Bisexuality / Homosexuality and Radical Feminism - Connection ?

[Stephen168]

(I might just add that modern reproductive technology has actually made XYs obsolete.)

That is the most succinct explanation of radical feminism and its association to homosexual women.

 

[elvisman]

They aren’t experts, they’re morons. I did like the “calm down” though, I wonder if you are going to ask her next if she’s on her period? Did someone get a time machine and suddenly turn this thread back to 1957?

Yup - they’re “morons” who’ve had a great deal of success which cannot be argued.

1st:

Radical feminism is not what is described in the OP. That’s just feminism. Radical feminism advocated violent response to abuse of women and their children by men. As in: beat up my sister and (Edited). Not that bad an idea, as little else seems to work.
Ummm . . . READ the OP - then come back and make another argument. the OP INDEED is about radical feminism and it’s connection to homosexuality.

2nd:

Actual science of the modern variety has identified the genetic mechanism through which same-sex attraction is transmitted. I don’t think they have the locus, yet, but they know how it works and what the evolutionary benefit is. Keep in mind that same-sex preference occurs naturally in every vertebrate species ever studied with a social culture, including fish, chickens and horses. Chimps are just shameless! Since this trait appears at a rather predictable rate in most species, you can just chalk it up to the way nature works in this case, including in humans. It’s God’s creation, folks, and who are we to argue?
Nobody** is arguing that some people are born this way. If you had READ the earlier posts - you would have known that. The debate is about whether or not radical feminism and homosexuality havd a connection - especially in today’s society where there seems to be a sharp rise in homosexuality. **

**The point is that radical feminism IS driven by a man-hating, marriage-hating sentiment and if you read ****post #32 **by John21652 – you’d have seen the proof of this by the actual quotes by radical feminist leaders.

**It’s easy, albeit imprudent, to jump in later and start blathering on about how everybody is wrong on the subject but yourself. You really need to READ the posts or you might just find yourself falling *****off ***that soapbox . . .

3rd:

We have a long way to go in this fight and I hope all the old guard XYs die off quickly before they further contaminate the younger generation of men and women.

Fact: 80% of women in the United States have been sexually assaulted in some degree before the age of 21, and 35% of those were assaulted by a close family member.

And how does it help the situation for radical feminists to push a radical homosexual agenda in schools and society?

The further fact is: when you interview the men, over 90% say and seem to believe, they haven’t done anything wrong.

And I know PLENTY of women in the same boat . . .

(I might just add that modern reproductive technology has actually made XYs obsolete.)

And there you have it, folks – the radical feminist agenda in a nutshell . . .

 

[elvisman]

This might be off-topic - but why on Earth do you use the different emphases/font colors? It’s incredibly distracting and aesthetically horrible.

Just my STYLE . . .

 

[Peepers]

Yes, mother’s make choices that limit their seniority in a chosen field, and even which field they choose to work. I read a study in the late 90’s on why women earn less then men and it very closely described my wife; took several years off to raise children, chose work that was close to the children’s school, day shift only, no weekends, no travel. All these choices limited her income and she didn’t care.

There is a book titled ‘The Moral Sense.’ In it the author talks about humans and our understanding of fair. We seem to be born believing fair is a good thing. At a very early age we understand fair to mean equal. Mom gives us a candy bar, we cut it into two equal pieces, I get one piece and you get one; that is fair. Sometime as young adults we learn that fair is proportional. If I pay 25% of the price of a candy bar and you pay 75%, we divide it into two equal pieces, I get one and you get one, that is not fair. Your (name removed by moderator)ut was proportionally greater and you should have got more. The author then says that some studies have shown that women have more difficultly understanding proportionality as fair. At that moment, I thought about this subject; women’s wages and the feminist claim that women making less on average was sexist. This also leads into the claim that this new radical feminism has a marxist agenda. They demand equal out come and don’t think unequal (name removed by moderator)ut should matter. They want the state to force the out come to be equal.

I think that guys today do have a better sense of balance than my dad or my grandfather did. There are more males taking time for their families. This is in part due to feminism, and in part due to the changes in the workplace. Companies are less loyal to their workers, and that sentiment is reciprocated. I know two guys my age who are staying home to raise the kids while their wives work. That made the most economic sense for them. I don’t think that happened much until the 1990’s, anyway. On the other hand, I think we have lost some balance. Boys and our ideas about masculinity have been “feminized” in some ways which do not serve anyone’s benefit.

Another interesting trend is that younger folks don’t want to be labeled for their sexual orientation. There is some speculation that we are well on our way past racial prejudice. Race is simply no longer an issue for young people. This may be happening with sexuality too. Whether this trend will continue, or is being accurately perceived is subject to debate. What role the feminist movement had in this is also debatable. Where the gay rights movement finds synergy with the women’s rights movement, and other civil rights movements is also debatable, and no doubt could be very controversial topics here.

 

[Peepers]

Yup - they’re “morons” who’ve had a great deal of success which cannot be argued.

Ummm . . . READ the OP - then come back and make another argument. the OP INDEED is about radical feminism and it’s connection to homosexuality.

Nobody** is arguing that some people are born this way. If you had READ the earlier posts - you would have known that. The debate is about whether or not radical feminism and homosexuality havd a connection - especially in today’s society where there seems to be a sharp rise in homosexuality. **

**The point is that radical feminism IS driven by a man-hating, marriage-hating sentiment and if you read ****post #32 **by John21652 – you’d have seen the proof of this by the actual quotes by radical feminist leaders.

It’s easy, albeit imprudent, to jump in later and start blathering on about how everybody is wrong on the subject but yourself. You really need to READ the posts or you might just find yourself falling ***off ***that soapbox . . .

And how does it help the situation for radical feminists to push a radical homosexual agenda in schools and society?

And I know PLENTY of women in the same boat . . .

And there you have it, folks – the radical feminist agenda in a nutshell . . .

Elvis - when you say that homosexuality is on the rise, do you mean homosexual behavior? Do you mean gay sexual orientation? All of those things? Or do you just mean that it is more open and discussed? Can you be more specific?

If you mean behavior and/or orientation, I would be interested in looking at your sources. Any references or citations would be appreciated.

 

[elvisman]

Elvis - when you say that homosexuality is on the rise, do you mean homosexual behavior? Do you mean gay sexual orientation? All of those things? Or do you just mean that it is more open and discussed? Can you be more specific?

If you mean behavior and/or orientation, I would be interested in looking at your sources. Any references or citations would be appreciated.

**I mean that there are significantly more people now claiming to be homosexual. **

---

**The 2000 U.S. Census Bureau said that homosexual couples made up less than 1% of households in America. **At that time, the Family Research Report claims that about 2-3% of men, and 2% of women, are either homosexual or bisexual. The National Gay and Lesbian Task Force said 3-8% of BOTH sexes were homosexual or bisexual.

---

In a microcosm of American youth (my former high school), there was only 1 single acknowledged homosexual when I went to school 29 years ago. As I stated in an earlier post – my Confirmations students who attend the very same school said that around 20% of the students now claim to be homosexual or bisexual.

---

**We are being systematically conditioned as a society to be – not only tolerant of certain behaviors – but to celebrate them. A “don’t knock it until you’ve tried it” approach. It has actually become fashionable to experiment – even if you don’t have the natural inclination. *“It’s a countrywide *thing”, said Jessie Gilliam, project manager for the Washington-based gay and lesbian support group Youth Resource on Washington DC. **

---

Shows aimed at adolescents like Glee, with its unrealistic view of the high school scene glamorize the homosexual behavior and make it seem that if you aren’t homosexual - or celebrate it – you’re some kind of Nazi. I don’t celebrate homosexual behavior because it is an abomination before God (Lev. 18:22, 20:13, Rom. 1:26-7)****. I tolerate those in society who have this burden – and it IS a burden for the Christian homosexual because they must remain chaste. I don’t celebrate a lifestyle that is diametrically opposed to the Word of God.

---

I support those homosexuals who have the courage to approach their lives with a Christian world view and not one pushed on them by a radical, anti-God agenda.

 

[AngryAtheist8]

Of course, women who are not subservient/recessive, and believe they should have equal rights are to blame for men not growing up like real men! I’ve also read a report which suggests that over dominating fathers lead to homosexuality. So what? This kind of claim to me is almost laughable, it’s so sexist.

As to the OP - where do you want me to start? Male dominance throughout history is a fact. Look at the percentage of men and women in the top jobs then tell me that male dominance doesn’t exist.

Subjectivity of women also exists. Lesbianism is very rarely outlawed or spoken out against. Why? Because men like to watch it. As for gay men however…

.

I think that’s related to the concept of women as property.

After all, why should I care about what my ice cream/woman does in the cooler with my other ice cream/women?

But if my neighbor Bob eats/has sex with my ice cream/woman, that’s theft

Moreover, a lot of guys think that it can’t be sex if a penis isn’t involved.

 

[AngryAtheist8]

Women have always wanted to usurp men’s rule since the fall.
Genesis 3:18 "To the woman he said. 'I will greatly increase your pain in childbearing; in pain you shal bring forth children, yet your desire shall be for your husband, and he shall rule over you.’"
And yet we debate the evils of so-called “feminism”
About as feminine as gays are gay. ( in the traditional sense of the word, of course)

Well yes.

The Abrahamic religions (Christianity, Judaism, and of course Islam) all embraced the idea of women as servant/property until recently (in historical terms). Although Judaism probably deserves the credit for getting it started.

Most of the major Christian denominations deserve some props for moving so far from this misogynistic idea, and Jews as a whole seem to treat their women well (the Ultra-Orthodox being a notable exception). Islam however…

 

[AngryAtheist8]

I think it is better now that the last 40 years that we can speak about women. :coffeeread:

In the West.

In places like Saudi Arabia, the ideal is for women to be unseen and unheard, and mercilessly punished if they step out of line in any way.

 

[AngryAtheist8]

I’m a man and am all for women’s rights in every aspect. Without those “radical” feminists, not as many women would have higher aspirations in the workforce today, and society would continue to chug along in its complacency. It takes dynamic leaders to shake up the status quo at times, and this applies to civil rights as much as women’s rights. Of course, those in power are alarmed, because they may not even realize they are being oppressive. Change is always frightening (on the part of both victimizers and victims), even change for the better.

Indeed.

I think that is why people like Edwest tend to automatically reject it (change).

 

[Peepers]

**I mean that there are significantly more people now claiming to be homosexual. **

**The 2000 U.S. Census Bureau said that homosexual couples made up less than 1% of households in America. **At that time, the Family Research Report claims that about 2-3% of men, and 2% of women, are either homosexual or bisexual. The National Gay and Lesbian Task Force said 3-8% of BOTH sexes were homosexual or bisexual.

In a microcosm of American youth (my former high school), there was only 1 single acknowledged homosexual when I went to school 29 years ago. As I stated in an earlier post – my Confirmations students who attend the very same school said that around 20% of the students now claim to be homosexual or bisexual.

We are being systematically conditioned as a society to be – not only tolerant of certain behaviors – but to celebrate them. A “don’t knock it until you’ve tried it” approach. It has actually become fashionable to experiment – even if you don’t have the natural inclination. *“It’s a countrywide *thing”, said Jessie Gilliam, project manager for the Washington-based gay and lesbian support group Youth Resource on Washington DC.

Shows aimed at adolescents like Glee, with its unrealistic view of the high school scene glamorize the homosexual behavior and make it seem that if you aren’t homosexual - or celebrate it – you’re some kind of Nazi. I don’t celebrate homosexual behavior because it is an abomination before God (Lev. 18:22, 20:13, Rom. 1:26-7). I tolerate those in society who have this burden – and it IS a burden for the Christian homosexual because they must remain chaste. I don’t celebrate a lifestyle that is diametrically opposed to the Word of God.

**I support those homosexuals who have the courage **to approach their lives with a Christian world view and not one pushed on them by a radical, anti-God agenda.

I think Kinsey put the number at about 10%. Estimates have varied on either side of that ever since, from as low as 2%. I am not sure what the current “best” estimate is. 20% seems higher than any estimate that I am aware of. But then, kids that age are walking hormone machines. If you look at the biological evidence, it appears that God intended us to be reproducing at that age. Our social norm is to postpone marriage. So, the kids are caught in a bind between their sexual urges and our moral standards. I hardly need to explain this. Presumably anyone reading this has been a teenager.

I would agree with you that the climate for sexual exploration is more permissive now than ever before, and that the Church stands in opposition to such behavior. I am not a parent. I understand that it is an ongoing challenge to instill moral values in a child. Every parent here might consider how he or she would handle a gay teen. Would you be a source of support while he or she tried to come to terms with a difficult problem, or would you turn your child away?

 

[AngryAtheist8]

Yes, the radical feminists created a victim class – All Women. And an enemies’ class – All Men. In the late 1970s, I heard the following: “Sisters! Throw off the chains of your oppression!”

But were the radical feminists solution oriented? No. That’s why you now have Women’s Studies at colleges, and women’s literature. Instead of trying to solve problems that existed between women and men, the radicals pushed the standard Marxist class warfare pattern. Guys were left out of the loop as if even a species relationship no longer existed between men and women.

For a while in the late 1970s, I thought that dates would include a lawyer for the woman. The man would have to agree to all terms and conditions or the date was off.

They were** mean and confrontational**, and not an appropriate intellectual body for dealing with the issues.

Peace,
Ed

People challenging the status quo are confrontational by definition. There’s nothing wrong with that.

The alternative is quietly accepting injustice.

 

[AngryAtheist8]

I suffer from some same sex attractions and some would call me Bisexual since I have attractions to both sexes but I am by no means a radical feminist. I fight against my objectively disordered sexual attractions and by no means would I ever be considered a gay rights activist either. I just simply acknowledge the fact that I occasionally do suffer from objectively disordered temptations geared toward other women. And believe me, this is not something I am proud of either. I am actually ashamed of it.

I wouldn’t worry too much about it if I were you.

According to Church teaching all lust is a sin, even lust between married couples (for one another). But without lust the human race (including Catholics) would die out.

Christians (and other religious people) single out homosexual lust because they don’t need it to survive as a group. The fact that homosexuals are a minority also makes them a relatively safe target.

 

[AngryAtheist8]

**You can only assure me that this is *your ***educated opinion. It doesn’t surprise me in the *least *to hear that the Christian approach to homosexual therapy is in the minority - especially in this culture where we are being force-fed generous helpings of sexual deviance in the media. Tolerance is one thing - celebrating the homosexual lifestyle is quite another.

Both Joe Dallas and Dr. Nicolosi specialize in this area and have counseled many people based on the theory that many homosexual cases are, in fact, the result of conditioning in the home environment.
As I stated from the beginning - I am merely parrotting the research of these two Christian men.

Read for yourself:
http://www.thesexualresolution.com/
http://www.josephnicolosi.com/

You can find studies supporting virtually anything.

A mere 2 studies from obviously biased sources don’t seem very convincing.

 

[AngryAtheist8]

Visit Amazon and read “The Flip Side of Feminism” by Suzanne Venker and Phyllis Schlafly.

Schlafly also wrote “Feminist Fantasies”.

Phyllis Schlafly was the Anne Coulter of her day. A woman who made a career out of (and became rich and famous by) telling women that they didn’t need careers and shouldn’t worry about becoming rich and famous.

A hypocrite of the vilest sort.

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

Ice cream woman and another ice cream woman? Angry, you’ve been watching one too many of “those” movies lately!

I think that’s related to the concept of women as property.

After all, why should I care about what my ice cream/woman does in the cooler with my other ice cream/women?

But if my neighbor Bob eats/has sex with my ice cream/woman, that’s theft

Moreover, a lot of guys think that it can’t be sex if a penis isn’t involved.

 

[AngryAtheist8]

That’s your** opinion.
What do you do with all of the people they have counseled - and brought back to heterosexuality* (not bisexuality)* - based on the idea that many cases of homosexuality is cause by conditioning in the home during the formative years?

You can have your opinions about why you don’t like them - but they are producing real results.

I think its more likely that ‘cured’ homosexuals are lying to themselves and/or others.

I am a heterosexual male.

I did not choose to be heterosexual, nor could I simply will myself gay.

Why should we assume it is any different for gay people.

 

[Elizabeth502]

According to Church teaching all lust is a sin, even lust between married couples (for one another). But without lust the human race (including Catholics) would die out.

Christians (and other religious people) single out homosexual lust because they don’t need it to survive as a group. The fact that homosexuals are a minority also makes them a relatively safe target.

Whoa. Just a teeny tiny bit inaccurate.

Lust is not desire; it’s disordered desire, directed strictly to personal, inordinate pleasure apart from the mutuality in which desire should be activated. So it’s disordered in level and in orientation. (Demanding self-fulfiling pleasure without consent of the spouse would be an example of lust; it would be using the spouse. Demanding inordinate amounts of satisfaction, without recognition and respect for a spouse’s less intense needs for satisfaction, would be another example.)

Also, homosexuals are not “targets.”

 

[AngryAtheist8]

This is such a blanket statement.
**You cannot *possibly ***speak for all women. Some ARE trying to usurp the role of men in society - and men in general.

In Humanae Vitae, Paul VI prophesied many of the things that have happened since the Sixties due to radical feminism - and they’ve come true. Many liberal Catholics at the time completely ignored what he had to say and some even left the Church because of it.

**He spoke about the radical **agenda that was taking place due to artificial contraception and how this decay of the family would decay our culture - and it has. Artificial contraception, abortion, euthanasia, rampant homosexuality, the “sexual revolution”, etc. can all be traced back to radical feminism.

Equal pay for equal work,rallying against abuse - these things are NOT the same as the radical feminist agenda. You can either look at history honestly and the sociological implications of radical feminism - or choose to hide your head in the sand . . .

An honest look at history would include acknowledging that women have usually been treated somewhere between property and 2nd class citizens in most times and places. A state of affairs that still prevails in many parts of the world.

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

You’re correct that much of this still exists and women have been marginalized throughout history. I notice that some Catholics even take it TOO far, imho, with excluding women at Mass. It makes sense in light of the in persona christi nature of the priesthood and sacred tradition to not allow women priests because of the very nature intrinsic to the priesthood to not allow women priests BUT I notice the “rad trads” the radical traditionalists, they go nuts if they see a girl altar server or a woman lector, a woman getting with a mile of the altar, etc. and I think it’s more knee jerk and chauvenistic than it is theological and true to themselves. Sometimes people just want to keep things the same way as the “good old days” because they think everything should never change. It’s like what GK Chesterton said about conservatives and liberals:

***“The whole modern world has divided itself into Conservatives and Progressives. The business of Progressives is to go on making mistakes. The business of the Conservatives is to prevent the mistakes from being corrected.” ***- G. K. Chesterton, Illustrated London News, April 19, 1924

An honest look at history would include acknowledging that women have usually been treated somewhere between property and 2nd class citizens in most times and places. A state of affairs that still prevails in many parts of the world.