Category Archives: Sex

Update IV: Another Democratic (Or Demonic) Uprising

Christianity, Democracy, Ethics, Objectivism, Pseudoscience, Psychology & Pop-Psychology, Reason, Sex

In 2008, on this space, I inquired naively, “Ever wonder why the epidemic of allegations that has almost bankrupted the Catholic Church has not caught on in the UK and Europe? I venture that this is because the pop-psychology that undergirds the allegations and the attendant class-action law suits that ensued is American through-and-through.

But, two years hence, Americans can boast of one lucrative EXport, or shall I say SEXport!? The repressed memory mythology, and my priest-did-me syndrome have been adrift at sea, but have finally dropped an anchor across the pond.

My favorite Pope, Benedict XVI, has stood up admirably against the exported $2 billion lawsuit industry:

“Christ guides us towards goodness and does not let us be disarmed by ingratitude.” He also spoke of how man can sometimes “fall to the lowest, vulgar levels” and “sink into the swamp of sin and dishonesty”.

The Pope represents an aristocracy of the mind. The Catholic Church, in its wisdom, has put in place a much-needed hierarchy for the worshiping mass of humanity.

Against this, the religion of Democracy preaches the rule of the mob and the masses—in particular instituting the lowest common denominator in all spheres of life, from morals to aesthetics. The Catholic Church is among the last historical institutions where the masses are ministered to by their betters (mostly). The impetus and instinct to bleed it dry is a manifestation of a democratic—or is it demonic?—uprising. It is driven by those who’ve, in the Pope’s words, “fallen to the lowest, vulgar levels … into the swamp of sin and dishonesty.”

Reread “SEX, GOD & GREED” by Daniel Lyons for a dissection of the veracity of the sexual abuse claims against the Church.

Update I: The “Another” of the post’s title alludes to the health care revolution, ushered in by the Obama coup.

Update II (March 30): What did I miss? Was there a priestly ritual murder? Plain murder? Boer murder? Evidence beyond hearsay of all the rest? You’d thinks so, wouldn’t you, at least from Schmidt’s hyperbole hereunder. I suggest, as I already have, the reading of Daniel Lyons’ “SEX, GOD & GREED.”

Update III: In reply to Hugo: Thanks for your always provocative posts. Still, it’s baffling to see an Objectivist poo-poo standards of evidence and due process—class action suits being but one legal emblem of the abuse of the principle of a case-by case adjudication.
Also perplexing is it to encounter an Objectivist, which I know Hugo to be, blame genocide in Rwanda on anyone other than the barbarians who, with malice aforethought, took machetes to their innocent neighbors (I was just revisiting that for my book).

Update IV (March 31): A discussion on Hardball with Pat Buchanan, a Catholic, of cover-ups and papal culpability. No discussion of the veracity and standards of the evidence, though.

Updated: Daddy Brown Creeps Me Out (He Should You Too)

Education, Etiquette, Family, Gender, Music, Republicans, Sex

It’s been my perception for some time that American fathers, generally, are sexually inappropriate with their daughters. The fault lies—again, generally—not so much with the hapless dad, but with these young, assertive females, taught by pedagogues and reinforced by parents and the culture that, “I’m like a sexual being” (uttered in Meghan-McCain like tart tones). The onus is on those around the girl to let her act out her sexuality 100% of the time—or so the consensus seems.

Repulsive. Improper. Unnatural.

However, Scott Brown, the man from Massachusetts who filled Kennedy’s sacred seat in the U.S. Senate, went beyond the call of an American dad’s duty in advertising his girls’ availability during his acceptance speech.

This picture of Brown with his girls, jutting boobs and all, certainly reinforces my view of impropriety (yuckiness).

More obscene than anything discussed here, however, is Ayla Brown’s singing. No, she’s not talented. Strained, bedroom groaning is not good singing. On the other hand, I guess it has its places …

Update (Feb. 4): The comment about my hailing from a once-Christian conservative country (South Africa, RIP), and thus not acclimatizing well to the hyper-sexual American family is completely off. It demonstrate to me that even conservative-minded readers are incorrigible cultural libertines.

It used to be the most basic of things that young women were modest about their sexuality around their fathers. The father-daughter relationship is a primary one for a girl. From it will develop all her future relationships with men. This is precisely why to me the specter of fems letting it all hang out around their fathers is disturbing. And why a father should know better (and Brown has carefully crafted his public image, including the pics he has released to media), and ought to be able to tell his proudly presenting girl, “Here’s my Hawaiian shirt, sweetheart, cover up.”

When you talk about restoring the middle-class family and its values, this is it. When you talk about returning America to a healthier time when parents where parents and not potential admirers or friends or sexual coaches, this is it.

For touting a slut like Kim Karsashian as a role model for “young girls” (read: budding sluts) because she doesn’t drink (but films herself adoringly copulating), Sean Hannity is a libertine. Am I from Another Culture to suggest this? Cultural conservatism used to be apple-pie American. Now my so-called culturally conservative readers find me quaint.

I despair. It’s beyond repair.

Incidentally, where on the continuum of tender (or, dare I say twisted) soft porn, suggestive, father-daughter tease are our wholesome Miley and Billy Ray Cyrus situated?

Updated: Don’t Ask Don’t Tell For Hets & Homos

Etiquette, Feminism, Gender, Homosexuality, Military, Sex

In his “State of the Union remarks, President Obama said he would work with Congress towards repealing the ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ law on which the policy is based.” The Generals, sitting in the front row, remained conspicuously stone-faced.

Today the news was all a-flutter when a politician in fatigues, Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, “made an impassioned plea for allowing gays to serve openly in uniform, telling a Senate panel it was a matter of integrity and that it is wrong to force people to ‘lie about who they are in order to defend their fellow citizens.'”

As the top- old dogs of the military are replaced by younger, more hip men, faces will soften on hearing such ludicrous ideas. So will the will.

The issue can be solved by returning the military to an earlier formation of disciplined men, united in common purpose. The ubiquity of women in the military has introduced into its ranks rampant, promiscuous sexuality. Combine youth, on-hand studs, testosterone, abundantly available loose women, and enabling laws—and you’ve created an assembly line of unwed, welfare moms, operating in a sexually charged atmosphere.

Remove women from the military, and you’ve removed the toxic effects straight women have on esprit de corps (and on rates of illegitimacy and welfarism).

In this kind of all-male outfit, there is no need to parade sexuality, straight or gay. Think of an all-boy school. Yeah, some hanky-panky goes on, but clandestinely.

Gay men who’ve chosen a military career are probably inclined to keep quiet about their sexual exploits. If he is the very poofy, prancing type, who doesn’t shut up about his beloved or bathhouse exploits; then our gay military man is probably unfit to serve.

As a wise woman said back in 2002, “The closet, sadly, has come to signify oppression, not discretion.”

I propose restoring indiscriminate discretion.

My answer to this facile debate is thus, “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell” for all military men, hets and homos.

Update (Feb. 4): A while ago “some industrious Army general in Iraq sought to limit the wages of whoring in the military. Maj. Gen. Anthony Cucolo III, quite reasonably, issued a policy on Nov. 4, 2009, ‘forbidding pregnancy among his soldiers.'” Cucolo was shot down by just about everyone. His, however, is a reflection of a healthy traditional morality. So screwed up have we become—so corrupt a culture are we mired in—that we think that our “civil rights”; in this case the right to fornicate, impregnate, procreate on the public dime, must accompany us wherever we peddle our sorry behinds.

I suspect most individuals who associate gays in the military with prancing poofs who feminize the force have a stereotypical view of gays. Homosexual men are not necessarily feminine. Men who join the army are seldom feminine. Among the vocal DADT advocates I’ve seen on TV, none was feminine; in fact most were way manlier than Markos Moulitsas, the editor of the Daily Curse, who has served.

The point is to restore decorum and morals to an army in which everyone is sexing it up. See? Back in the closet, hets and homos.

Updated: No More Making Whoopy In The Military?

Classical Liberalism, Feminism, Free Speech, Gender, IlanaMercer.com, Iraq, Military, Morality, Private Property, Sex, The State

Oh dear, some industrious Army general in Iraq wants to limit the wages of whoring in the military. Maj. Gen. Anthony Cucolo III, quite reasonably, reports ABC News, issued a policy on Nov. 4 “forbidding pregnancy among his soldiers.”

His policy statement said violation of the rule could be punishable by court martial, and that it would also apply to the men who get female soldiers pregnant, even if the couple is married.
Pregnant soldiers are immediately redeployed out of combat zones to bases where they can get comprehensive medical care.

“The true purpose behind this is to cause them to pause and think about, ‘Okay wait a minute. It was written in the order and I’m going to leave my team. I’m going to leave an outfit shorthanded,'” Cucolo said.”

[SNIP]

NO MORE MAKING Whoopy In The Military? What next? Leaving Iraq for lack of recreational outlets? We can only hope.

Anyone with a brain cell knows that the military, other than being an arm of the state, subject to all the malignancies that entails, is one of the Biggest Whore Houses around.

The authority on the subject is “Stephanie Gutmann, a Jewish woman out of Manhattan,” as Fred Reed forthrightly fingers her. Reed writes the following about Stephanie’s apolitical “reportorial” effort, which,

[D]escribed perfectly the fraud and double standards used to make women look successful in the army. Much of it would be hard to credit, except that I had seen it from outside … In the course of events I met Steph a couple of times, chatted on the phone, and lost contact with her. The book got few and bad reviews because it was not what the media wanted to hear. It was a fine book.

As is “Steph’s” Other Book. Read about it here. (I too have had a pleasant exchange or two with this lovely lady.)

Update (Dec. 23): To the distracting diversions in the Comments Section, including my responses (by necessity), let me repeat: The Posting Policy of BAB states: “Please note that ‘Barely A Blog’ is private property. Posts are published at the proprietor’s discretion.” Apparently this requires explanation, as participants prefer the fun of expressing themselves without the discipline of acquaintance with the philosophy espoused here.

THE CONFUSION about this statement demonstrates even more the need for participants to become “vaguely familiar with the political philosophy championed on this forum and the Mother Site, ilanamercer.com. Accordingly, there is no such thing as absolute free speech; there are only absolute rights of private property. Speech is circumscribed by private property rights. I’m afraid you may deliver a disquisition in my virtual or tangible living room only if I let you so do.