What caused the 'sexual revolution?'

[Robert_Sock]

That is a somewhat bizarre comment, and suggests an organized effort. What is your solution?

Peace,
Ed

I take Paxil for depression and it severely reduces the libido. What a relief! It’s not until one loses their libido that one come to notice just how powerful it was.

I also believe in an upper world of existence that controls and guides us.

 

[Robert_Sock]

In reading the old psychological journals, I came across a whole set of books relating to a sex economy. At first, I have just laugh and say no way, but in thinking a bit deeper we really do live in a sex economy.

 

[SgtSchultz]

In reading the old psychological journals, I came across a whole set of books relating to a sex economy. At first, I have just laugh and say no way, but in thinking a bit deeper we really do live in a sex economy.

Indeed. Sex is used to sell everything, even to children. (Have you ever heard of, or seen, a “prostitot”?) It seems to keep getting worse. We see the word “pimp” being used as a verb in a positive sense in the media for seemingly innocuous things such as vegetable gardens or email. (Seriously, I saw a sign that said “pimp my garden”.) You can’t even turn on the TV any more, even to watch golf, without seeing trashy women prancing about with douchebag guys. And don’t get me started about the so-called “music” I’m forced to listen to, whether on the train (why can’t people keep it turned down? They’re wearing earphones, aren’t they going deaf?) or at a shop.

 

[tomarin]

I don’t think it’s all that controversial a statement.

In fact, come to think of it, if the quality of a decade’s popular music reflects the extent of Satan’s maleficent reach, I’d say he really had his claws dug deep into the 70’s and even more so the 80’s.

 

[manualman]

1. …The so-called traditional family model was based on keeping women out of labor marker and dependent on their husband to provide for them. …
2. The Catholic Church is still fighting with the 1968 revolution, probably because its leadership was shaped by it. …while the 20-year-old seminarians want to go back to 1950s, because the 80-year-old leadership has sold them the idealized vision of 1950s.
3. Spare me. The Western fertility has not been ruined by contraceptives (it’s a tool, nothing more), but by economic policy which has made it unbearable for common people to have children.

Do you understand that in conditions like these it is objectively immoral to have children? !!!]

Wow! You live in a a sad, sad world. Glad it isn’t the real one. Get help.

1. Typical radical feminist fail. The 1960’s feminists brilliantly identified the way in which the men of the world failed to value women’s vital roles and contributions in the modern socio-economic system - then proceeded to AGREE with that devaluation by further denigrating women who chose historically feminine roles. Pre-industrial revolution, the roles of men and women were complementary and cash was a minor element of an economy built on labor and barter. In this system, men and women contributed equally to the survival of family and there was no artificial divide between economic contributions (raising livestock and crops, constructing shelter)) and cultural contributions (educating and nurturing children, maintaining the shelter). Then came the industrial revolution and the cash-based economy. Men then built the skeleton of civilization: roads, laws, medicine, industry, etc and reaped all the monetary rewards, while women continued to flesh out the body of civilization: the tasks of child-rearing, education, and community cohesion building, but got little to no cash pay for it. Over time, this cash disparity resulted in a cultural value disparity. Instead of working to FIX that mismatch of pay versus value, radical feminists EMBRACED it and made the problem much worse. Now nobody values child rearing and community cohesion building. Nice job. This all has some effect on marriage stability, but little effect on the collapse in people’s value of the virtue of chastity overall. In short, it’s a distraction from the topic.
2. Nope. Evangelical protestants dream of the 50’s. Orthodox Catholics don’t (OK, maybe some of the “it’s all Vatican II’s fault” sort do, but they are a small group). You should meet some actual young priests sometime instead of just reading about them at the Huffington Post and National Catholic Distorter. The personalism that underlies the Theology of the Body has utterly nothing in common with 1950’s Americana.
3. Economics are shaped by culture. People once had 7 children and were happy in 800 SF log cabins with no plumbing and heated only by a wood stove. It is NOT “economic policy” which has dictated people’s value choices in the last 100 years, it is CULTURE. We’ve made an unconscious choice to believe in marketing messages that we can’t be happy with less and in fact need more, so we can’t afford children. Contraception has decoupled sex from babies and destroyed the reality check that prevented prior generations from allowing their appetites to control their long term behavior.

“Objectively immoral to have children?” LOL, not even worthy of further discussion. You sound like somebody from vhemt.com, and I’m not entirely sure that site isn’t satire.

 

[edwest2]

LSD and Yoko Ono, for two things.

Look up the lyrics to his Atheist Communist song Imagine.

And the lyrics to Woman is the N*gger of the World. That’s what John thought of Yoko? That’s how he treated her?

Sad. Sad. Sad.

Peace,
Ed

 

[edwest2]

Personally, I think we’d all be better off if no one spoke openly about their sexuality, especially in media. That kind of thing is something that should be private, maybe among your mates at the pub, but definitely in a setting no more public than that.

I’m tired of hearing about people feeling the need to announce their sexual proclivities to the world. They act like it’s their God given right to do so and to demand that others listen. It’s cheap, tawdry, and tasteless. Such people are not right in the head and feel the need to get confirmation of their self-worth from others. It’s quite sad.

They want affirmation. They want a pat on the back. They crave, in some cases, other’s approval. “Atta boy, mate. So what’s the count so far this week?” They want others, by saying nice and encouraging things, to make themselves feel like they are doing no wrong.

Sex is always a private matter and should only be discussed with a doctor if there’s a medical problem.

Peace,
Ed

 

[edwest2]

Indeed. Sex is used to sell everything, even to children. (Have you ever heard of, or seen, a “prostitot”?) It seems to keep getting worse. We see the word “pimp” being used as a verb in a positive sense in the media for seemingly innocuous things such as vegetable gardens or email. (Seriously, I saw a sign that said “pimp my garden”.) You can’t even turn on the TV any more, even to watch golf, without seeing trashy women prancing about with douchebag guys. And don’t get me started about the so-called “music” I’m forced to listen to, whether on the train (why can’t people keep it turned down? They’re wearing earphones, aren’t they going deaf?) or at a shop.

Hey, I had my TV thrown out years ago. If I hear trash coming from the car next to me, I roll up my window. What little TV I watch is to report especially bad behavior to people on sites like this. I’m just watching the garbage pile getting bigger and bigger. And I made it a point to say something about using the word “pimp” as a verb to a family member. Politely.

Sex is not used to sell everything, thank God. I work in the media and I follow this stuff.

Peace,
Ed

 

[edwest2]

Wow! You live in a a sad, sad world. Glad it isn’t the real one. Get help.

1. Typical radical feminist fail. The 1960’s feminists brilliantly identified the way in which the men of the world failed to value women’s vital roles and contributions in the modern socio-economic system - then proceeded to AGREE with that devaluation by further denigrating women who chose historically feminine roles. Pre-industrial revolution, the roles of men and women were complementary and cash was a minor element of an economy built on labor and barter. In this system, men and women contributed equally to the survival of family and there was no artificial divide between economic contributions (raising livestock and crops, constructing shelter)) and cultural contributions (educating and nurturing children, maintaining the shelter). Then came the industrial revolution and the cash-based economy. Men then built the skeleton of civilization: roads, laws, medicine, industry, etc and reaped all the monetary rewards, while women continued to flesh out the body of civilization: the tasks of child-rearing, education, and community cohesion building, but got little to no cash pay for it. Over time, this cash disparity resulted in a cultural value disparity. Instead of working to FIX that mismatch of pay versus value, radical feminists EMBRACED it and made the problem much worse. Now nobody values child rearing and community cohesion building. Nice job. This all has some effect on marriage stability, but little effect on the collapse in people’s value of the virtue of chastity overall. In short, it’s a distraction from the topic.
2. Nope. Evangelical protestants dream of the 50’s. Orthodox Catholics don’t (OK, maybe some of the “it’s all Vatican II’s fault” sort do, but they are a small group). You should meet some actual young priests sometime instead of just reading about them at the Huffington Post and National Catholic Distorter. The personalism that underlies the Theology of the Body has utterly nothing in common with 1950’s Americana.
3. Economics are shaped by culture. People once had 7 children and were happy in 800 SF log cabins with no plumbing and heated only by a wood stove. It is NOT “economic policy” which has dictated people’s value choices in the last 100 years, it is CULTURE. We’ve made an unconscious choice to believe in marketing messages that we can’t be happy with less and in fact need more, so we can’t afford children. Contraception has decoupled sex from babies and destroyed the reality check that prevented prior generations from allowing their appetites to control their long term behavior.

“Objectively immoral to have children?” LOL, not even worthy of further discussion. You sound like somebody from vhemt.com, and I’m not entirely sure that site isn’t satire.

I heard the following on Catholic Radio: “We’re not back to 1957 yet but we’re making progress.”

There is no such thing as a this or that Catholic. You are either obedient or you’re not.

Christianity in the 1950s and 1960s was warmly embraced by the Federal Government and the media. Life was normal, families were normal, and we lived our faith daily, not just on Sundays.

Peace,
Ed

 

[manualman]

I heard the following on Catholic Radio: “We’re not back to 1957 yet but we’re making progress.”

There is no such thing as a this or that Catholic. You are either obedient or you’re not.

Christianity in the 1950s and 1960s was warmly embraced by the Federal Government and the media. Life was normal, families were normal, and we lived our faith daily, not just on Sundays.

Sorry, but no. The 50’s were not idyllic. They were a time when people tried to paint over their chaos with idyllic images and fronts. The chaos had roots that went much deeper back. You can’t send several million men and women off to war, traumatize them with gore and horror, desensitize them with passionate, but uncommitted sexual encounters and expect them to be able to go home without being crippled. The adults of the 1950’s tried to go back to emulating the lives their parents before them lived, but failed because they didn’t address the moral and social wounds they’d received in the war. Their children rebelled because they perceived the failures of their parents to be the result of the ‘failed’ moral system they claimed to adhere to, but were too wounded to do so fully. The rebel generation never comprehended the external forces that reduced the capacity of their parents to live a moral christian life and falsely concluded that the moral system was to blame (instead of the trauma that was actually to blame).

The values people TALKED in the 50’s were indeed good. But the walk didn’t often match the talk. Hypocrisy foments rebellion. Especially when the rebels don’t understand the motivations of the hypocrites. I’m too young to have been there, but my family tree bears the brutal battle scars of what went on in the 40’s and 50’s. It’s not pretty.

 

[JimG]

And yet from 1952 till 1957, Bishop Fulton J. Sheen’s prime-time TV program was one of the most watched in the nation. Everybody watched that show!

 

[manualman]

And yet from 1952 till 1957, Bishop Fulton J. Sheen’s prime-time TV program was one of the most watched in the nation. Everybody watched that show!

Consistent with my assertion. Society still wanted to believe in the gospel, they just failed to resolve the problems they were experiencing in living it out. Nobody adequately confronted the wounds of war.

Take the fact that most of the derided theologians and priests of the late 60’s received THEIR faith formation in the 50’s. According to the John Jay report, the peak population of child molester priests were educated and ordained in the 50’s. All looked well on the surface, but trouble was brewing already underneath.

 

[fastenatingguy]

This is a fascinating thread that mixes fact and opinion.

I find myself agreeing (in part) with at least something from many of the posters.

The issues are far more complex than can be managed in this type of forum, but don’t let my opinion stop anyone.

We certainly need to pray and ask God for his mercy.

That is all.

 

[Robert_in_SD]

Was it planned, or did it just happen. If, as St Paul states: In everything, God works for the good, where’s the good in the sexual revolution? To me, the sexual revolution is like a giant pendulum that one ought not stand in it’s way.

I don’t think it was planned by any person(s). I think it was the result of many different factors:

(1) birth control becoming widely available;
(2) expanding civil rights movements/womens’ rights movements;
(3) the threat of global thermonuclear war
(4) the threat of the draft/Vietnam (in America)
(5) the increasing mistrust of authority coupled with a heightened acceptance of, and even expectation of, rebellion against socially accepted morals.
(6) the changes in gender roles at home and the workplace;
(7) increased leisure time due to modern conveniences;
(8) development of global communication and dissemination of new ideas via television and radio;
(9) the rise of the two-working-parent family; and
(10) a very permissive, experiential, and experimental college environment.

These are all just off the top of my head. I’m sure there are more factors that contributed to the “revolution.”

Peace,
Robert

 

[edwest2]

Sorry, but no. The 50’s were not idyllic. They were a time when people tried to paint over their chaos with idyllic images and fronts. The chaos had roots that went much deeper back. You can’t send several million men and women off to war, traumatize them with gore and horror, desensitize them with passionate, but uncommitted sexual encounters and expect them to be able to go home without being crippled. The adults of the 1950’s tried to go back to emulating the lives their parents before them lived, but failed because they didn’t address the moral and social wounds they’d received in the war. Their children rebelled because they perceived the failures of their parents to be the result of the ‘failed’ moral system they claimed to adhere to, but were too wounded to do so fully. The rebel generation never comprehended the external forces that reduced the capacity of their parents to live a moral christian life and falsely concluded that the moral system was to blame (instead of the trauma that was actually to blame).

The values people TALKED in the 50’s were indeed good. But the walk didn’t often match the talk. Hypocrisy foments rebellion. Especially when the rebels don’t understand the motivations of the hypocrites. I’m too young to have been there, but my family tree bears the brutal battle scars of what went on in the 40’s and 50’s. It’s not pretty.

I was there. My father was a World War II vet and my mother endured the war in a forced labor camp in Germany. One of our closest neighbors was in a concentration camp and lost his father there. In fact, many of our neighbors were either vets or D.P.s (displaced persons) who left war-torn Europe to start a life in America. And you know what? After all the bombs and dead bodies and killing and camps, they all raised normal Catholic/Christian families. But there were those who hated normal. And hated functional families and Christian communities.

Sexual perverts wanted what we have today. Don’t you dare try to paint them in a good light. Oh yeah, I read the stories that the pervert rebels hated conformity and hated their parents’ behavior, like going to cocktail parties. No, it was not perfect but it was 90% better than what we have now.

The sexual deviant perverts wanted everything to be their way. To feel good about being sexual deviant perverts. To turn the country into sexual deviant pervert land. That is why I reject most media today, That is why I don’t even talk about some of it.

The sick, the twisted, the nihilist, the live for today, get lots of sex and die crowd will soon get their wish. My job is saying no to their lies and lifestyle and warning others.

May God have mercy,
Ed

 

[edwest2]

And yet from 1952 till 1957, Bishop Fulton J. Sheen’s prime-time TV program was one of the most watched in the nation. Everybody watched that show!

Yes. Can you imagine someone like that on TV today - a Bishop that is?

Peace,
Ed

 

[manualman]

Don’t you dare try to paint them in a good light. Oh yeah, I read the stories that the pervert rebels hated conformity and hated their parents’ behavior, like going to cocktail parties. No, it was not perfect but it was 90% better than what we have now.

It’s not about putting the sexual revolutionaries “in a good light.” It is about recognizing that they are human beings. Good, but fallen. Not so different than me and you. They didn’t spring, black and shriveled from the loins of Satan himself, they were produced in large numbers by a culture that was already terribly wounded.

I’m glad your parents pulled it off. It CAN be done with the help of Grace, of course. But an awful lot of WWII survivors never really healed. My grandfathers never really did. Both were alcoholics, one I’m pretty sure was unfaithful while in Europe and the marriage never recovered (forum anonymity allows this sort of frankness without it being gossip). No wonder of the 7 kids in that family every single one of them ended up rebelling (some held out a bit longer than the 60’s, actually). More than one of them ended up dead long before their time.

The other gradnfather personally seems to have held it together, but their circle of friends and close relatives sure had its fair share of affairs and adultery. Weekly churchgoers all of them: ushers and Knights of Columbus. Go figure.

People aren’t our enemies, Ed. The devil is the enemy. People embrace evil by being deceived. And the best lies always have at least a tiny element of truth in them. The sexual revolutionaries didn’t witness genuine purity and chastity and reject it. They fell for the devil’s lie that if they saw one person close to them who ‘said’ he believed in chastity, but didn’t live it, that the whole system was a sham and a lie. Who’s best at calling the truth lies? Man or the beast?

 

[Dawnia]

Consistent with my assertion. Society still wanted to believe in the gospel, they just failed to resolve the problems they were experiencing in living it out. Nobody adequately confronted the wounds of war.

Take the fact that most of the derided theologians and priests of the late 60’s received THEIR faith formation in the 50’s. According to the John Jay report, the peak population of child molester priests were educated and ordained in the 50’s. All looked well on the surface, but trouble was brewing already underneath.

I agree that the 50s had a nice new coat of whitewash on the picket fence that was rotting away from the inside. But, I think there was more to it than just the war. The birth control movement had been around for almost 50 years at that point. A huge amount of wealth was created after the war and the idea of “should we do something” was replaced with the idea of “can we do something”. (we still have that idea today)

I think the sexual revolution was just one of those times when a lot of different circumstances all collided at once. Once the ball started rolling, the mob mentality took over and people who normally would be rational people just went with it.

 

[edwest2]

I don’t think it was planned by any person(s). I think it was the result of many different factors:

(1) birth control becoming widely available;
(2) expanding civil rights movements/womens’ rights movements;
(3) the threat of global thermonuclear war
(4) the threat of the draft/Vietnam (in America)
(5) the increasing mistrust of authority coupled with a heightened acceptance of, and even expectation of, rebellion against socially accepted morals.
(6) the changes in gender roles at home and the workplace;
(7) increased leisure time due to modern conveniences;
(8) development of global communication and dissemination of new ideas via television and radio;
(9) the rise of the two-working-parent family; and
(10) a very permissive, experiential, and experimental college environment.

These are all just off the top of my head. I’m sure there are more factors that contributed to the “revolution.”

Peace,
Robert

I disagree completely. It was all carefully planned and financed by individuals who wanted to see the United States turn away from God and to a life of constant sexual immorality and general hedonism. They have names and still exist today.

I was there for the launch of Sputnik, the deployment by the US and Russia of ICBMs in 1959, the Cuban Missile Crisis in 1962, and you know what? Nobody - none of us - lost a second of sleep over it. We had great times in the late 1950s and early 1960s.

They loved immorality and wanted to gradually teach us to love it too - so here we are.

Pray and ask God to transform hearts.

Ed

 

[Dawnia]

I disagree completely. It was all carefully planned and financed by individuals who wanted to see the United States turn away from God and to a life of constant sexual immorality and general hedonism. They have names and still exist today.

I was there for the launch of Sputnik, the deployment by the US and Russia of ICBMs in 1959, the Cuban Missile Crisis in 1962, and you know what? Nobody - none of us - lost a second of sleep over it. We had great times in the late 1950s and early 1960s.

They loved immorality and wanted to gradually teach us to love it too - so here we are.

Pray and ask God to transform hearts.

Ed

There have been people like that throughout history. If the general population hadn’t been open to the ideas, it would have died a quick death.