One more reason I’m proud to say I’m no longer a feminist

Because of morally bankrupt, exceptionally puerile ‘arguments’ like this one, which, as so much other radical feminista propaganda does, encourages women – especially those who are virgins – to lower their standards and have sex because “Sex is amazing, liberating and a power to be exerted over others”, among other things.

And here I thought the feminist movement was not supposed to be defined by our sex (and having sex) but instead who we were as human beings rather than sex objects …

Hat tip: Daniel Gelernter at Phi Beta Cons

Related: Here’s a must-read from Dawn Eden, who provides some very valuable insight on the ‘sexual revolution.’

Prior:

15 Responses to "One more reason I’m proud to say I’m no longer a feminist"

libertarian observer says:

January 31, 2007 at 3:11 pm

her parents must be so proud.
tommy in nyc says:

January 31, 2007 at 3:27 pm

Well I want to understand ST on this one correctly. ST are you saying that remaining celibate until marriage is healthy first off and secondly do you consider sex outside marriage immoral?
Sister Toldjah says:

January 31, 2007 at 3:35 pm

Yes and yes.
tommy in nyc says:

January 31, 2007 at 3:43 pm

Well ST all I can say is that I’m glad I unlearned that sex outside of marriage is “bad” after 12 years of Catholic school. I can understand why you could see it’s more mature (at least until you’re a young adult like 17 or 18) for more emotional handle on relationships and sex but I’ll be honest that I’m a little suprised that you would consider a normal human desire as immoral. That sounds like priest preacher BS.
Sister Toldjah says:

January 31, 2007 at 3:46 pm

tommy, are you competing for the title of “King of Non-Sequiturs”? I didn’t say anything about “normal human desire” being “immoral.”
Steve Skubinna says:

January 31, 2007 at 3:49 pm

Golly Tommy, how did you ever become such a superior sort of person? I mean, overcoming all that Catholic school and all, what a handicap to deal with. You have every right to be proud of yourself.

Anyone less sterling than yourself, it would come off as being smug, condescending, and self righteous. But not you.
tommy in nyc says:

January 31, 2007 at 3:56 pm

Whoa wait a minute I asked you ST if you considered sex outside marriage immoral and you said yes. Now if having sex is a normal human desire how is having it outside of marriage immoral? Steve I also do not consider myself a superior person one bit. I guess what I am trying to say is that there is nothing wrong in my humble opinion of two consenting adults knocking boots that’s all.
Sister Toldjah says:

January 31, 2007 at 4:00 pm

“Whoa wait a minute I asked you ST if you considered sex outside marriage immoral and you said yes. Now if having sex is a normal human desire how is having it outside of marriage immoral?”

Are you smoking wacky weed again today, tommy? I didn’t say having normal human desires is immoral. I feel that ACTING ON THEM by having sex outside of marriage is. Sheesh.
tommy in nyc says:

January 31, 2007 at 4:15 pm

As a matter of fact ST yes I am and I inhaled also. Your way of making a point sometimes escapes me but now I understand what you are saying you are saying basically that’s normal to have sexual urges and that’s fine,dandy and normal but if you act on them outside the institution of marriage you’re commiting a sin which is something I don’t think I’ll ever agree with. But to each his/her own
tommy in nyc says:

January 31, 2007 at 4:17 pm

anyway I’m leaving in a minute so youse have a pleasant evening especially you ST
Sister Toldjah says:

January 31, 2007 at 4:17 pm

Well yes, you are committing a sin but I have not made a religous argument out of this, tommy. I’ve said it was IMMORAL, I didn’t bring “sin” into it.
libertarian observer says:

January 31, 2007 at 4:18 pm

tommy in nyc vividly illustrates the difference between those “enlightened” (read: “narcissisti”) lefties and us grownups: life isn’t about doing whatever you want at any given time. And it’s possible to have “normal human desires” and yet not act on them—for moral reasons.

I know that will will be completely lost on tommy.
NC Cop says:

January 31, 2007 at 6:31 pm

As a matter of fact ST yes I am and I inhaled also.

What a shocking revelation!!!
Lorica says:

January 31, 2007 at 8:36 pm

The funny thing is how Tommy argues that acting on our more primal urges is enlightened. keep on token’ tommy. – Lorica
Marshall Art says:

February 1, 2007 at 2:05 am

I don’t think it’s the weed. I’ve never toked any that made me think like tommy. Maybe he gets better shit that I get. But I don’t think it’s the weed.

Comments are closed.