fake. On first blush, I thought: why would such an article appear in xoJane or Salon? A true religious person having abstinence doubts would have addressed it to a more mainstream religious audience, not anti-religious bigots at those magazines.

    Then I clicked on her profile (on xoJane) and the picture and profile do not matcha lifelong virgin woman’s voice in the story. Fat, hipster-nerdy, “bisexual,” etc. A leftist probably from birth.

    At the end of her bio (on xoJane) , she claims she works for mental health reform. WTF, I thought? I know feminazis who find solidarity supporting baby-killing, gay rights, and crunchy granola earth-firsters, but mental health reform?

    Then it dawned on me: this chick has most likely been in for a severe tuneup. Probably on several meds. Why else focus on mental health?

    So this “story” is fiction. James Frey-esque making it up. Whether it be from her mental disease or her desire for fame, it isn’t true at all. She is, in short, lying.

    Not that that will stop the left from using it as a hammer if it catches on. The Big Lie, etc.

  55. Anonymous Reader says:

    jf12, I followed the link trail a bit further and found a woman who admitted that she did not want to be proven wrong. She was afraid of having to admit that years of sexual refusal was wrong. She was afraid to admit to her husband she was wrong.

    She did not want to admit she was wrong. She would rather continue to cause emotional pain to her husband, than admit to being wrong.

    Well, I find that quite believable.

    To her credit, she’s over that and attempting to help other women. Now. But for years, she would rather hurt her husband personally and deeply, than admit she was wrong.

    I’m saving the relevant links for the next NAWALT that gets tossed at me…

  56. Just Saying says:

    it’s because I have a sexual need

    The women in my core group are always welcome to NOT come over if they don’t have a sexual need – of course, I will be calling another woman to take her place. This is why a man always must have options – or perhaps I should say “willing replacements”. Of course, none of the women I see are willing to give up their night because they aren’t feeling a “sexual need”… Because they know another women will be taking her place, and that may be permanent since I will always respect her wishes. So she can go to the back of the line as there are others that are more than willing to do what I want, when I want. And I thank Feminists for ensuring there are so many young and willing replacements.

  57. jf12 says:

    @AnonymousReader, I’m not good enough to ferret out her upbringing, quickly. But Samantha and Ian did have a DJ, a variety of alcoholic drinks, and a dancefloor as part of their wedding reception entertainment, and she posted comments and pictures , e.g.of her holding a drink, and her getting her grandfather to boogie down. I.e. not a terribly strict upbringing, for one thing.

  58. bicklerain says:

    “As a result of trying to teach purity while being hostile to traditional marriage, we end up with the perverse replacement of the father for the groom”

  59. theasdgamer says:

    @ TFH

    Yeah, I hear ya. The local church was SBC. This chick was badmouthing churches’ missions right before going to church. Weird. The whole experience felt Kafka-esque.

    When I was younger I could never game shy girls because I didn’t understand about comfort. This chick was so easy–I just let her talk (which provided comfort) and I asked a few relevant questions. She started off sexualizing things, so I barely needed to sexualize anything. She even threw a 5h1t test at me about dancing supposedly being for homos. That was a gimme as far as passing it goes. The chick lowered her value (in her own eyes) saying that she was a little nerdy. She’s shy and has below-average self-esteem, so negging would have been the wrong strategy.

    She approached my table standing and we chatted a bit with her standing, then I invited her to sit down at my table.

    Since she was Asian, it was no surprise that she called me “sir.” Her view of men’s status is likely very high. It doesn’t affect sexual attraction. Surprisingly, she was a top athlete, despite being Asian. This suggests evaluating her body. I didn’t even look at her boobs, heh; I was approaching the whole thing as an academic exercise and was amused. I expect that they were small.

    When she talked, she barely made eye contact. Since I realized that she was a shy girl, I wasn’t surprised or put off by it. I leaned back in my chair, relaxed, smiling. She leaned in, sitting opposite. Her voice indicated nervousness–more at first, then subsiding to a low level. My eyes were lively when we made eye contact. Smiles and “dancing eyes” are a big part of my Game during convo. I don’t speak a lot.

    I broke rapport first, checking the time. She followed suit. We exchanged numbers and she left.

    I expect that she felt successful in getting a number close. She was heavily invested. She expected me to initiate exchanging numbers, I expect, her being Asian and all. But she also approached me, so who knows? Maybe she was checking my level of interest.

    During the convo, I suggested that she think about couples dancing and told her that if she came out where I go dancing, she could sit at my table (ostensibly providing social protection) and I’d introduce her to some folks (providing social assistance with networking). The object there was to create comfort and the perception of reduced risk and the possibility of obtaining social advantage. Women are allergic to risk. I wouldn’t be surprised if she brought friends if she did show up.

    This chick is looking to fall into the loving arms of a man. I wouldn’t be surprised if she were a virgin. If she is, likely it’s because her mother c0ckblocks her through the manipulation of logistics. This chick commutes from home to attend classes and works a lot.

  60. Michel Mason says:

    If we assume that the writer is telling the truth, then there are several hints throughout the article that she was a “Christian” in the sense that she went to church and tried to follow a set of rules. There is no indication that she ever acknowledged her own sinful nature and accepted the redeeming grace of God. Consider the following statements:

    Extramarital sex was sinful and dirty and I would go to Hell if I did it.

    I was told over and over again, so many times I lost count, that if I remained pure, my marriage would be blessed by God and if I didn’t that it would fall apart and end in tragic divorce.

    I wondered where the line was because I was terrified to cross it. Was he allowed to touch my breasts? Could we look at each other naked? I didn’t know what was considered sexual enough to condemn my future marriage and send me straight to Hell.

    I don’t go to church anymore, nor am I religious. As I started to heal, I realized that I couldn’t figure out how to be both religious and sexual at the same time. I chose sex.

    Time and again she approaches Christianity from a legalistic standpoint. When describing her change of heart, she doesn’t say that she no longer believes in the sinful nature of mankind, or that she no longer has faith in Jesus Christ, or any other point that deals with actual Christian doctrine. She simply says that she is no longer “religious.” When i hear Christianity talked about in this manner, it is usually by a person who either was never a professing Christian, or who was raised in the church but who never took it seriously and never developed a personal faith in Christ. If we assume she is telling the truth, then she is most likely the latter.

    It’s also worthy of note that she keeps coming back to the status she received in the Christian community as a virgin. She claims that she wore her virginity “like a badge of honor” and that she would alert others to her pledge at every opportunity. And while she claims that her problem was an inability to see sex as anything but sinful, she spends more text describing how let down she was by the loss of her status and the fact that God didn’t come down personally and congratulate her. “There was no chorus of angels, no shining light from Heaven.” “I wasn’t special anymore.”

    She claims that she couldn’t figure out how to “be both religious and sexual at the same time.” Given how positive God’s Word is about marital sex, you’d think that this should be a bridge that could be crossed, even if counseling is required. But if she never saw God’s Word as true and divine, and if she never associated Christianity with more than rules and community, then it makes sense. Her self-identity as a “Christian” was based on the status and affirmation she got by being “their virginal, perfect-Christian-girl mascot.” Not only did that status go away once she was just another married woman, but if she did not repudiate Christianity, she would be forced to admit to herself that she had gotten the message wrong. Far better to just write the whole thing off as a devious “fairy tale.”

    Or, of course, the whole story could be fabricated.

  61. Outlaw says:

    Dalrock: Have you read this article, and do you have any opinions?
    http://www.thomasumstattd.com/2014/08/courtship-fundamentally-flawed/

  62. Remo says:

    1. Keep women from marrying until as late as possible
    2. When she fornicates with multiple guys due to temptation castigate any male who would judge her unfit to be a wife
    3. Constantly push insane ideas like “born again virgin” and other nonsense to encourage old used up sluts to be considered marriageable
    4. After the marriage happens and the sour fruit of all those alpha widows fully blooms make divorce easy so they can “find themselves”
    5. Develop an entire industry designed to make the divorce as financially devastating and acrimonious as possible where men are nothing more than slaves

    The devil himself designed this. Call it feminism or new values or whatever but nothing man could come up with would better destroy marriage and cause more pain and conflict than this present system.

  63. It is relevant to point out that both of the actresses therein (Katie Micucci and Rikki Lindhome) are now about 35, and childless/unmarried. The blonde one (Lindhome) has started appearing nude in B-movies as well

    The two of them have their own tv show now. Their “pilot” was Thursday, pretty lame actually.

  64. ray says:

    “As a result of trying to teach purity while being hostile to traditional marriage, we end up with the perverse replacement of the father for the groom (scroll down to see all of the photos), the groom he is keeping her from marrying.”

    Exactly. Harsh medicine but good.

    There’s a perverse sexual displacement in these relationships, increasingly common over the past 3 decades. Dads hyperprotecting their daughters, overextending the innocence of their childhoods, often for selfish reasons detrimental to the girls. Some of these guys pretend to be Christian but ally (usually non-overtly) with feminism and modern, not Scriptural, methods and mores. Traditional/Biblical structure required or stongly encouraged girls to marry young and for life, and dad best see to it, or stay outta the way at worst, otherwise, he’s stuck with her lodging and living expenses, sometimes to the end of his days. BIG motivator.

    Our feminist ‘progressive’ cultures invert all this, and encourage dads simultaneously to extend their daughters’ “innocence” and singleness, taking full advantage of vast female entitlements, privileges, powers (including sexual), exemptions, and of course opportunities to replace men wholesale by having state-advantaged ‘educations’ and ‘careers’. Eventually she goes to work for govt or NGOs, middle management, and dad is permanently off the hook… she’s hardcharging and empowered and doesn’t need or want marriage (if at all) until her thirties, at which point there Are No Good Men.

    Those linked photos were horrible, sad, esp the guy kissing his daughter on the lips, the faux macho poses of the guys (who clearly appeared controlled and emasculated by their daughters and wives, just as Yahwah spoke thru Isaiah) and the smug and sometimes lascivious poses of the girls. There’s nothing ‘Christian’ or Scriptural about such father/daughter relations. Cheers.

  65. Lyn87 says:

    @ Fem, not Fem

    I wandered over to your blog and I see that you’ve given me posting privileges. Thanks. I like what I’ve seen. You have a tough row to hoe – one of the many reasons I don’t have a blog myself is the constant policing it would require. Good luck.

  66. MarcusD says:

    I’m going to try online Catholic dating, advice?
    http://forums.catholic.com/showthread.php?t=903516

  67. Michel Mason, that’s what Legalism does.

    Nowhere in the Bible does it say things like, “You’ll live happily ever after as long as you’re a virgin on your wedding night”, but she trusted in the church leaders who told her as much. Now that she feels betrayed and deeply disappointed – and Heaven knows she has the right to – she’s turned her back on God, not realizing that there’s a difference between Him and those who claim to speak FOR Him.

    I was a Prodigal myself for the same reasons, but God called me back to Him because He knew that I had it all wrong. I pray that she’ll find her way back home too.

  68. JDG says:

    I knew an old Feminist (IRL) in her 60s who lamented how the “young women don’t respect themselves today” in response to young women’s trashy taste in fashion and vulgar language. It was her generation that gave us the Sexual Revolution but she couldn’t connect that with her observations of modern behavior. Cognitive dissonance much? I’m thinking back to that now and seeing how she fundamentally did not understand human behavior. She must have thought that “liberating” women from societal constraints would allow their innate goodness and beneficence to flow forth to elevate all mankind.

    This is exactly what they think, that people (especially females) are basically good deep down inside and only need to be ‘educated’ and/or properly socialized to become ‘good little boys and strong independent girls (who are good regardless). That’s why we hear things like “follow your heart” and “be true to yourself”. And if the girl does something wrong, it’s almost a certainty that a man caused it.

  69. Boxer says:

    we end up with the perverse replacement of the father for the groom (scroll down to see all of the photos), the groom he is keeping her from marrying.

    Someone (I think Cane Caldo) had an article about the “daddy daughter marriage” purity phenomenon, way back when.

    It’s easy to criticize this, and I can understand the rebuttals. It seems to me like pure Electra Complex. At the same time, though, families are trying to reconstruct a more marriage friendly society out of the ruins of this one. I think that their motives are often noble, even if they’re going overboard or making mistakes. People want a better life for their daughters, they just don’t know what to do any longer.

  70. All this starts with a bone-deep belief that a woman’s happiness is an unalloyed Good to which everything else in her life must be oriented. Her pursuit of happiness is so critical that it can trump anything else. If there’s a chance that she could be “trapped” in a marriage where she doesn’t always blissfully enjoy the sex, well, then maybe those rules on extra-marital fornication have to be blurred a little so she can make sure she gets a husband who hits her G-spot — or gets her fill before marriage so she can be happy without much sex in it. Or, to avoid the fornication, you have Dad dote on her constantly and make her feel like a princess — anything to keep her happy at all times.

    It’s the flip side of the divorce culture we’ve talked about, where people can claim to be anti-divorce in general yet be in favor of it whenever a woman is unhaaaappy with her marriage. It all comes down to the belief that a woman should be happy at all times. If she’s not, then something somewhere — usually a man’s happiness or God’s laws — has to give.

  71. solitude says:

    The purity ball is bizarre, but then again so is blowing every guy in a club for a contest. Apparently, newton’s 3rd law applies to culture in this case.

    My personal raised in evangelical church my whole life take on this is that stories like this are a bs anomaly. This girl would probably have some sort of sexual problems no matter what she did or how she was raised. Every few months an article like this makes the rounds about how being raised christian screwed up their sex life in some way.

    6 of my close male friends married now, 4 of them were virgins. 3 others engaged, all virgins. Maybe the stat is that 80% of Christians don’t wait but plenty do, and they tend to all hang together. They are often the ones raised in church who don’t leave. Sure plenty of my friends made different choices. But none of them responded like this. A few people I knew went completely off the deep end, surprize! they weren’t the virgins. Who are, no surprise, a levelheaded well on there way to a good life bunch.

    It’s nice porn for slate readers, but all it really did was jump start this girls “journalism” career. And really do not need anymore of those.

  72. Bee says:

    Good quote from Martin Luther:

    “To sum the matter up: whoever finds himself unsuited to the celibate life should see to it right away that he has something to do and to work at; then let him strike out in God’s name and get married. A young man should marry at the age of twenty at the latest, a young woman at fifteen to eighteen; that’s when they are still in good health and best suited for marriage. Let God worry about how they and their children are to be fed. God makes children; he will surely also feed them. ”

    From this excellent essay:

    http://www.perseveronews.com/true-love-doesnt-wait/

  73. jf12 says:

    Bee, you’re right, good quote!

  74. Bango Tango says:

    The Brass Cat, grey ghost, JDG and others comments on women’s misunderstanding of human nature is on point. The older generation of women responsible for the switch from K to R environment are confused why women’s freedom hasn’t created a Utopian world yet. It must be because there are still traditionalists left that are keeping this from happening. The older hippie hags ignorance is off the scale. Maybe if we give women even more choices that will do it! New law in CA says verbal consent must be obtained before sex otherwise it’s rape. Straight out of Idiocracy.You can’t make this insanity up. Buckle your seat belts.

  75. infowarrior1 says:

    @Bee

    I will likewise concur with the last 30 mins of this aurini podcast:

  76. @Boxer:

    I think this is the Cane Caldo article to which you were referring.
    http://canecaldo.wordpress.com/2013/12/11/neither-saved-nor-spent-but-invested/

  77. Tam the Bam says:

    ” ..let him strike out in God’s name and get married. A young man should marry at the age of twenty at the latest, a young woman at fifteen to eighteen “
    … said the 41-year-old priest who married the 26-year-old nun (having “wooden-horsed” her out of the convent in a herring barrel), despite declaring he would never marry a mere six months previously.
    Moping over might-have-beens perhaps?
    Six kids, mind you, so they certainly didn’t hang about. Once he’d made his flip-flopping mind up.

  78. Tam the Bam says:

    Previous to this he’d been coming out with some pretty racy stuff, and was gung-ho fer tha cuck.
    With the cuckimony/child support and all!
    (Same piece as Bee’s quote’s at the end of, written two years before his marriage).

    “What I said was this: if a woman who is fit for marriage has a husband who is not, and she is unable openly to take unto herself another and unwilling, too, to do anything dishonourable since the pope in such a case demands without cause abundant testimony and evidence, she should say to her husband, “Look, my dear husband, you are unable to fulfil your conjugal duty toward me; you have cheated me out of my maidenhood and even imperilled my honour and my soul’s salvation; in the sight of God there is no real marriage between us. Grant me the privilege of contracting a secret marriage with your brother or closest relative, and you retain the title of husband so that your property will not fall to strangers. Consent to being betrayed voluntarily by me, as you have betrayed me without my consent”.

    I stated further that the husband is obligated to consent to such an arrangement and thus to provide for her the conjugal duty and children, and that if he refuses to do so she should secretly flee from him to some other country and there contract a marriage. I gave this advice at a time when I was still timid. However, I should like now to give sounder advice in the matter, and take a firmer grip on the wool of a man who thus makes a fool of his wife. The same principle would apply if the circumstances were reversed, although this happens less frequently in the case of wives than of husbands. “

    He was overfond of the old Bier, by all accounts.

  79. theasdgamer says:

    @ Cail

    All this starts with a bone-deep belief that a woman’s happiness is an unalloyed Good

    Doesn’t this rely on pedestalization? On idolizing womanhood?

  80. Lyn87 says:

    Since we’re taking shots at 16th Century clergymen, I’d like to join in. I want to point out that one of “Flip-Flopping” Martin Luther’s contemporaries, Pope Alexander VI, also fathered a bunch of kids, including four with his married mistress Vannozza dei Cattani. At least Martin Luther repented of his former stance against I Timothy 4: 1-3, married a virgin, and had legitimate children with her. Pope Alexander VI never married any of the sluts, whores, and adulteresses he had sex with, including any of the mothers of his TWELVE known bastard children.

    For the record, I TImothy 4: 1-3 is the passage that equates the doctrine of clerical celibacy as a Departure from the faith and/or a Doctrine of devils. It reads as follows [emphasis added]:

    “Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils; Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron; Forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats, which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving of them which believe and know the truth.”

    Martin Luther was – as we all are – an imperfect man, and his late-life anti-Semitism (perhaps caused by a neurological condition such as Alzheimer’s), tarnishes his legacy. But by any measure he was a model of consistency compared to the popes of his day – or even our day.

  81. Lyn87 says:

    re: Happiness

    I’ve written this before and I’m writing it again now – God does not object to our happiness when we are in His will, but…

    God cares a lot more about our holiness than our happiness.

  82. Thinkn'Man says:

    jzb says:
    August 17, 2014 at 3:36 pm
    I don’t think we can dismiss the psychological struggles this woman has had with the purity thing.
    I’m all for people being virgins, but I think we all can admit that the church sucks at life on a lot of issues, and that the church succeeds quite often at fucking up the psychological/emotional well beings of its members.

    What the “church sucks at..” today is the one thing it SHOULD be doing:
    preaching the Gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ.

    The fact that this gets utterly lost in the shuffle says it all.

    Now it’s been replaced with “The gospel of…”
    • prosperity
    • health
    • self-esteem
    • i want a baby
    • etc etc.

  83. Blueplillprofessor says:

    @Fishman- That was a riot reading those women try to hamster, deflect, and deny. I don’t know if I was attracted to my husband because I never thought in that way….sometimes I wanted to have sex (when I was ovulating and/or my husband showed some balls but have I ever connected the dots). Wait, what was the question?

    “When I have sex with my husband, I make sure it’s because I have a sexual need and not because I feel I’m required to fulfill his desires.”

    Because women are not responsive. Why women are the aggressors! An empowered woman must come up with the idea to have sex and any seduction or inducement is “rape.”

    Feminism is not just a meta-shit test, it is the ravings of a lunatic or a perhaps more properly the sinful demands of damned souls. All that is required for evil to triumph is for good MEN to remain silent.

  84. theasdgamer says:

    @ Think

    What the “church sucks at..” today is the one thing it SHOULD be doing:
    preaching the Gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ.

    Maybe it has forgotten what the Gospel is?

  85. Thinkn'Man says:

    “Feminism is not just a meta-shit test….”

    Ha! Genius, pure genius.

  86. Gunner Q says:

    Too many posts, too fast! Several thoughts:

    I’ve seen a different form of corrupted purity, the “no touch before marriage” idea. There was one couple I saw celebrated because they’d gone until the wedding night without kissing, hugging, touching or even holding hands. She knew her emotional/financial need would be met… but how could he know whether his physical needs would be met?

    If a woman is happy to not snuggle & snoggle her fiance for several months at a time then I fear for the guy.

    Thinkn’Man @ 10:08 am:
    “What the “church sucks at..” today is the one thing it SHOULD be doing: preaching the Gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ.”

    Marriage is part of that. The Biblical purpose for marriage is modeling the relationship between Christ and the Church, making it visible to the world. When one considers how many people think marriage is an obsolete breeding program, or think humans are just high-end primates, there’s clearly untapped evangelistic potential in upholding Biblical marriage principles.

    Chris Dagostino @ 1:00 am:
    “I was a Prodigal myself for the same reasons, but God called me back to Him because He knew that I had it all wrong. I pray that she’ll find her way back home too.”

    Could you elaborate on your rediscovery of Christ? I see a lot of guys like this, hating Christ because they were burned by the Church, but don’t know how to reach them.

    Bango Tango @ 7:57 am:
    “New law in CA says verbal consent must be obtained before sex otherwise it’s rape.”

    We’ve had that consent requirement for a decade at least. This proposed law appears to actually counter the trend… once a girl gives verbal permission then she can’t later claim rape.

    Last I checked, the “yes means yes” law is bogged down on whether it would apply to a girl drinking alcohol. Considering how women like to get tipsy before putting out, the final effect will probably be nil. But it’s still a crack in the feminist dam.

    Feminist: “25% of college girls have been raped by men! Men must be controlled!”

    Daddy: “Okay, but meanwhile I don’t want my Princess going to college. It isn’t safe… maybe I’ll just get her married off.”

    Feminist: “NOOOO!!! WAIT!!!”

  87. Kevin says:

    I don’t think there is anything generalizable from this article except:

    Crazy people say crazy stuff.

    As someone else said, this is click bait for the Salon crowd. Her experience tells us nothing about the world other than she has deep issues. There are thousands of the converse experiences reported – the world taught me to seek trivial sex and then I learned it was not working for me and making me happy. They are conversion stories and being being born in Christ. Very common. So, someone got converted the other way – big deal.

    Virginity before marriage will well serve the vast majority of humanity. I am not sure what to make of the purity dances. I am trying to figure out the right way to communicate all these thoughts to my daughter: Sex in marriage is great, sex before marriage is sin and makes you less marriageable, God will love you and forgive you for sin. Young people are idiots with incompletely developed impulse control (women develop this even later than men), poor cognitive reasoning, and a life time of learning crap. It is tough to help them see and internalize the path to happiness that God has laid out.

    That being said I know alot of women and men who were virgins until they were married and are living happily now.

  88. Societal Decay says:

    Novaseeker: “As for this: When I have sex with my husband, I make sure it’s because I have a sexual need and not because I feel I’m required to fulfill his desires.
    Well, I guess that goes for him as well — sex is there to satisfy his sexual needs, and not to fulfill *your* desires, Samantha. Selfishness for both. I guess that’s equality, huh?”

    To paraphrase Churchill: the inherent virtue of feminism is the equal sharing of miseries.

  89. theasdgamer says:

    @ Decay

    To paraphrase Churchill: the inherent virtue of feminism is the equal sharing of miseries.

    Nope. It’s purpose is to maximize feminine happiness, especially if the cost of that happiness can be loaded on a man. His misery = her pleasure at denying him sex.

  90. mikediver5 says:

    Let me make a comment about the Garfunkel and Oates 29/31. You all are saying that since they have hit/passed the wall they are disqualified from giving lessons. The fact that they screwed up means they have no right to teach. I believe that the best teacher is one that can tell you from their own bad experience why this is the wrong path to take. It is kind of like ex-junkies are the best people to counsel against drugs. Think of the whole scared straight concept. Older women are supposed to be teaching younger women how to be better wives, mothers, and women just as older men teach young men what it is to be a husband, father, and man. I would hope that women would listen to post wall women and learn to do better. Of course, my expectation is that those hopes will not materialize in any widespread manner. (I hesitate to bring this up, although it could be considered germane, but there is a Garfunkel and Oates video called the Loophole which directly addresses the purity movement. I will warn everyone that it is extremely crass and not for the faint hearted. It is neither Christian nor Churchian. Proceed with caution.)

    Let me tell of another cultures way of teaching purity. I married a 25 year old Filipina virgin. We met when she was 23. The first thing she said to me was that I better be in this for marriage because that was the only reason she was interested in me. The second thing she said was that she was a virgin and would be on her wedding night, so if I was interested in her for sex I should go elsewhere. What were the cultural background and teachings that led to this attitude? She was a Catholic of the Latina variety. The Philippines were ruled by Spain for about 400 years, mostly through Mexico. The culture is close to that of South and Central America. Her mother’s teaching on sex was pretty much summed up by, “Sex is the greatest thing in the world, but it also the most addictive. Once you try it you will always want it.” The teaching that flowed from this was, wait until marriage when you will have a man committed to meeting your needs.

    The second cultural difference between the Filipino/Latino culture and the Anglo culture is the expectation that young women will want sex just as much as the young men. There is no pedistalization of women as less sinful than men. We are all fallen. They took the traditional solution to the problem. Unlike convincing the girls that sex was nasty and sinful, they just controlled logistics to make sure that she had no opportunity (or very little) until she was married. All our dating was chaperoned. In fact my wife had never gone anywhere unescorted by a male family member until after we were married. That includes not going to the store across the street to buy an ice cream bar. It took a great deal of convincing to get her to go out on her own in the US. It was one of the many hard spots in adapting to her new country. I was somewhat shocked to be told by my 25 year old bride a week before our wedding that I was the first boy she had ever kissed.

    This parental control is not exclusive to daughters. I was surprised to learn that when her 29 year old (at the time) single brother applied to work outside the country he had to have his mother’s permission (their father had died before I met her). I asked why, since he was a full adult, and should be able to make his own decisions. I was informed that until marriage both sons and daughters are fully under their parent’s control, and there is little they can do without a parent’s signature and approval. In this culture you don’t become an adult by passing some arbitrary birthday, but rather by taking on adult responsibilities in marriage. This is the kind of incentive that used to be in the west. You are a child until you are responsible for your own family. Try staying a lifetime cad or carousel rider under this standard. I will say I have seen it done there. There is apparently no sure way to get people to act for the right.

    I have gained a lot of respect for the Filipino culture while I have lost a great deal of it for my native culture.

  91. Pingback: Dark Brightness | A fear of babies.

  92. Bango Tango says:

    We’ve had that consent requirement for a decade at least. This proposed law appears to actually counter the trend… once a girl gives verbal permission then she can’t later claim rape.

    Last I checked, the “yes means yes” law is bogged down on whether it would apply to a girl drinking alcohol. Considering how women like to get tipsy before putting out, the final effect will probably be nil. But it’s still a crack in the feminist dam.

    @Gunner q. I don’t think your reading the law correctly. Men will have to ask a girl every time for verbal consent or in the eyes of the law he HAS RAPED HER IF HE NEVER GOT THAT CONSENT. No other evidence needed by her and nothing else he can present to claim otherwise. Counter to the trend? LOL. Try the road to hell my friend.

  93. What if she’s a mute?

  94. Bango Tango says:

    @mikediver5. Agree 100% with your post.

  95. Joe Katzman says:

    @TFH: Don’t all of your points make the whole video EVEN BETTER? I mean, I’d show the video, then (if you have links verifying the info below) save your points as the follow-on nuke, for use only if necessary.

    “It is relevant to point out that both of the actresses therein (Katie Micucci and Rikki Lindhome) are now about 35, and childless/unmarried. The blonde one (Lindhome) has started appearing nude in B-movies as well.

    They both gained some degree of minor fame in Hollywood, of late, but surely will not earn enough to be set for life…

    So they have not followed their own advice.”

  96. Gunner Q says:

    Bango Tango says:
    “@Gunner q. I don’t think your reading the law correctly. Men will have to ask a girl every time for verbal consent or in the eyes of the law he HAS RAPED HER IF HE NEVER GOT THAT CONSENT.”

    Yeah, that’s the way it’s been in California for a long time. It’s rape if she ever says ‘no’ a single time, of if she drank any amount of alcohol, or if the guy didn’t ask permission, of if he takes pictures, etc. If this law is just another ratchet then it’s no concern.

  97. JDG says:

    New law in CA says verbal consent must be obtained before sex otherwise it’s rape. Straight out of Idiocracy.You can’t make this insanity up. Buckle your seat belts.

    I’m not surprised considering it is now illegal to through a frisbee on the beach in CA or sell goldfish in San Fran.

  98. JDG says:

    God cares a lot more about our holiness than our happiness.

    This can’t be said enough. Preach it brother.

  99. bicklerain says:

    “Yeah, that’s the way it’s been in California for a long time. It’s rape if she ever says ‘no’ a single time.”

    Yeah but the bloody point is that now it will be rape even if she doesn’t say no a single time. She’ll need to say yes, and enjoyably having sex with you with no complaints won’t be considered evidence of consent.

  100. bicklerain says:

    That’s a huge freaking deal. A game changer from the standpoint of making it damn near impossible to defend oneself from a false rape accusation.

  101. bicklerain says:

    Yeah she texted you back that she enjoyed having sex with you afterwards, but she didn’t text you back saying she said: “Yes I wanna have sex with you”.

    Rape!

  102. jf12 says:

    re: affirmative consent laws.
    http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2014/06/06/bill-mandating-pre-sex-consent-on-california-campuses-gaining-momentum-in-sacramento-sexual-contact-contract-university-law-vote-sexual-activity-verbal-written-college-sexual-agreement-written-verbal/

    Roughly speaking, each attempt at such a law (and many have tried many times over the years) founders because of negative feedback from *women*.
    1. She cannot give a blanket consent, for the purpose of these kinds of laws. She has to go through the hassle of explicitly consenting every single time there is sexual activity.
    2. Theoretically she has to give explicit consent to each individual step/escalation of sexual activity, i.e. as if the running of the “four bases” is reduced to slo-mo stop-motion (like the red-light green-light game). As all critics correctly note every time this comes up, foreplay is effectively outlawed.
    3. If she changes her mind after giving consent, then her consent could be used against her. This issue has come up repeatedly regarding videotapes of women giving consent.

    From guy’s point of view,all such laws are stupid because bad boys don’t need permission and don’t care about rules anyway, and women will never complain about bad boys taking advantage of them anyway. Mostly, what women complain about IS nice-but-unattractive guys asking them nicely.

  103. Fish-Man says:

    Lyn87,
    If you mean to imply that the great popes of the last two hundred years or so do not measure up to greatness in faith and mind, then you simply do not know anything of the Papacy or the Catholic Church. Alexander VI was the worst pope on record, more a renaissance phony than a true shepherd. Yes, he was despicable. But, Leo XIII, John Paul II, Pius X, Benedict XV, Pius XII. These were men of such stature as to boggle the mind. Oh, Pius IX. Many more. Luther whom I really enjoy, did end up his life and broken and depressed man. He watched schism after schism unfold with none of them seeking his advice or influence. Truly sad. So, please know what you are talking about before you start to make an evaluation of the Papacy.

  104. JDG says:

    I have gained a lot of respect for the Filipino culture while I have lost a great deal of it for my native culture.

    Same here mike. My wife is from Iloilo on Panay. Her culture still has a sense of decency and sanity that ours has long since forgotten.

  105. whorefinder says:

    On the flip side of the Filipino culture, however, is the fact that Filipinos have reputations for voracious sexual appetites/immorality when they break from their strict-partental-culture.

    Most Asian female porn stars in Western porn, regardless of what they might portray in a film, are part or whole filipino (check imdb or IAFD.com) The few male porn stars of asian descent in the Western market tend to Filipino. Furthermore, there is a culture on the West Coast of many Filipino 1st–generation being very promiscuous–Filipino males being perhaps the only east asian male group stereotyped as bad boys and players in North America, and who largely are not given the Scarlet Letter treatment when it comes to genitalia size (whether the stereotype is real or imagined). They tend to imbibe the surfing-bad-boy culture well.

    Food for thought.

  106. Lyn87 says:

    Fish-Man,

    I’ll respect Dalrock’s standing wish to avoid turning his blog into a reprise of the 30-Year’s War, but I’m not going to sit idly by while someone repeatedly tees off on the (imperfect) guy who God used to loosen the Vatican’s stranglehold on Christendom, while saying nothing about the dozens of popes who did far worse than anything Martin Luther ever did – including much more recent ones. Believe me when I say that my criticism of the papacy has exactly nothing to do with lack of knowledge on my part. Indeed, I would probably be a lot less agitated by Catholicism if I knew a lot less about the “Vicars of Christ” than I do. You wrote:

    So, please know what you are talking about before you start to make an evaluation of the Papacy.

    I have studied the doctrine of the papacy inside and out. So, In the future please know about your opponent’s knowledge base before you accuse a scholar of not knowing his subject.

    Now that everyone has stated his position, I would vastly prefer to let it drop and return to the subject at hand.

  107. Anonymous age 72 says:

    I hope this is the thread which includes purity balls. A big deal was made in comments on the linked article about the father kissing the daughter on the mouth.

    My family when I was a child, didn’t kiss at all, as far as I can remember.

    Here in Mexico, little girls within the kinfolk category, get kissed on the forehead. There is now a little girl, called niece in this culture, who absolutely loves it when I kiss her on the forehead. In fact, when she sees me coming, she breaks out into the biggest smile you can imagine, and it doesn’t change while I give her the forehead kisses.

    Her older sisters, now around 5 and 8, have also expected forehead kisses since they were babies. When I go to their house, they come trotting over with smiles on their faces, expecting those kisses.

    But, the girl who is now 5, when she was 3 was also very affectionate, and returned the forehead kisses, but on my cheek, since she was shorter.

    One day, she was sitting on my lap and turned around, grabbed my head and moved it to where she wanted it and gave me a big kiss right on my lips. She clearly wanted to kiss my lips for whatever reason a 3 year old does anything.

    It wasn’t especially upsetting, just not something I was used to. I assumed her mother and/or father kissed her on the mouth, but when I asked, they said, no.

    She did it several times over a few weeks. I neither encouraged or discouraged it. She very carefully would move my head with her little hands, at the right angle for the kiss, then eventually stopped it.

    The only explanation I have ever thought of seriously is for reasons known only to an innocent 3 year old she liked me a lot, and wanted to show affection in her own way, and saw nothing wrong with it. It is sort of an obvious thing, I was kissing her forehead and she thought it was nice; she was kissing my cheek with her mouth and so also thought that was nice, and so may have thought to kiss on a mouth with a mouth was twice as nice. I do not believe a three year old had erotic nor romantic intentions.

    Let me add that those girls get a lot of kisses in that family. My family was not kissers; their family definitely is.

    And, also let me add that if that 5 year old’s 25 year old mom ever gave me a kiss on the mouth, things could get really messy, fast. Heh, heh.

  108. JDG says:

    On the flip side of the Filipino culture, however, is the fact that Filipinos have reputations for voracious sexual appetites/immorality when they break from their strict-partental-culture.

    Sorry, I’m not buying it. If you’ve got stats I’d like to see them. Filipinos are no less susceptible to perversion than any other group of people. I will concede that there are more then a few gays and prostitutes over there; however, the gays and prostitutes over there aren’t coddled. They are under no illusions about their illicit behaviors or where they stand with the rest of society. Also, the bad boy reputation among Asians over here is not limited to filipinos.

    Filipinos do have an undeserved (IMO) reputation for being ‘low class’, but that is because they often take low station jobs. They also have a reputation as being hard workers.

  109. JDG says:

    typo again should be – Filipinos are no more or less susceptible to perversion than any other group of people.

  110. Societal Decay says:

    theasdgamer: Nope. It’s purpose is to maximize feminine happiness, especially if the cost of that happiness can be loaded on a man. His misery = her pleasure at denying him sex.

    I don’t know whether that’s feminism’s “purpose,” but that’s definitely not its effect. Any short-term power trip she gets from denying sex going to be dwarfed by the eventual misery of a frigid marriage. Marriage is either win-win or lose-lose – and modern feminism pushes everyone towards the latter.

  111. bicklerain says:

    >Roughly speaking, each attempt at such a law (and many have tried many times over the years) founders because of negative feedback from *women*.

    This law is getting pretty close to passing. It already passed the state senate. Feminism is finally reaching it’s final stage: All men will either be virgins or rapists.

    Rape!

  112. Don Quixote says:

    @ Mikediver5: I live in Australia and a lot of Ozzie guys marry Filipinos with disastrous results, suffice to say they didn’t marry virgins. They are traditional catholic but the ones who make it to Australia are extremely westernised. I only ever saw 1 Filipino girl that was marriage material in Australia.

  113. Let me make a comment about the Garfunkel and Oates 29/31. You all are saying that since they have hit/passed the wall they are disqualified from giving lessons.

    No we’re not. We’re pointing out that even when women seem to “get it,” they can still fall into the traps of feminism, so we should be careful about ever deferring to their wisdom. About the time you say, “Hey, here’s a woman who really gets it; listen to her if you won’t listen to me,” she’ll go on a rant about how much men suck, or do something else that makes you regret it.

    If G&O make more songs like 29/31, or otherwise use their experience to try to teach girls not to make the same mistakes they did, I’m sure everyone here will applaud them. It’s a tragedy that two attractive, talented girls may end up childless spinsters making parodies of their lives until they’re no longer pretty enough for people to want to watch them. If they can help other girls to avoid that fate, good for them. We just shouldn’t go overboard on that and forget that they’re women.

  114. mikediver5 says:

    I will make a response to several comments about Filipino culture. First to those remarking about Filipino culture for Filipinos in the US, that is not Filipino culture. We all know the corrupting influence of the western culture. The one thing the US has learned to do well is inculcate its culture to immigrants. I know nothing of the statistics of porn stars by nationality, but it has to be a very tiny percentage of Filipinas no matter how big a proportion of the Asian porn world they may be.

    Filipinos have been a significant immigrant population in the US for a long time. After the Spanish American war of 1898, Filipinos were considered US nationals. A national is not a citizen (can’t vote) but does carry a US passport. Filipinos were able to immigrate, if that is the right term for moving from a US territory to a US state, with no visa up until the 1930s. During the depression a law was passed to block further Filipino immigration. There was a lot of that going around at the time and it covered pretty much all immigrant groups. Still, Filipinos have been a large part of Californian farm labor since the early 1900s. They worked in tandem with Cesar Chavez and actually pushed the Mexican farm workers to go out on strike by saying that if the Mexicans didn’t then the Filipinos would not support a strike later. Also when I started out in the Navy, back during Vietnam, I served with a lot of Filipinos. They seemed to be good people with solid family values.

    Yes there are prostitutes and gays in the Philippines, just as there is everywhere. Have you been to Las Vegas? The sidewalks are literally covered by discarded flyers advertising “escort” services. The pictures leave little to the imagination. There is also real poverty in places in the Philippines so I have more compassion for those who choose that option there than I do for those who choose it here. Many Filipinos believe their country is poor, but I have seen real poor countries and the Philippines is not that poor; think Haiti, Guatemala, and almost everywhere in sub-Saharan Africa. As to gays they have a very tolerant attitude towards gays in the Philippines. For a country that is over 90% Catholic, I found their willingness to hate the sin without hating the sinner to be a much more Christian attitude than I have found in many places in the US.

    To the Australian guy who observes that many of the Filipinas brought back as wives by Australian men are not marriage material, I see the same thing in the US. There are good wives to be had in the Philippines but that does not mean there are not also bad wives to be had. I had several friends who were married to Filipinas prior to marrying my Filipina bride. Two were long term marriages (the longest over 40 years) to respectable women from good families. The third was to a woman who the guy met through the bars. So, he knew she was a hooker, but married her anyway. It did not work out. The Filipino culture has no magic to reverse the common wisdom that you can’t make a house wife out of a whore. Now that I am married to a Filipina I have become involved in the surprisingly large Filipino community in Minnesota. Many of the wives’ backgrounds are sketchy at best, but a lot of the guys are very happy and the marriages are very long lasting.

    According to the 2010 census data the lifetime divorce rate for American men married to Filipina wives in the US is ~20%. That is less than half the rate of American men marrying American women. If the guy emigrated to the Philippines, I would assume the divorce rate would be close to zero, as divorce is not legal there. Also to further address the Australian’s comment, most of the best marriageable Filipino women are married off long before they meet some foreigner. When I got back from my first scuba diving trip to the Philippines I told my friends I had not met any nice women. They told me of course not, as no decent woman would have anything to do with a tourist. They told me I would have to be properly introduced. I then asked to be introduced to suitable women. Only a small sub-set of women are interested in marrying a foreigner. It may be a larger sub-set than in other countries, but it is a minority. My wife’s family was not very happy with a foreigner taking their daughter out of the country. Most Filipinos have the long held belief that American men beat their Filipina wives. My friend that had been married over 40 years said they were saying that when he got married to his Filipina back in the late 60s. The other side of the coin is the constant barrage of “she only wants a green card”. My friend married to his Filipina for over 40 years said of his wife; “well, she is certainly putting in her time to earn that green card.”

  115. buckyinky says:

    Skepticism is called for whenever the calls for millstones being hung upon necks comes from the one who was “offended” as a child.

  116. jf12 says:

    @buckyinky, re: skepticism.

    I agree. Given Pugsley’s continual fixation on depicting herself visually victimized satanically in a wedding dress, I’m beginning to suspect that the main purpose of her getting a church marriage was to desecrate it. Reference also “purpose of modern marriage”.

  117. Anonymous says:

    Not to mention what Garfunkel and Oates said about this:

  118. Fish-Man says:

    Lyn87,
    No, it cannot be dropped. You slander popes and probably know a lot less than you think you do. As to things that “recent” popes have done that rival the rending of universal Christendom: what would those things be? And what of the heroism of recent popes? Funny, no Protestant scholars of repute seem to be down on the Papacy these days. Quite the opposite. In my experience only tin-pot backwoods fundamentalists indulge anti-Catholicism these days.

  119. JDG says:

    As to gays they have a very tolerant attitude towards gays in the Philippines. For a country that is over 90% Catholic, I found their willingness to hate the sin without hating the sinner to be a much more Christian attitude than I have found in many places in the US.

    Over there the gay population isn’t in your face like they are over here, and yet we have lots of tolerance for gays over here. Gays are a special group with lots of privileges in the USA. It’s bible believing Christians and men that are held in contempt over here.

    Tolerance of the sin != love for the sinner.

  120. Sarah says:

    This be the problem. Sex has become a democracy. In marriage a woman is supposed to serve her husbands needs. It isn’t difficult to do but now a woman is considered oppressed for giving him sex when she isn’t in the mood. It is surprising that Christian women are acting this way. Feminism is more powerful than Jesus now.

    Sexual morality needs to be taught to everyone not just Christians. This “do what ya like culture” needs to end now.

  121. JDG says:

    Feminism is more powerful than Jesus now.

    No!

    Sexual morality needs to be taught to everyone not just Christians. This “do what ya like culture” needs to end now.

    Yes!

  122. M Simon says:

    Sexual morality has nothing to do with morality. It is in the main determined by M/F ratio in the mating years.

    http://www.issues.org/13.2/courtw.htm

  123. theasdgamer says:

    @ Societal Decay

    Any short-term power trip she gets from denying sex going to be dwarfed by the eventual misery of a frigid marriage.

    Then please explain why the frequency of sex declines with the number of years married. The women all report that they are satisfied with the frequency and the men report that they are dissatisfied. It is clear that the wives are denying sex to their husbands. Sounds like you say the reason they deny it is so that the women can be unhappy.

    Women prefer a frigid marriage to sex with an unattractive man. Her unhappiness due to the marriage being frigid is ameliorated by her pleasure in watching her husband suffer.

  124. bicklerain says:

    “Women prefer a frigid marriage to sex with an unattractive man.”

    Who can blame them? I wouldn’t want to have sex with someone I wasn’t attracted to. The problem is when a woman holds a man she isn’t attracted to hostage as a pathetic eunuch slave. Marriage is the last legal form of slavery.

  125. bicklerain says:

    “Not to mention what Garfunkel and Oates said about this:”

    Sodomy is so much more demeaning than premarital penile-vaginal intercourse. It’s heartbreaking that the malign influence of hardcore pornography has infected the minds of so many young people.

  126. bicklerain says:

    Sodomy is also far more dangerous from the standpoint of catching a horrible disease.

  127. Luke says:

    bicklerain says:
    August 22, 2014 at 1:43 am

    “Sodomy is also far more dangerous [than PIV sex] “from the standpoint of catching a horrible disease.”

    If you mean P in rectum, that’s correct. Fellatio is around comparable to PIV, while cunnilingus is lower than PIV for STD transmission risk.

  128. Luke says:

    Mikediver, if you have one (or ten) children via marriage to a Filipino woman, you’re still having your cultural and genetic legacy end with you. The children will culturally and genetically much more favor her side. Actually, you’re being kind of a human equivalent of a voluntary victim of whydahs/cowbirds/magpies (types of birds called brood parasites; look it up). If you’re going to marry 3rd World genetically, at least get a vasectomy first (and don’t marry one with kids that you’ll be supporting, for God’s sakes.)

  129. Joe Katzman says:

    TFH,

    Sorry for the lateness. Yes, I am that Joe Katzman. I needed to step away from blogging for a bit, aside from the occasional guest-blog ( http://www.blackfive.net/main/2012/12/the-art-of-the-left-hook-guns-humanity-and-politics.html ).

    Do I miss it? Absolutely. On the other hand, I decided to untether from my preconceptions and go walkabout on the Interwebs for a bit, and that has been helpful. The Mighty Charts of Dalrock are really interesting sociology, and one good example of something I found because I dropped the blogging and decided to look and listen more in a wide range of places.

    I may start again one day, but it will probably involve blogging somewhere else, rather than running my own site at Winds again.

  130. M Simon says:

    Joe Katzman says:
    August 24, 2014 at 5:09 pm

    Fancy seeing you here. I’m going to check out the B5 link. And step away for a while? Heh. It has been 10 or 12 years.

  131. M Simon says:

    Joe,

    Let me draw your attention to my August 21, 2014 at 11:30 pm – morality is a dependent variable. You want loose women? Reduce the supply of men. You want to bring back good old morality? Increase the supply of men. In colleges now men get “points” for just being male. When the F/M ratio is above 1.05 sexual morality fades. Beyond 1.5 F/M – well college admissions deans don’t want to go there.

    You can always buck the trend. But the women will just throw themselves at you harder.

    Weimar was a consequence. The Roaring 20s was a consequence. And the 60s? Well look up the demographics.

    Rollo at therationalmale.com covers the behavior. It is demographics that drive behavior. And rap music? A consequence of drug prohibition.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s