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: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

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: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

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: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

FT144: “The longer a woman stays single the longer she may vote Democrat.” —Old Pithy

Posted by PITHOCRATES - November 16th, 2012

Fundamental Truth

Married Women appear to be just as Interested in Sex, Birth Control and Cancer Screening as Single Women

By now we’ve all heard about how single women voted for Democrat President Obama more than they did for Republican Mitt Romney.  And how married women voted for Republican Mitt Romney more than they did for Democrat President Obama.  People are furiously debating why this happened.  This is a question Bill O’Reilly tried to get an answer from liberal Democrat guests on his show The O’Reilly Factor.  Why two women the same age with similar backgrounds vote differently based on their marital status.  The answers he got generally fell back to the war on women meme.

The war on women basically says Republicans don’t care about issues important to women.  Birth control, abortion, cancer screening, etc.  Which didn’t really answer the question.  For married women and single women are both women.  Who should both care about these women’s issues equally.  But they don’t.  If it’s these women’s issues that drove single women to vote for President Obama then apparently married women don’t care about birth control, abortion, cancer screening, etc.  Based on the average family size of 2.62 children in 2010 it would appear that married women are using birth control.  Or abortion.  Who no doubt want to screen for cancer so they can be there to see their children grow up.  And see their grand children.  Or else they’re only having sex to procreate.  Losing all interest in sex once they marry.  Of course the booming sales of Fifty Shades of Grey, often dubbed mommy porn, says otherwise.

So married women appear to be just as interested in sex as single women.  So the women’s issues (birth control, abortion, cancer screening, etc.) should be just as important to them as they are to single women.  So there has to be something else that differentiates single women from married women.  And that can only be that there are other issues that are even more important to married women than these issues that are so important to single women.

There is a Lot of Evidence out there that Despite the Women’s Movement a lot of Women still Want to Marry

Feminists launched the women’s movement to free women from the hell of wedded bliss.  To let them do whatever men did.   To have a career.  And to have a lot of indiscriminate sex.  Which was the purpose of the birth control pill.  Allowing the hippie love-ins of the Sixties and Seventies.  Freeing women from being second-class citizens.  Stuck at home raising a bunch of kids, cleaning house, cooking and satisfying the disgusting sexual needs of their husbands.  For that was all marriage was.  And is.  Unless you’re gay.  Then it’s a beautiful expression of love between two people.  But for heterosexual women marriages is just awful.  According to the feminists.  For men are pigs.  And always will be.  Of course, it’s a lot easier for men to be pigs these days thanks to the women’s movement.  For they can love and leave a lot more women that they once could thanks to birth control.

So are women happy?  Is this what they want?  To be free from the hell of wedded bliss?  Probably not.  For the brides magazines still sell well.  There are reality shows about brides picking out their dresses.  Some of which costs tens of thousands of dollars.  Celebrity women spend even more.  And like marriage so much that some marry, divorce and marry again.  There are reality shows where women compete against other women to win the affections of a man to marry.  And a reality show where men compete compete against other men to win the affections of a woman to marry.  There are online dating sites that advertise that their matches end in more marriages than the competition.  People still go to singles’ meeting places seeking their future significant other.  And a lot of women complain that the men they date don’t want to get married and raise a family.  As many of them seem more interested in loving and leaving as many women as possible.  Greatly distressing women as their biological clocks tick away.  Wanting to get married before it’s too late to have children.  So there is a lot of evidence out there that despite the women’s movement a lot of women still want to marry.

Women who suffer marriage infidelity are not happy women.  While they may date men who are dating a lot of women and enjoying a lot of sex with these different women obviously expect that behavior to cease once married.  And rightly so.  But some men can’t seem to control themselves.  In part because of the women’s movement.  Which has encouraged women to use birth control and empower herself by enjoying life.  Like a man.  Doing what you want.  When you want.  One of the problems of that, though, is that it tells a lot of men that there are a lot of women out there empowering themselves.  Women that men think just want consequence-free sex.  Which is okay for these women empowering themselves.  But these men?  They’re nothing but a bunch of pigs with only one thing on their minds.  And it isn’t getting married and raising a family.  Or being faithful to their wives.

Liberals know how Women change their Voting Habits once they Marry so they help Women Remain Single

It’s clear that women want to get married.  And want to have children.  Even celebrities are proudly showing off their baby bumps in the tabloids during their pregnancies.  Suggesting that marriage and motherhood are things that women want.  And little girls’ dreams of meeting their Prince Charming and having a big wedding don’t fade with time.  For when they become women they start buying those brides magazines.  Planning their big day.  They look forward to wedded bliss.  And after they’re married if the passion fades it doesn’t mean their sexual desires fade. At least not based on the massive sales of that mommy porn.  Fifty Shades of Grey.  And with the average family size down to 2.62 children in 2010 these married women are using birth control or getting abortions.  And probably don’t want cancer.

So there isn’t a lot of difference between single women and married women.  At least when it comes to these women’s issues.  Yet they voted differently.  Why?  Well, there’s the obvious.  Single women support themselves, are not raising a family and typically don’t own a house.  While married women typically have a working spouse, are raising a family and live in a house.  So what does that mean?  Married women have greater expenses and pay property taxes.  So they are a lot more sensitive to taxes.  Deficit spending.  And debt.  Because they have to be very sensitive to spending and debt in their households.  And married women tend to base their decisions on what’s best for their children.  And their grandchildren.  Whereas single women tend to base their decisions on what’s best for them.  Because they are the only ones they are providing for.  Of course, once they marry and start raising a family that all changes.  Which brings us to another reason that is perhaps not as obvious.

Liberals know how women change their voting habits once they marry.   Which hurts their hold on power.  As liberals make up only about 21% of the population.  While conservatives make up about 42% of the population.  With moderates make up the remaining 37%.  Which requires liberals to patch together a coalition of special interest groups to advance their agenda.  And part of their strategy is getting as many women as possible to vote Democrat.  And one very successful way of doing that is by helping women remain single.  To try and suppress their dreams of that fairy tale wedding they’ve had since they were little girls as long as possible.  Or to destroy it.  By making birth control and abortion readily available.  So they can have a career.  And satisfy their sexual desires.  With no need of settling down with, or settling for, a husband.  For those whose birth control fail the government steps in to provide for these single mothers.  To help them raise their children as single women.  To discourage them from getting married.  All the while scaring them that Republicans will take away all of their financial support.  Forcing them onto the streets.  Or into a marriage.  And the only way to prevent that from happening is, of course, by voting Democrat.  And staying single.  Which is what liberals want.  For the longer a woman stays single the longer she may vote Democrat.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

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