I realize that my previous thread about Unchaste Women was too "negative". So instead of focusing on the negative, this thread will focus on the positive. I believe that beautiful young women, sexually conservative, chaste, pure, virgin, are worth fighting for and valuing. These types of women are very attractive. Their innocence and prudishness are a refreshing quality, very rare in this liberal society of promiscuity and degenerate culture. I feel that these women, specifically, are worthy of protection, culture, and safeguarding. These are virtuous women. Why do people claim that I hate women, when obviously, I love and cherish (chaste) women? What's not to love and idolize, about these particular women? These are women truly worth looking up to, aspiring toward, and putting into the limelight. These are the women and ladies our nation's daughters should be emulating.
Societies and cultures change. You would have gotten few arguments a century ago (to use an arbitrary number of years) and yet with equal rights and combat roles and economic equality and the ubiquitous nature of soft core photos and skits openly used as daily advertisements for nearly everything and hard core stuff accessible to anyone with a computer connection, is this relevant anymore?
Every man has a preference in a woman, and every woman the same for a man. Good Luck going forward....you're gonna need it.
I am sure you will be able to find the woman of your dreams, she may expect the same behavior from yourself, hope you can live up to your own expectations! Good luck!
I am willing to agree on most parts, but I think I'd be happy to say more or less the same about less chaste women as well. I believe sexually conservative and sexually liberal women are worth fighting for and valuing. Both types of women can be very attractive. The innocence and prudishness of some can be as refreshing a quality as confidence and honesty of others can be. The reason people claim that you hate women is not that there does not exist a type of women that you like, but that you do not see value worth lauding in women who do not fill your criteria. Especially since your criteria is evidently focused on their sexual function, rather than their function in any other aspect of life or even human value. Personally, I would be more careful in my wording, but if your question is why they say what they say, that, I think, is it. What's not to love about any of these women? They are all worth looking up to. I believe all these women in all countries, as well as men for that matter, should be free to choose whom to emulate themselves (or make up something new altogether) for that is what the word freedom means, the value to have agency over their own actions. (I imagine myself dramatically proclaiming that last sentence over a scenic valley with piccolos and drums in the background)
that! add in the continuous references to YOUNG BEAUTIFUL women and you get a fairly clear picture of what this (actual, not Heretic's version) argument really is.
I guess it's all just a matter of personal choice. I, for example have come to really admire slutty waitresses and have come to love and cherish several of them. I feel that this part of our culture should be protected and safeguarded also. You are a real virgin-snob. cheers
So when a woman has sex, or enjoys sex she is suddenly unattractive? That makes me think that you are not married. The thing that bothers me most about your post however, is this belief that the only women worthy of protection or have any value are chaste virgins. This kind of thinking is the justification behind rape culture, female circumcision and labia sewing. And you wonder why people claim you hate women? Me, I am attracted to women who enjoy having sex which is why I am still attracted to my wife. Now, if you will excuse me, my wife is calling me to bed right now.
Yesterday in the first page of Reddit there was a fascinating story about the history of the vibrators , they were developed because gynecologists were getting carpal tunnel syndrome from manually giving orgasms to women in order to cure hysteria . Unsexed women have terrible moods and low self esteem , their place is in mental asylums . Women are built for sex , to give and enjoy it , anything different is against their nature.
I like a woman who is in touch with her sexuality and comfortable in bed. It makes things so much more enjoyable, particularly if she knows what she likes and is willing to try new things.
Yes, these women are our hope in that they can stand up say things that need be said, especially to the Gay community and other woman. The argument is lame when see what the women HAVE done, when they insist that a woman's body is her own, and no man should even try to tell her what to or not do with her body, (abortion, illegitimacy, Welfare, fatherless criminals, child abuse of poverty, etc). There are good women who might now suddenly realize they have been brain washed into silently respecting whatever others do, as if that is Christianity in action,... being nice and never opposing what others say of do instead of preaching out the Truth..
I tend to think all women deserve protection and safeguarding, as well as equal jobs, equal pay, etc. They are daughters, sisters, mothers, grandmothers, and all of them are beautiful in one way or another. Your post makes me think you are suggesting women who have not had sex before are the only women worthy of setting an example for anyone. Have you personally engaged in sexual activity? The moral high ground leaves no room for hypocrisy so I have to assume you are as virtuous as those you mentioned. Otherwise, what would qualify you to ever have someone so virtuous as your partner/wife? And are they removed from your protection if they do engage in sex? Does that fundamentally change the value in life they possess in your eyes? I do realize your post was supported by religious beliefs and I have zero problem with that, but if you choose to engage non-believers in the discussion it may be difficult to get your point across without bouncing right back to why they do or don't share your religious beliefs.
The issue is the children, whether women care about them enough to establish a culture that does not in the end, abuse the children: US & UK Rank Worse Amongst 21 Wealthy Countries,... survey of child welfare... By David McHugh Associated Press Thursday, February 15, 2007 BERLIN, Feb. 14 -- The United States and Britain ranked at the bottom of a U.N. survey of child welfare in 21 wealthy countries that assessed subjects from infant mortality to whether children ate dinner with their parents or were bullied at school. 1) One of the study's researchers, Jonathan Bradshaw, said children fared worse in the United States and Britain -- despite high overall levels of national wealth -- because of greater economic inequality and poor levels of public support for families. 2) The study also gave the two countries low marks for their higher incidences of single-parent families and risky behaviors among children, such as drinking alcohol and sexual activity. 3) "But at the statistical level there is evidence to associate growing up in single-parent families with greater risk to well-being -- including a greater risk of dropping out of school, of leaving home early, poorer health, low skills and of low pay," the report said. 4) Less than 60 percent of the children in the United States lived with both parents, where 16 percent of adolescents lived with stepfamilies. On average, 80 percent of the children in the countries surveyed lived with both parents. 5) In the United States 16 percent of adolescents lived with step-families. 6) The study ranked the countries in six categories, based on national statistics: a] material well-being, b] health (vaccinations) c] safety (infant mortality) d] education (40% non-graduated) e] peer relationships (deaths before age 19) f] family relationships (50% with both parents) g] behaviors and risks (fighting/bullied) h] young people's own subjective sense of well-being
Regardless of whether The Social Contract includes men and women, bodily, or just some rules that defy the control over what they actual do is immaterial. We SEE what women have done with their bodies since the Sexual Revolution of Feminism, and that ought at least be addressed by the women themselves. Half of the children born today are bastards, who will suffer the abuses of fatherlessness and poverty. Since 1965, @ half a century now, the women apparently can NOT use birth control effectively enough to lower the consistent 1.2 million abortions every year, in a nation with a birth rate of under 4 million. Women now require Public Assistance because they are unmarried with children, to the tune of $ 1 Trillion dollars a year in Welfare. They require FREE medical Health Insurance, Medicaide. Their children are almost all Special Education and the drop out of High School rate is over 50%. The children raised by these women are the criminal element which fills the prisons and makes the large inner cities impossible to live in or visit. What seems over due is for women to explain this idea that they, alone, can do as they have and ignore the results after 50 years of Unabridged Freedom."
Really,... You approve of half the Nation, women, doing as they please in spite it costs the Tax Payers $ 1 Trillion dollars annually in assistance to support what they do. You could care less that the cities are dangerous and a sane citizen ought respect that they are off Limits, especially at night. You do not care that poor attendance and bad behavior in the Institution of Public Education, paid for by Taxes, results in terrible schools and a drop out rate of 50% in High Schools. It does not matter that the prisons cost $80/day per inmate, and 70n%bof all violent crime is by people who were raised fatherless I wonder what you would say "Dayum.....uh......Exactly", if men insisted they could do as the wish with similar results over 50 years.
Perhaps no one ever explained this to you, and I realize it's not really my place to do so...but someone needs to since it is clear you mommy and daddy skipped this part: When a Man loves a Woman they decide sometimes to make a baby........ Ah hell...get a damn book. Point is, this requires both a Man AND a Woman, and pretending she is in some way alone in this seems an ignorant or naïve view of the world. By the way....if it's all on her, shouldn't she also get to decide what to do?
Your assumption is every woman who is not chaste is contributing to the societal costs of raising children in single parent homes, with children who are all special needs, and they are the reason for poor attendance and bad behavior? You have just lumped all of society's problems on women who have engaged in sex? Seriously? And only those who have not are the good ones? If you're married to a woman, next time you look at her consider what you just said. You just also placed your own mother in that group since she obviously had to engage in sex at least once, making YOU the result of an unchaste woman. Chaste definition: 1. Morally pure in thought or conduct; decent and modest. 2. a. Not having experienced sexual intercourse; virginal. b. Abstaining from unlawful sexual intercourse. c. Abstaining from all sexual intercourse; celibate. 3. Pure or simple in design or style; austere. http://www.thefreedictionary.com/chaste Your argument is without merit because no woman remains chaste if she ever has sex or bears a child as a result of sex. And please realize that women do not get pregnant without a man who also chooses to use no birth control.
Blame???? That is not important. What is important is single women are now half of the American families. If half of the families in America were without Mommy, the complaint would be the same. ///////// Statistics on Fatherlessness CHILDREN NEED BOTH PARENTS It’s a Fact Here’s why: 85% of all youths sitting in prisons grew up in a fatherless home. (Source: Fulton County Georgia jail populations, Texas Dept. Of Corrections, 1992). 63% of youth suicides are from fatherless homes. (Source: U.S. D.H.H.S., Bureau of the Census). 90% of all homeless and runaway children are from fatherless homes. 85% of all children that exhibit behavioral disorders come from fatherless homes. (Source: Center for Disease Control). 80% of rapist motivated by displaced anger come from fatherless homes. (Source: Criminal Justice and Behavior, Vol. 14, pp. 403-26). 71% of all high school dropouts come from fatherless homes. (Source: National Principals Assoc. Report on the State of High Schools). These statistics translate to mean that children from fatherless homes are: 5 times more likely to commit suicide 32 times more likely to run away 20 times more likely to have behavioral disorders 14 times more likely to commit rape 9 times more likely to drop out of high school 20 times more likely to end up in prison Children from fatherless homes are*: Children from "fatherless families of single mother" homes are*: • 15.3 times more likely to have behavioral disorders • 4.6 times more likely to commit suicide • 6.6 times more likely to become teenaged mothers • 24.3 times more likely to run away • 15.3 times more likely to have behavioral disorders • 6.3 times more likely to be in a state-operated institutions • 10.8 times more likely to commit rape • 6.6 times more likely to drop out of school • 15.3 times more likely to end up in prison while a teenage • 73% of adolescent murderers come from mother only homes • 6.3 times more likely to be in state operated institutions Daughters who live in mother only homes are 92% more likely to divorce**
How do you tie being chaste or unchaste to the statistics you posted? The "other half" of families (assuming they have children)....they ALL have unchaste women as mommy. What is your point with single mothers in the context of this chaste/unchaste discussion? As I stated above, YOUR OWN MOTHER is not chaste. But I would assume she did not contribute to these statistics you posted since they're very important to you so who are you really pointing a finger at? Every mother is unchaste. It's a fact. But you're only pointing a finger at SOME of them here?! Unless you've gone off topic and I'm missing the point.
You need a condom culture and the first step to get it is by legalizing prostitution so boys from a very young age learn that the use of a condom in mandatory .
Okay....so now it's the Fatherless Homes that are to blame (make up yer damn mind), unless you are claiming the women are to blame for what the men do. I am curios what this has to do with a Chaste woman, other than the fact sexual intercourse is the primary reason children are born?
I'm going to assume that the bolding and underlining is yours and that it serves to draw my attention to those. I don't know if there is a reason why some is bolded and some underlined. I can't help but think that you're implying some logic in your choice of marking the text, but you haven't provided a full explanation of the logic. I don't see the connection to what I have been posting, which considers primarily human worth, attractiveness and freedom of choice, in reference to Heretic's original post. You seem to be implying a connection between sexually liberal women and single parent families. While I don't quite disbelieve the connection, I wouldn't mind seeing some numbers on it. I'm not sure if you're trying to convey the logic that sexually liberal women get pregnant on one night stands and then get stuck bringing the child up without the father, or that sexually liberal women are less likely to stay in relationships with children. The first idea would rather be resolved by teaching correct use of contraception, safe and controlled abortions and so on than limiting the personal freedom. Even then, I don't advocate the 16-and-pregnant level of sexual liberation, since that in a sense limits freedoms in a similar way. The second idea, I'm not sure is true and can still be resolved by considering things like the notion that once a marriage or other relationship involving children is breaking up, the leaving party often takes the welfare of the children into account when deciding to leave. In general, it is hard to argue with only half the opposing arguments presented.
