FT199: “If Republicans want women barefoot and pregnant then Democrats want women with their legs spread and barren.” —Old Pithy

Posted by PITHOCRATES - December 6th, 2013

Fundamental Truth

1950s Society did not Depict their Women Sexually

Democrats bemoan that the Republicans want to take America back to the 1950s.  Where women didn’t work.  But stayed at home and raised families.  Where they ware barefoot and pregnant.  With three jobs in the household.  A cook in the kitchen.  A maid in the house.  And a whore in the bedroom.  Always serving the needs of others.  But never themselves.  While their husbands go out and build a career.  And enjoy life.  Leaving their wives behind to suffer from the disease of pregnancy over and over again.  And the oppression of motherhood.

Of course the Republicans don’t quite see it that way.  They don’t see pregnancy as a disease.  Or raising a family as oppression.  They see a loving household as a good thing.  Where they can raise their children to be good citizens.  To respect one another.  And to treat women like ladies.  To respect them.  And protect their dignity.  To be chivalrous.  To hold a door for them.  To offer their seat to them on a crowded bus.  To think of them as human beings.  And not just as vessels holding their sexual parts.  Sexual objects that are only useful when a man wants to have a good time.

Democrats disparage those old television shows like Father Knows Best, The Donna Reed Show, Leave it to Beaver, Ozzie and Harriet, etc.  Because they treated their women horribly.  There was no hooking up or casual sex at all.  For 1950s society did not depict their women sexually.  They dressed and acted conservatively.  No bare midriffs, lower back tattoos, plunging necklines or exposed thongs for men to leer at.  Men were polite to women.  And boys were polite to girls.  Unless they had cooties.  Even then if they were mean parents, teachers and older siblings admonished them for that.  Oh yeah, it was sheer hell for women back then.

Democrats have Liberated Women to be Pure Sex Objects for Men everywhere to Enjoy

Then came the Sixties.  And the Sexual Revolution.  The counterculture (i.e., young Democrats) railed against treating women with respect.  For they have vaginas.  And they should use them as often as they darn well pleased.  Not to just get married and raise a family.  To one man for the rest of their life.  The heck with that.  They should use their sexual parts to please more than just one man.  So instead of only one man enjoying her vagina a woman should allow many men to enjoy her vagina.  It was the dawn of the women’s movement.  Feminism.  And never again would American society treat women like prim and proper ladies.  At least not with feminists around.

As the conservatives tried to maintain a lady’s honor the young liberal Democrats fought censorship.  For the right to show naked women with their legs spread in pornographic magazines.  To show them fully naked in the movies.  In simulated sex acts.  And performing real sex acts in hardcore pornographic movies.  Yes, Democrats have finally liberated women to be pure sex objects for men everywhere to enjoy.  Of course Democrats called this liberating.  While dirty old (and young) men just say, “Thank you!”

Seedy strip clubs became high-scale gentlemen’s clubs.  Where women stripped down to a thong and rubbed herself on a man’s lap.  Or did more in the VIP/champagne rooms.  Yes, this was liberating for women.  Sexy women were everywhere.  Half-naked women sold things on television.  Boys could peak at naked women spreading their legs in magazines at the local drug store.  Most R-rated movies contained gratuitous nude scenes.  And when the VCR came out pornography really took off.  Women became slabs of meat on camera.  Making hundreds of titles.  Putting a lot of miles on their vaginas.  And other openings.

Democrats are doing everything within their Power to Nationalize a Woman’s Vagina

So who do the kings of the sexual exploitation of women vote for?  These businesses all vote Democrat.  Because they don’t want to roll time back to the 1950s when women weren’t sexual objects.  For they profit handsomely on the liberation of women.  While bombarding men with their pornographic images.  So that when they see a woman today they’re not thinking about what she’s thinking.  They’re thinking about what she looks like naked.  And how much they would like to do things with her that they do in those pornographic films.  Sometimes forcing the issue with alcohol and drugs.  Bringing terms like ‘date-rape’ and ‘roofie’ into the lexicon.  For the American left has so sexualized women that more and more men can think of nothing else but hooking up.

The Democrats have long championed birth control and abortion.  To remove any consequences from a sexually active lifestyle.  Encouraging women to offer their vaginas to as many men as possible.  Which they have.  Kicking off an epidemic of sexually transmitted diseases.  And not because women’s husbands were seeing prostitutes at the local saloon like they were before Prohibition.  Bringing diseases home to their wives.  Which helped kick off the Prohibition movement as men drank away their paychecks and did bad things.  Like being abusive to their wives and giving them syphilis and other STDs. No.  Today women are out there hooking up for casual sex.  Bringing STDs into their lives.  Because Democrats have taught them all their lives that they should be having casual sex.  Instead of getting married.  Because that would be a living hell.

Perhaps the greatest political trick ever done was how Democrats got women to choose to be sexual objects.  Getting them to believe that casual sex with many different partners is liberating.   And not objectifying.  The next greatest political trick ever done was how these same Democrats convinced women that it’s the Republicans that have a war on women.  Not the Democrats.  Who are doing everything within their power to nationalize a woman’s vagina.  So feminist men (who are mostly Democrat) can enjoy a lady’s charms without having to marry her.  Like they did in the God-awful 1950s.  Where Republican men kept their women barefoot and pregnant.  Well, if Republicans want women barefoot and pregnant then Democrats want women with their legs spread and their wombs barren.  Yet it’s the Republicans who have a war on women.  Go figure.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Birthrates and Welfare States

Posted by PITHOCRATES - October 22nd, 2013

History 101

Birth Control and Abortion hurt the Welfare State because Babies become Taxpayers

People typically have fewer children during bad economic times.  Because you have to feed and clothe kids.  Which is very hard to do during bad economic times.  Especially if you lost your job during a period of high unemployment.  Such as the Great Depression.  Or if you’re going through a period of high inflation.  Like during the Seventies.  We can see this if we look at the birthrate over the years.

Number of Children per Woman R1

(source: Population Reference Bureau)

Bad economic times (Great Depression) fewer births.  High inflation (the Seventies) fewer births.  Of course, there was something else happening during the Seventies.  Which followed the Sexual Revolution.  Women were having more sex outside of marriage.  But they were using birth control and recently legalized abortion to avoid having children.  Women were liberated.  The feminists were moving into careers once reserved for men.  And because they were having careers they were not being stay-at-home mothers raising a family.

Also during the Seventies there was the zero population growth movement.  Among many other movements.  As the hippies turned antiestablishment.  And anti-capitalist.  Preferring a communal life.  Where there was no greed or profits.  Where everyone was equal and had an equal share.  Like the communists enjoyed.  Or, rather, suffered.  The zero population growth movement protested against having babies.  And the threat they posed to the limited resources of the earth.  So they were quite happy to see the birthrate fall below the replacement birthrate (about 2.1 children per woman in the United States).  Because below this rate future generations will be smaller than previous generations.  Which will burden the limited resources of the earth less.  But it created a big problem for those who wanted a large socialist state to provide cradle to the grave welfare.  For babies become taxpayers.

Because of the War on Poverty it takes Two Incomes to raise a Family Today

We just emerged from a government shutdown that ended with an agreement to raise the debt ceiling.  Why?  Because they can’t raise tax rates high enough to pay for all of the government’s spending.  At least not without putting most everyone below the poverty line after taxes.  Which makes that declining birthrate a big problem.  For the fall in the birthrate coincided with the expansion of the welfare state in the Sixties.  As can be seen in the explosion in welfare spending following LBJ’s launching of his War on Poverty.

Total Welfare Spending 1950 - 2010 R2

(source: The Heritage Foundation)

So just as women were having fewer babies so following generations would be smaller LBJ’s Great Society gave us a new expanding welfare state.  That is, once our tax base began to grow smaller with each subsequent generation federal expenditures were growing larger with each subsequent generation.  Resulting in higher tax rates on the smaller tax base to pay for it.  And massive new borrowings to pay what our taxes won’t.  As the government took more of our earnings away median household income stagnated.

Federal Spending and Median Income

(source: The Heritage Foundation)

If you’ve ever wondered why we can’t raise a family on one income these days this is why.  It’s the growth of federal spending.  Paid for with a growth in tax revenue.  Leaving us less money to raise our families.  Requiring that second income.  This is what the Great Society gave us.  And it’s what birth control and abortion gave us.  But it gets worse.

This Year Adult Incontinence Pants outsold Baby Diapers in Japan for the First Time

The Sexual Revolution gave us a baby bust generation.  Following a baby boom generation.  Giving us an aging population.  Where more people are leaving the workforce than are entering it.  So more people are consuming taxes (Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, etc.) than are paying taxes.  Causing a massive wealth transfer from the young to the old.  So an aging population makes it even harder to raise a family.  Especially for the young just starting their families.  Because of the higher tax rates on a shrinking workforce required to pay for that aging population.  Which can lead to worse things than a collapse of the welfare state (see Why have young people in Japan stopped having sex? by Abigail Haworth posted 10/19/2013 on The Guardian)

Japan’s under-40s appear to be losing interest in conventional relationships. Millions aren’t even dating, and increasing numbers can’t be bothered with sex. For their government, “celibacy syndrome” is part of a looming national catastrophe. Japan already has one of the world’s lowest birth rates. Its population of 126 million, which has been shrinking for the past decade, is projected to plunge a further one-third by 2060…

Fewer babies were born here in 2012 than any year on record. (This was also the year, as the number of elderly people shoots up, that adult incontinence pants outsold baby nappies in Japan for the first time.) Kunio Kitamura, head of the JFPA, claims the demographic crisis is so serious that Japan “might eventually perish into extinction”.

This is the zero population growth movement on steroids.  The Republicans in the United States shut down the government in an attempt to curtail federal spending.  As the public debt is approaching 100% of GDP.  Very dangerous territory to be in.  But if you think that’s bad it’s far worse in Japan.  As their public debt is approximately 214% of GDP.  To support a massive welfare state.  In a country where the taxpayer is fast becoming an endangered species.

This is the ultimate end of any democracy that learned it could vote itself the treasury.  As taxes rise people cut back on their spending.  And a big cost item is children.  So we have declining birthrates in developed countries with expansive welfare states.  And immigration problems.  Immigrants who come for those generous state benefits.  And governments that want to grant them citizenship.  To make them taxpayers.  To make up for that declining birthrate.  And prevent their own extinction.

 www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

The Left’s War on Women brought about the Vicious Cycle of Thong Use and Bacterial Vaginosis

Posted by PITHOCRATES - October 20th, 2013

Week in Review

The left say the Republicans have a war on women.  Because they want to restrict abortion.  Make women pay for their own birth control.  And other heinous anti-women behavior.  Such as encouraging them to marry instead of having casual sex with multiple partners.  The left says Republicans want to turn women into the housewives of the Fifties.   Having sex only with one man and getting pregnant when they do.  Instead of a woman exploring her sexuality.  And enjoying it.  That’s how uptight Republicans are.

Of course, the left’s idea of a liberated woman probably pleases men more than women.  Once upon a time men married one woman and either stayed with her or had ‘discrete’ affairs on the side.  Then the Sexual Revolution came along and women were just giving it away.  Short shorts.  Miniskirts.  Going braless.  Men just loved the women’s movement.  As women no longer wore shape-hiding dresses but revealing clothing showing all of their curves.  Then the ladies took it up a notch.  Bare midriffs.  Low rise jeans.  And thongs.  Allowing women to wear tight clinging dresses without showing any visible panty lines.  Or showing some thong riding out the back of their low-rise jeans for the men to see just to be super sexy.

Of course when we ask why women want to wear tight and clinging dresses or low-rise jeans there is but one answer.  They want men to look at them.  To see them as a sexual object.  It has to be.  For they sure aren’t doing it for the comfort.  Or the hygiene (see Why Your Thong May Be Bad For Your Health by Ellie Krupnick & Rebecca Adams posted 10/15/2013 on The Huffington Post).

Many thongs, particularly the sexy lacy kinds, are made of non-breathable materials, as opposed to cotton.  “We should all always be wearing all cotton underwear,” Dr. Ghofrany advises…”When patients say [to me], ‘But the crotch is cotton,’ my response is that the layer outside the crotch is not, thus making the cotton less breathable and thus allowing more moisture to be trapped and more possible imbalance leading to infections.”

Plus, even if the entire garment is cotton, the skinny shape creates an inherent risk. “The patient’s vulva is much more ‘exposed’ to whatever they’re wearing,” Dr. Ghofrany explains, “and given the increase in leggings and ‘skinny’ jeans, all of which have Lycra, Spandex, etc., there again is trapped moisture.”

Lastly, the thin band of material at the crotch tends to move around, possibly transferring bacteria from one spot to another. As Dr. Rabin tells, us, “If you have a little bacteria — E. coli is the most common bacteria in the colon — in the back part of the fabric and you’re physically active, that material may move. All it has to do is move an inch or two and it’s next to the vagina or urethra. That thong may be depositing colonic bacteria into your vagina or urethra.”  Yikes.

Infections can occur when the balance of the vaginal environment, including the moisture levels from vaginal secretions, is thrown off, says Dr. Ghofrany. The most common? Yeast infections and bacterial infections, mainly bacterial vaginosis. The extra bacteria usually manifests with increased discharge, which leads to what Dr. Ghofrany calls the “vicious cycle of thong use”: the increase in discharge leads to an increased use of panty liners, which leads to even more trapped moisture, which leads to more infections and more discharge.

Thongs also carry the risk of external irritation. “I see more patients with skin tags on their vulva and near their rectum, in the exact distribution of the thongs,” Dr. Ghofrany tells us. “I sometimes will be mid-pap and ask a patient, ‘So you wear thongs a lot?’ And their response is always ‘Ya! How can you tell?’ And it’s because of the skin tags, small ‘piles’ of soft tissue that occur from the skin being constantly rubbed in the same spot. These happen traditionally at bra lines and neck lines, and now increasingly at thong lines!”

Infections?  Bacteria?  E. coli?  Bacterial vaginosis?  Vicious cycle of thong use?  Skin tags?  Piles?  That’s a pretty steep price to pay to be sexy for men.  But in our highly sexualized world where the left has sexualized women this is how women feel good.  By being sexy.  To, of course, please men.  Yet it is the right that has a war on women.  Go figure.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Women Doctors suffer Sexual Harassment thanks to the Left’s Sexualization of Women

Posted by PITHOCRATES - October 12th, 2013

Week in Review

Australia was once part of the British Empire.  Like the United States.  And both were very Christian when they were part of the British Empire.  And they remained religious following their independence.  For a while.  But then we both drifted away from our religious teachings.  And began to lose our civility (see Most female doctors suffer sexual harassment, say researchers by Australian Associated Press posted 10/7/2013 on The Guardian).

Most women GPs suffer sexual harassment from patients during their career, according to researchers, who have written a letter to the Medical Journal of Australia.

The most common concerns are requests for inappropriate examinations, inappropriate exposure of body parts and gender-based remarks.

Touching and grabbing are also problems, according to a questionnaire-based survey by Dr Peter Bratuskins of Monash University in Melbourne.

He and his colleagues report that 54.5% of respondents have been harassed by a patient.

Before the Sexual Revolution, birth control and abortion, before we sexualized women, we treated women like ladies.  The left thinks treating a woman like a lady means inferring she’s the weaker sex and should remain barefoot and pregnant.  To forgo a career so her husband can have one.  That’s what the left thinks.  But the right doesn’t.  They believe treating a woman like a lady means we don’t sexualize her.  And we see more than just her lady parts.

The percentage of people in Australia who have no religion jumped from less than 1% to 6.7% following the Sexual Revolution.  Rising to 18.7% in 2006.  The further we move from religion the easier it is to sexualize women.  Because we believe that there is no judgment of our behavior after we die.  Which turns medical examinations into cheap sexual thrills with women doctors.  Because today we live in a sex-dominated world. Where we use sex to sell everything.  Putting sex foremost on the mind of many men.  Who interpret the women’s movement as the nod of approval to look at women as the sum total of their lady parts.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , ,

Studies find Liberated Women becoming Alcoholics instead of June Cleavers

Posted by PITHOCRATES - October 6th, 2013

Week in Review

It is rather ironic that the sexual revolution coincided with the women’s movement.  Women liberated themselves by being more sexually active.  Which is why men loved the women’s movement.  Because they got more of what they wanted.  More sex with more different women.

This focus on women’s sexuality did more to sexualize women than any man did.  What did birth control and abortion do for women?  It gave them the freedom not to get pregnant when having sex.  So they had more sex.  Turning them into sexual objects. Because men didn’t have to marry them to have sex with them.  Which was just fine with them.

It is interesting that women have defined their liberation by living more destructive lives.  Their sexual revolution led to an explosion in STDs.  As women became more liberated more women smoked.  In fact a popular ad for Virginia Slims was, “You’ve come a long way, baby.”   Showing a modern, beautiful, sexy women smoking a cigarette.  About as unlike June Cleaver as you can get.  And what liberated woman doesn’t drink(see Female alcohol abuse is a ‘global epidemic’ by Ann Dowsett Johnson posted 10/5/2013 on the New York Post)?

Alcohol abuse is rising in much of the developed world — and in many countries, female drinkers are driving that growth…

Women with a university degree are almost twice as likely to drink daily as those without. “I ask myself every day if I’m an alcoholic,” says one rising corporate star. “I’m 32, and I drink every night. All my friends drink every night. We haven’t had our kids yet, and we all drink the same way we did in university.”

Says Katherine Brown, director of policy at Britain’s Institute of Alcohol Studies: “Young professional women drink a lot more than women in manual and routine jobs — what you call blue collar. Is it marketing, keeping up with the machismo, children..?”

Brown believes that a crucial driver is the norms of the university years. “It’s an alcohol-soaked environment,” she says. “At the university I went to — Exeter — Carlsberg was a sponsor of events held on campus. The focus was on getting really, really drunk and the most horrendous things used to happen. All social events revolved around drinking, and acting the fool was celebrated…

“It is the issue affecting girls’ health — and it’s going sideways, especially for those 13 to 15.” This is the voice of Nancy Poole, director of research and knowledge translation at the British Columbia Centre of Excellence for Women’s Health. “And the saddest thing,” says Poole, “is alcohol is being marketed as girls’ liberation.”

Drinking calms us.  And lowers our inhibitions.  We drink at a party to get the courage to talk to that person we’re attracted to.  New strippers drink a lot so they can strip down to a tiny thong and gyrate on a man’s lap.  In fact, drinking has been used for years as the prelude for sexual pleasures.  Which is why men buy women drinks.  To get them drunk enough so they lose their inhibitions and have sex with them.  Which is probably why 13-15 year old boys are finding ways to get alcohol so they can binge drink at parties.  And get girls so drunk that they can have sex when they are not of right mind to say ‘no’.  Because nothing puts a damper on having sex more than a girl saying ‘no’.

Of course, these boys get an assist from government.  Thanks to that free birth control available at school.  And abortions without parental notification.  Which gives them the argument that there is nothing to worry about.  Even if there is something to worry about.  Because there’s a way to make problems go away.

When they get to university they take it up a notch.  Because there are no parents around looking out for their best interests.  So they binge drink.  Act stupid.  And do horrendous things.  The kind of things you want to start drinking to forget about when you wake up the following morning.  Unless someone uploads a video of you in the throes of that horrendous thing.  Or you brought home a souvenir that will require medication for the indefinite future.  Or longer.

Liberated woman, you have come a long way.  Baby.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Our Daughters are Paying the Highest Price for the Democrats’ Sexual Revolution

Posted by PITHOCRATES - May 11th, 2013

Week in Review

Parents spend a lot of time telling their kids ‘no’.  Telling them not to smoke, drink or do drugs.  And to wait until they are more mature before having sex.  That’s why the Democrat Party attracts the youth vote.  They are so not like their parents.

Democrats talk to our kids as if they are mature adults.  Who want to help them to have sex by providing free birth control and access to abortion.  Making the morning-after pill available to girls as young as 15 without a prescription.  Even making contraception a women’s health issue during the 2012 election.  Saying the Republicans wanted to make people pay for their own birth control.  Which was, of course, code for taking it away.

For Republicans wanted to force women into loveless marriages.  Turning them into baby factories.  They didn’t want to empower women.  They wanted to imprison women.  Because they hate women.  While the Democrats love women.  (Some more than others.)  Even encouraging them to explore their sexuality.  (Preferably with enlightened Democrats who love women).  Which was how you empowered a woman.  Letting her have consequence-free sex.  And if she develops a consequence there are things she could do to get rid of that consequence.  With all of these resources available courtesy of Democrats there was nothing limiting the amount of sex young people could have.  Making the Democrat Party the party for them.  Which is why the Democrats remain the party of women.  Even though their policies end up destroying women’s lives (see Sex Superbug Could Be ‘Worse Than AIDS’ by Mark Koba posted 5/2/2013 on CNBC).

An antibiotic-resistant strain of gonorrhea—now considered a superbug—has some analysts saying that the bacteria’s effects could match those of AIDS.

“This might be a lot worse than AIDS in the short run because the bacteria is more aggressive and will affect more people quickly,” said Alan Christianson, a doctor of naturopathic medicine…

“Getting gonorrhea from this strain might put someone into septic shock and death in a matter of days,” Christianson said. “This is very dangerous…”

According to the CDC, about 20 million a year contract a sexually transmitted disease (STD) and result in about $16 billion in medical costs. More than 800,000 of STD cases reported are gonorrhea infections, with most occurring in people between the ages of 15 and 24.

Gonorrhea is transmitted through unprotected sexual contact. Untreated, the disease can cause a number of health complications in women, including infertility. In men, the disease can be very painful and lead to sterility. It can also trigger other life-threatening illnesses, including heart infections.

Gonorrhea can be hard to detect. It often shows no symptoms in about half of women and in about 5 percent of men. Gonorrhea infection rates were at historic lows until two years ago, according to the CDC…

But Smith said more needs to be done. In a briefing on Capitol Hill last week, he urged Congress to target nearly $54 million in immediate funding to help find an antibiotic for HO41 and to conduct an education and public awareness campaign.

“I’m hopeful we’ll get the additional funds, but I can’t say for sure,” Smith said. “What I do know is we don’t have the resources to fight this as it stands now.”

Avoiding the disease completely is the best course, experts said.

We actually have an education and public awareness campaign.  We call it parenting.  And if the Democrats haven’t been undermining parents in their parenting perhaps these kids would listen to them.  But it’s hard to tell your kids to wait until you’re older and more mature before having sex when the government is providing free birth control in our high schools.  And providing the morning-after pill to girls as young as 15 without a doctor’s prescription or parental notice.  Because kids will be kids.

And then you have a liberal curriculum put together by the radicals of the Sixties.  Teaching them to be different than their parents.  Even blaming their greedy parents for trying to kill the planet with global warming.  And attacking religion and our traditions as backward relics of a medieval past.  The 1950s.  So thanks to government and our educational system our parents have little moral authority with their kids.  Who would much rather listen to their teachers, professors and government when it comes to sex.  Because they say it’s okay.  Which is why there has been an explosion in STDs (See Sex and the Superbug by Jerome Groopman posted 10/1/2012 on The New Yorker).

The sexual revolution of the nineteen-sixties ushered in rising rates of gonorrhea, as condoms, which effectively prevent transmission, were abandoned in favor of oral contraceptives. Only after the risk of death from AIDS began to increase, in the nineteen-eighties, did condom use again become a norm. A federally funded gonorrhea-control program, started in 1972, perhaps made a difference; by 1997, the number of yearly cases of gonorrhea reported to the C.D.C. had fallen by nearly three-quarters compared with its peak, in 1975. In 2009, the number of gonorrhea cases in the U.S. was at an all-time low. “Ten or fifteen years ago, we thought it was going to be eradicated in some Western countries,” Unemo told me…

The microbe carries specialized proteins that help it attach firmly to the surface of cells and other proteins that blunt a host’s immune-system response and prevent white blood cells from ingesting and degrading it. Together, these tools grant the gonococcus the ability to fasten to and invade the cells that line the human urethra, cervix, rectum, and throat, and the lining of the eyelid and eye.

In some respects, N. gonorrhoeae is a fragile organism; dry conditions, changes in temperature, and the ultraviolet rays in sunlight destroy it. As a result, it is transmitted only through intimate contact with body fluids; it doesn’t thrive on inanimate objects and can’t be picked up from toilet seats. Yet it is far more contagious than H.I.V. A woman who has unprotected sex with an H.I.V.-infected man has roughly a one-in-a-thousand chance of contracting the virus. The transmission rate among gay men having anal sex is an order of magnitude higher, about one in a hundred. In contrast, with gonorrhea a man has a twenty-five-per-cent chance of catching the microbe from an infected partner. For women, the odds are as high as sixty-six per cent.

The pill liberated women.  And many unsuspecting women did not believe they had to be careful anymore.  So they weren’t.  They took their oral contraceptives.  And if that failed they could get an abortion starting in 1973.  Making the Seventies a magical time for men who wanted to play the field.  And they did.  Spreading disease.  And it was the women who suffered the most from their sexual appetites.  As an infected man infects two out of three women he has sex with.

Interestingly, the resurgence in gonorrhea corresponded with the Democrats winning the White House in 2008.  With President Obama, Nancy Pelosi as Speaker of the House (until the 2010 midterm election) and Harry Read as majority leader in the Senate the country could move further to the left than ever before.  There was nothing the Republicans could do to stop them.  Case in point: Obamacare.  Which is replete with free preventative health care measures that include birth control and abortion.  The left was giddy with joy.  And apparently they celebrated their even more consequence-free sex lives, appropriately, in the sack.

In effect, the human pharynx is a spawning ground for resistance… And, because pharyngeal gonorrhea rarely produces symptoms, it is more likely both to go untreated and to be passed on unknowingly.

A driving factor behind the rise in gonorrhea infections, as well as the trend toward total antibiotic resistance, is our complacent attitude toward oral sex…

In many circles, however, especially since the era of H.I.V., oral sex has been embraced as a safe alternative to intercourse… Recent statistics from Los Angeles County suggest that the proportion of pharyngeal to genital gonorrhea cases among adolescents has increased sevenfold since 1988…

According to the C.D.C., adolescents and young adults account for nearly half of all new cases of sexually transmitted disease, even though the group represents just twenty-five per cent of the sexually active population. The adaptive nature of the gonococcus, coupled with the prevalence of unprotected oral sex, all but insures that drug-resistant gonorrhea will eventually take root in the general heterosexual population. Unemo warned, “When you get into the population of young heterosexuals, it can very quickly spread.”

It turns out that consequence-free sex has some serious consequences.  And these numbers are just shocking.  Only 25% of the sexually active population is responsible for nearly half of all new STDs.  The adolescents and young adults.  Who overwhelmingly vote Democrat.  A demographic exploited by the Democrats to remain in power.  No matter how many lives they destroy.  And yet they say the Republicans have a War on Women.  Those sexual prudes who want their kids to refrain from having as much sex as the Democrats are encouraging them to have.  Because they fear for the wellbeing of their children.  As they understand the risks of sexual activity.  They try to be good parents and protect their children.  Especially their daughters who are paying the highest price of the Democrats’ Sexual Revolution.  But it’s difficult to do when government and our educational system is fighting so strenuously to turn their kids against their parents.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Thanks to the Sexual Revolution One in Four Women have Herpes

Posted by PITHOCRATES - March 31st, 2013

Week in Review

The Democrats attacked Mitt Romney in the 2012 election.  Saying that he was conducting a war on women.  That he wanted to take away women’s birth control.  Instead, he was going to force them into marriages first before they have sex.  Like they did in the awful, repressive Fifties.  Where women would be nothing but June Cleaver and Donna Read clones.  And what woman would want to be in a loving, happy marriage?  As it turns out, a lot of women.  Who join dating sites just for that one purpose.  To find someone to live happily ever after with.  But because of the Sexual Revolution women are finding that harder to do these days (see STD dating websites are on the rise by Natalie DiBlasio posted 3/28/2013 on USA Today).

[Clinical psychologist Carl Hindy says “a] lot of my clients are looking for relationships and they are on dating websites like eHarmony and Match, but then the question is, ‘When do I tell him or her that I have herpes? If I tell them right away, that person is going to go away. But if I let the relationship develop and wait to tell the person, is that betrayal?'” Hindy says. “It makes dating really hard.”

The Left has been telling women that birth control and abortion empower women since the Sixties.  And it just so happened that empowering women made a lot of men very happy.  As they loved and left many women.  Leaving a little something of them behind when they left these women.  An STD.

There are more than 110 million sexually transmitted infections among men and women in the United States, and there are 20 million new infections each year, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Its report includes eight common sexually transmitted infections: chlamydia, gonorrhea, hepatitis B virus, herpes, HIV, HPV, syphilis and trichomoniasis.

“There are more and more sites being created catering to people who are infected,” says Diana Kirschner, a psychologist who wrote Find Your Soul Mate Online in 6 Simple Steps. “Part of the reason is that one in four women is infected with herpes. It’s off the charts, and there is a great deal of shame associated with being diagnosed with one of these diseases.”

This is what the Sexual Revolution gave women.  Some 20 million new STDs each year.  With one in four women having herpes today.  Something they will have for the rest of their life.  Which is just tragic.  And caused by the Left.  For they’re the ones who’ve been encouraging these women to have sex.  By calling birth control a women’s rights issue.  And giving them near abortion-on-demand.  Everything they need to throw caution to the wind.  And to go out and have casual sex.  Even giving high school girls free birth control.  And abortions without parental notification.  Because what could possibly go wrong with that?

Of course if these women could travel back in time they would probably tell their younger selves the same thing their mothers told them then.  Wait.  At least until you’re older.  Preferably when you’re married.  Like June Cleaver.  And Donna Read.  So you can live happily ever after.  And not worry when the appropriate time is to tell someone you have an STD.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , ,

Marriage, Babies and Taxes

Posted by PITHOCRATES - March 28th, 2013

Politics 101

The Women’s Movement encouraged Women to Choose a Career over Having Babies

It is common for a married couple planning to have children to both work.  To put as much money into the bank for a down payment on a house to raise their family in.  In a nice neighborhood with good schools.  After they buy that house and have their first child it is common for the woman to quit working to stay home and take care of their newborn child.  And the other children they have.  While the husband continues to work.

The women’s movement changed that.  It encouraged women to have fewer babies (or none at all) and to have a career instead.  Those who had children were encouraged to return to work as soon as possible.  To just dump their kids into daycare and continue their careers.  But it doesn’t always work that way.  Sometimes a woman determined not to let her children interfere with her career has a change of heart after having her first child.  Deciding not to return to work.  Choosing to, instead, stay at home and raise her children.  And not dump them into daycare.

This, of course, causes problems for employers.  Making it more risky to hire women.  Especially in this litigious world.  They have to hold a woman’s job for her when she goes on maternity leaves.  And if her job is a critical job, like doing payroll, others will have to split up her job responsibilities.  Perhaps hiring a temp to pick up the less critical tasks (filing, answering phones, etc.).  For mistakes in payroll do not make happy employees.  And mistakes in payroll taxes can cause some very costly problems with the government.  If a woman doesn’t plan on returning to work after having her baby the business can hire a new employee.  And in her last weeks before leaving to have her child she can train her replacement for an orderly transfer of her responsibilities.  Something she can’t do if she changes her mind while on maternity leave.

In the Marriage Contract the Wife gives up her Career to Raise the Children while her Husband provides Financial Support

This can be a reason why men earn more than women.  Because there is less of a chance of his changing his mind to be a stay-at-home parent.  It happens.  But not as often as it happens with women.  Because women have a biological clock ticking.  Which can greatly influence her thinking on her long-held career plans.  For a woman has to leave work to have a child.  And to recover from the birth.  Men don’t.  Their lives can go on with little change.  And because a woman has to take time off she spends more time bonding with her newborn child.  Which is a powerful force.  Mothers are very protective of their babies.  And even though she had all intentions of returning to work having the welfare of her newborn dependent on her can change her best laid plans.

Of course, leaving the workforce not only affects her employer it affects the household budget.  For that lost paycheck can make life more difficult at home.  Forcing the new family to get by on less.  Government understands this.  And they design the tax code to help families raise children.  Because the government needs people to have babies.  And they need them to have more than two.  For if they only have two the population will not continue to grow.  These children will only replace their parents.  Not expand the tax base to help pay for an expanding menu of government benefits going to an aging population.  But having more than two children is very expensive.  Which is why married families get a lot of deductions and credits in the tax code.  To help offset the high cost of having children.  So they will have more children.

And there are other legal issues and traditions to help families.  Such as the baby’s last name.  A woman may hyphenate her name when married.  But you can’t do that with children.  For in a generation or two a person’s name will grow so long with multiple hyphens that it will make it difficult to use on forms, to sign a contract or a check.  Put on a nametag.  Tradition has the father being the financial provider.  As the father is not physically impacted by pregnancy.  He can keep working.  And providing.  So giving the child the father’s last name makes it easy for the child to go through life.  And makes it clear that the father is financially responsible for that child.  Just like it’s a man’s work benefits that cover his wife and children.  Because in the contract of marriage the wife gives up her career to do something more important.  Raise their children.  But she can only do that if her husband provides the income, the health care benefits, house, car, groceries, etc., the family needs.

If Same-Sex Marriage is about an Unfair Tax Code the Left could just vote Republican so we can Lower Taxes for Everyone

The institution of marriage developed to help a man and a woman raise children.  Having children came first.  People have been having children long before they even talked or used tools.  Then civilization advanced.  The economy grew more complex.  This advanced civilization was costly.  Especially when raising children. Then the institution of marriage came along to help families have children.  Governments and business help families have and raise children.  For we need families to have and raise children.  Businesses need an expanding population.  For a business needs more people to grow.  To buy the goods and services of their expanding business.  Just as government needs an expanding population.  To pay the taxes to fund an expanding government.  An expanding population translates into a growing and prosperous economy.  And a growing and more generous government.  Because the more people there are the more people government can tax.

Men and women have married without raising a family.  Yet they still get some of the benefits we developed to help married people raise children.  Such as one spouse being covered under the other’s employer’s health insurance benefit.  Raising the business’ costs without providing an expanding population benefit for this additional cost.  And it’s the same for government.  A married couple may get some favorable tax benefits that cost the government while not providing an expanding population benefit for this additional cost.  So there is a short-term benefit for a childless marriage.  The woman doesn’t leave the workforce.  She builds her career and earns more income.  Providing more tax revenue.  But there is no long-term benefit.  For when this couple leaves the workforce there will be no one to replace them.  So while they start consuming Social Security and Medicare benefits they have not added new people to the workforce to pay for these.

Understanding how and why we have the institution of marriage makes the current same-sex marriage debate puzzling to say the least.  For marriage is not about civil rights.  It’s about lowering the cost of raising children.  Which both business and government needs.  For if couples don’t have more than two children then the population will no longer expand.  And it will age.  Making it more costly for government.  While providing a shrinking customer base for businesses.  A couple that does not bring new children into the world provides no return on the cost of the marriage benefits they receive.  And a same-sex marriage will be no different than a childless marriage between a man and a woman.  From an economic/government funding point of view. They will not help grow the economy.  They will not lower the future cost of government.  And there won’t be a legal or traditional need for giving a newborn child a last name.  As they can’t procreate.

If procreation is out of the equation people can enter committed relationships without the institution of marriage.  During the sexual revolution the Left belittled the institution of marriage and asked why anyone needed a piece of paper to sanction their love.  And these people lived together flaunting convention.  And tradition.  Using birth control and the recently legalized abortion to make sure no children resulted from these new living arrangements.  These marriage-less committed relationships.  Now marriage is the number one issue of the Left.  If it’s for same-sex couples the institution they hated and worked so hard to destroy is now the greatest thing in the world.  And on top of everything else the Left, who supports higher taxes, are arguing that the tax code unfairly discriminates against same-sex couples.  If that is the basis of this being a civil rights issue the Left could just vote Republican so we can lower taxes for everyone.  Then they could have everything they want.  The free love of the sexual revolution.  Low taxes.  And no reason to get married.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Thanks to Liberal Sexual Attitudes and Digital Cameras once Private Nude Photographs are Going Public

Posted by PITHOCRATES - March 9th, 2013

Week in Review

The Sexual Revolution gave women the pill and access to abortion.  It liberated women to be free to be something more than just a housewife.  It let these women explore their sexuality.  By letting more men than ever explore these women’s sexuality.

This was a turning point in society.  Women were no longer romanced and cherished.  But enjoyed sexually.  And for some reason this empowered them.  Letting men live out all their sexual fantasies by having sex with as many women as possible.  With little intention of marrying them.  For teenage boys and young men aren’t thinking as much about marriage these days as they are about sex.

So this is what the hippies of the Sixties gave us.  And liberals in general.  They’ve empowered women into sexual objects.  Advocating free birth control and access to abortion as women’s health issues in the 2012 election.  For that was the most important issue for women they said.  Otherwise they may just end up getting married or something.  Romanced.  And cherished until death.  And who wants that?  Especially in the era of digital cameras, smartphones and sexting.  For this intense sexual environment that liberals have created has gotten teenage boys and young men all hot and bothered.  And it got a lot of girls to willingly give in to their sexual desires.  Even taking consensual nude photographs.  It’s just so exciting, titillating and grown up.  And they’re in love.  Surely someone they’re in love with would never share those intimate photographs (see Proposed Florida law would put limits on posting naked pictures on the Internet by Florida Today posted 3/7/2013 on WTSP).

A friend alerted her to the nude photos first – he sent her a link to a site that was displaying them. He suggested that she might want to talk to her ex-boyfriend. The photos were posted on a pornography site and included information that identified the 22-year-old Brevard County resident.

At first she was in shock. Then she felt angry, desperate, and most of all helpless.

“There’s really no telling how many people have seen it,” said the woman, whom FLORIDA TODAY is not identifying to protect her privacy.

Posting consensually obtained nude photographs is not illegal, but a bill proposed to the state legislature by the Brevard County Sheriff’s Office would make it a third-degree felony to do so without the person’s written consent.

The Brevard woman didn’t want to talk about how the photos were taken. BCSO Agent Dan Ogden said the woman – who was 18 at the time – posed willingly, though they were meant to be private. She believes the pictures were online a year before she found them…

The proposed bill would prohibit “knowing use of a computer or other device to transmit or post any photograph or video of an individual which depicts nudity and contains specified information relating to the depicted individual without first obtaining the depicted person’s written consent.”

A person who violates the statute could be sentenced to up to five years.

Sheriff Wayne Ivey said this idea came about when they noticed a trend of these issues, but had no legal means to fight them.

“As life goes on, (victims) go in, they apply for a job or they’re applying for college or they’re in college and someone’s Google searching them and then all these pictures are coming up,” Ivey said. “It actually creates a long-term victimization for our victims and, in fact, there’s a couple examples where the victims have been so just so overrun by it and so depressed over it they’ve actually committed suicide.”

Apparently these teenage boys and young men these women once loved do share those intimate nude photographs.  Even posting them on the Internet for the world to see.  Which is hard to fathom if you didn’t come of age in this intense sexual environment.  For before the Sexual Revolution boys shared a malt at the malt shop with the girl they liked.  Sure, they tried to share more than a malted beverage.  But most waited until marriage for that.  And the girls that didn’t got a bad reputation.  But even these girls who went all the way the price they paid for their dalliances didn’t hold a candle to what girls today are paying.

This is the societal decay brought on by the Sexual Revolution.  And the sexualization of teenage girls brought on by pop culture and consequence-free sex thanks to birth control and abortion.  Pushed by liberals who call conservatives old prudes.  But as it turns out there are still consequences.  Such as the explosion in venereal disease in our young people.  And the shame and humiliation of having their nude selves posted on pornographic sites for their family, friends, neighbors, their boss and their coworkers to see.  By doing nothing more innocent than a Google search on a woman’s name.

There are things more important to women than having lots of sex.  And by scaring women into believing that Republicans will impose some kind of Sharia Law is only furthering this sexualization of women.  Young people vote Democrat because they like having fun.  Which includes smoking marijuana and having sex.  Two things that Democrats say are no big deal.  So the young indulge more.  And bad things happen.  Like ex-boyfriends posting nude photographs of their ex-girlfriend on the Internet.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

The Sexual Revolution objectified Women and led to an Epidemic of Young Single Mothers and STDs

Posted by PITHOCRATES - February 17th, 2013

Week in Review

Women liberated themselves in the Sixties.  Gone were the days of finding a man to marry and settling down to raise a family.  The way it used to be in the Fifties.  In romantic comedies.  And in romance novels.  Where a woman meets the man of her dreams.  They get married.  And live happily ever after.  This is the hell the sexual revolution freed woman from in the Sixties.  And now they are free to enjoy their sexuality.  By giving it away to as many men as they please.  Which pleased a lot of men.  And more and more high school boys (see Victoria’s Secret’s Customers Keep Getting Younger by Ashley Lutz posted 2/16/2013 on Business Insider).

Ten years ago, Victoria’s Secret sold lingerie to women in their twenties.

Today, the lingerie retailer is luring in young girls by offering underwear that is cute instead of sexy, reports Sapna Maheshwari at Bloomberg News.

The highly-popular Pink line is technically marketed toward college girls ages 18 to 22.

“When somebody’s 15 or 16-years-old, what do they want to be?” Stuart Burgdoerfer, CFO of Victoria’s Secret, said at a conference last month. “They want to be older, and they want to be cool like the girl in college, and that’s part of the magic of what we do at Pink.”

You know what cool girls do in college?  They party.  That means they drink, do drugs and have sex.  When these cool college girls go on spring break they party so much that some star in amateur porn.  For free.  There are so many cool girls letting loose on spring break that they’ve built a video franchise around them.  Girls Gone Wild.  This is not what 15 and 16 year girls should be aspiring to.  Instead of focusing so much on buying cute underwear they should be hitting the books.  Getting good grades in math and science.  So they can pursue whatever career they choose.  Using their brains.  Instead of just trying to be pretty.

The whole point of the women’s liberation movement was to get away from thinking about women as sexual objects.  Of course you wouldn’t know that based on the 2012 presidential campaign.  When all the feminists urged young women to vote Democrat lest they lose their birth control or access to abortion.  For apparently that was more important to women than any other issue.  Their ability to have as much casual sex as possible.  Which seems to benefit men more than women.  While women have more to lose (see Why youths aren’t getting tested for HIV by Sari Zeidler posted 2/16/2013 on CNN).

The 25-year-old mother of two is poised. Sitting in a boardroom at AID Atlanta, an HIV outreach facility in Atlanta where she volunteers, she exudes confidence.

But Traylor is HIV positive.

According to the CDC, 50,000 Americans are infected with HIV each year, and 25% of those are between the ages of 13 and 24.

Sixty percent of youth with HIV don’t know they have it, despite recommendations from the CDC, the American Academy of Pediatrics and the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force.

Traylor got her first HIV test as a teenager when someone living with the disease gave a presentation at her high school. She was about 16 and already a teen mother at the time. She knew she had been having unprotected sex and wanted to stay healthy for her young son.

At the time, Traylor was in what she believed was a monogamous relationship. During her annual doctor’s visit, she was disturbed to realize she had to ask specifically for an HIV test on top of a standard STD panel. She insisted on taking the test even though her doctor told her — as a heterosexual woman involved in a monogamous relationship — that she was low risk.

Later Taylor broke up with her boyfriend and began a new committed relationship. That was the year her life changed. Despite vigilance in testing, Traylor wasn’t prepared for what she found out at her doctor’s visit that year: She was HIV positive. Two weeks later she learned she was pregnant with her second child.

She thought she was in a monogamous relationship.  But thanks to birth control and abortion boys are like a kid in a candy store.  They may profess their love and say she is the only one.  But with all those young girls out there buying that cute underwear and no doubt eager to show it off (unlike their utilitarian granny panties that kids will make fun of any girl wearing them) how can a boy remain monogamous?  His body is surging with hormones.  And so many young girls want to be like the cool girls in college.  Who are very popular girls.  As they like having fun the way adults like having fun.  And you can’t stop these boys.  You can’t tell them to stop having sex.  Because boys will be boys.  That’s why they give away birth control in high school.  For there is just no way to stop the sex.

It’s rather ironic, really.  That women’s rights have come down to keeping birth control and abortion services abundant and accessible.  But who does that really benefit?  Girls who may end up with two babies before they’re 18?  Girls who come down with an STD or test positive for HIV?  Or girls who are both single mothers and HIV positive?  Girls who are not likely to complete high school and go on to college.  And on to a career that the women’s liberation movement opened up to them?  Or is it benefitting boys who are having multiple sex partners despite telling each girl that she’s the only one?  Boys who are leaving these girls to grow up as single mothers?  Or to grow up with HIV?  Or both?

One could call this the greatest con against women ever.  Men have made young women want to become sexual objects.  So men can enjoy having sex with a variety of women.  Without having to marry and settle down with one sex partner for the rest of their life.  Something most women want.  Monogamy.  Based on the success of romantic comedies.  And romance novels.  But today we’ve replaced living happily ever after with an active sex life.  Something that men love.  Who are clearly benefitting more from the sexual revolution than women are.  For they’re getting more of what they want.  And they don’t have biological clocks ticking away.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

« Previous Entries