What caused the 'sexual revolution?'

[SgtSchultz]

Originally Posted by edwest2

"Affluence"? That's a ridiculous word to use.

Please elaborate. Do you not think that excessive disposable income played no role? Maybe not by itself, the Kinsey types and the deviants helped, no doubt, but the consumerisation of everyday life certainly is an attitude that effected how many look at relationships. Everything is about "consumers" and "consuming" and "markets" these days. Nothing is treated as off limits from this perverse mindset where everything is a commercial transaction for one's own benefit.

Originally Posted by edwest2

The radical, anarchist, sexual deviants wanted us all to be like them so they opened Adult Bookstores, strip clubs and topless bars.

I agree. They also wanted to make money. Like drug dealers, they lure people in with cheap thrills, then get you hooked. These facts don't disprove that affluence played no role. In fact, the rise in disposable income fuelled the growth of these establishments.

[migueltojose]

What caused the sexual revolution...

The combination of science (the pill), luck (?) (little or no economic competition for either reosurces or production), technology (explosive growth of disposable income and lesiure time), advertising (sex sells, commercial radio, TV, music) and a sense of entitlement (hey, we just won WWII, time to enjoy the spoils of victory)... whether or not thedevil and the Holy Spirit were active participants or bystanders, I don't know, that's a mystery, but the major drivers were too big and strong to overcome.. We complain a lot about the way things are but from the perspective of creature comfotrts, they are a lot better than the way things were. Technology is the answer to all our ills, coupled with a moral compass and the Father, Son and Holy Spirit behind us, with us and out front of us clearing the path.

[migueltojose]

Originally Posted by migueltojose

What caused the sexual revolution...

The combination of science (the pill), luck (?) (little or no economic competition for either reosurces or production), technology (explosive growth of disposable income and lesiure time), advertising (sex sells, commercial radio, TV, music) and a sense of entitlement (hey, we just won WWII, time to enjoy the spoils of victory)... whether or not thedevil and the Holy Spirit were active participants or bystanders, I don't know, that's a mystery, but the major drivers were too big and strong to overcome.. We complain a lot about the way things are but from the perspective of creature comfotrts, they are a lot better than the way things were. Technology is the answer to all our ills, coupled with a moral compass and the Father, Son and Holy Spirit behind us, with us and out front of us clearing the path.

And the threat, for the first tim ein history, of total annihilation from nuclear war.. the effect on our social psychology was a sense of hopelessness (doom) and fostered a Jack Kerouc, Jim Morrison "live for the moment" hedonistic narcissism..

Looking for blame is notworthwhile. Learning and understanding (hindsight is 20/20) what happened is necessary to learn. Education, coupled with a moral compass, is the answer. We're like adolescents (as a nation) just ramping up the learning curve. We lack vision. We need to understand where we were, where we are, where we want to be and how are we going to get there. You won't hear much about that in the next 100 days.

What we have now is representation without taxation for half of our population (the inverse of the founding fathers) and as a result they become dependent on the government, which gives the government way too much power. And as we know, power corrupts..

[SgtSchultz]

Originally Posted by migueltojose

Looking for blame is notworthwhile. Learning and understanding (hindsight is 20/20) what happened is necessary to learn. Education, coupled with a moral compass, is the answer.

Amen to that!

Originally Posted by migueltojose

We're like adolescents (as a nation) just ramping up the learning curve. We lack vision. We need to understand where we were, where we are, where we want to be and how are we going to get there.
[...] You won't hear much about that in the next 100 days.

But why is this? Is this not because you Americans would rather engage in sycophantic hyperbole than address issues? Why let this happen? Why not eschew the garbage, lay off the binary and the "X is better than Y, so I'll vote for X to keep Y out" when you have Z and A and B? If Americans truly want what is said here, they won't support the same old garbage. Yet they do. They choose X or Y when there is Z and A and B. They play into the propaganda of X and Y only. They are blind to the fact that no other democracy in the world is stuck with a binary.

Originally Posted by migueltojose

What we have now is representation without taxation for half of our population

Speaking of hyperbole....

But since you mentioned that old "taxation without representation" polemic, how come you still require your citizens who live overseas, have no national income, no ties, and no assets, to pay income tax? They can't even vote for anyone, yet they have to pay tax? Where is the outrage over this? No other country in the world does this, except for Eritrea. I hear whining about taxes all the time, but no one ever addresses this injustice.

[InJesusItrust]

I would say that it was part of a plan to spread the Communist Revolution across the world. If anyone is interested in why I say this look up the origins of Cultural Marxism and see lectures from Soviet dissidents like Yuri Bezmenov on Youtube who explain how subversion really works. Like always, it is the well-educated who make the most "useful idiots" and academia is where the infestation started.

[migueltojose]

To some extent, look at the architecture from 1950-1990. Very much driven by MArxist ideals. No facades. Builings looked the same from all four sides. No reference to class. No fancy tops or entrances. Boring as he..ck.. Artists, poets, (architects) subliminaly drive culture. Who were the leaders? Pollack? Picasso? What was their motivation (consciously or subconsciously). Desperation? Expressionism (I versus we). Uncertainty. Uncertainty leads to selfishness and greed. Again, no fault, just fact. Understanding is key. Knowledge is power.

However, I must admit, the direction here is beyond me. I've never even heard of cultural Marxism. I will say I think we underestimate the influence of art, architecture and poetry on our culture. We tend to think bottom up (deductive) as opposed to top down (inductive). We need both to.. meet in the middle.

[lerapt78]

Originally Posted by migueltojose

And the threat, for the first tim ein history, of total annihilation from nuclear war..

Makes me think of the scenes in movies where the enlisted soldier gets assigned overseas. He's making out with his girlfriend in the car before he's due to leave, and then comes the whole "You have to put out, I could die tomorrow!!!" line.

I think the idea of affluence has merit. Combining technology (more time to ourselves) with money (ability to spend on diversion) creates a population of people with plenty of leisure time to indulge in pleasurable activities.

[migueltojose]

Idle hands do the devils work..and to much tolerance for individual expressionism. Good to a certain extend but needs to be kept in perspective. It is all about you.. but.. it's all about you not being all about you..I think a lot of people think/thought it was okay to be masochistic because they thought they were only hurting themselves (and everybody else was doing it.. sex, drugs and rock and roll..) but it doesn't work that way. Yes, we are all under a microscope and we are all special (just like everyone else).. but it's about you not being all about you.. the irony is rich..

[migueltojose]

Speaking of individualism.. here's an observation.. somewhere along the line it became more about the individual versus the art. In music it's the singer or guitar player but shouldn't it be about the song? In movies it's the actors or director but it
sn't it about the movie. In sports it's most evidient. It used to be about the team. Now it's more about the player. It's bass akwards. It's twisted. Our osession with celebrity wealth and fame is misguided. It has filled the void created by disposable income and leisure time. What a waste of time and money it is. It's a sin.

[lerapt78]

Originally Posted by SgtSchultz

But why is this? Is this not because you Americans would rather engage in sycophantic hyperbole than address issues? Why let this happen? Why not eschew the garbage, lay off the binary and the "X is better than Y, so I'll vote for X to keep Y out" when you have Z and A and B? If Americans truly want what is said here, they won't support the same old garbage. Yet they do. They choose X or Y when there is Z and A and B. They play into the propaganda of X and Y only. They are blind to the fact that no other democracy in the world is stuck with a binary.

You touched upon an interesting facet of our political process, and you are very correct in that Americans prefer a choice between two parties than to "think outside the box" when it comes to electing officials. Part of it I think is has to do with comfort level, but there is also the issue of media blackout with respect to differentiating viewpoints. Third parties will rarely get the time afforded to tout their policies in front of the cameras, and Americans (in general) are content to follow the candidates that either CNN or Fox News present to them. If you think about it, the people behind "the people" will find it easier to control two political parties as opposed to twenty. There is deliberate action behind this, I think.

Originally Posted by SgtSchultz

But since you mentioned that old "taxation without representation" polemic, how come you still require your citizens who live overseas, have no national income, no ties, and no assets, to pay income tax? They can't even vote for anyone, yet they have to pay tax? Where is the outrage over this? No other country in the world does this, except for Eritrea. I hear whining about taxes all the time, but no one ever addresses this injustice.

Where do you get this information? If an American is living abroad (but has not renounced his American citizenship), he/she is able to vote via absentee ballot. With regard to taxes, it is not a clear-cut demand that taxes have to be filed if one lives overseas; rather there are qualifications that have to be met, and it has to do with length of residency, amount of income, source of income (which company you work for), etc.

[migueltojose]

Originally Posted by lerapt78

You touched upon an interesting facet of our political process, and you are very correct in that Americans prefer a choice between two parties than to "think outside the box" when it comes to electing officials. Part of it I think is has to do with comfort level, but there is also the issue of media blackout with respect to differentiating viewpoints. Third parties will rarely get the time afforded to tout their policies in front of the cameras, and Americans (in general) are content to follow the candidates that either CNN or Fox News present to them. If you think about it, the people behind "the people" will find it easier to control two political parties as opposed to twenty. There is deliberate action behind this, I think.




Where do you get this information? If an American is living abroad (but has not renounced his American citizenship), he/she is able to vote via absentee ballot. With regard to taxes, it is not a clear-cut demand that taxes have to be filed if one lives overseas; rather there are qualifications that have to be met, and it has to do with length of residency, amount of income, source of income (which company you work for), etc.

American Politics - Number one job... get elected... number two job... get re-elected. Campaign. Sell out. It is necassary or you won't get elected. The issue for me and I would hope others is there are parts of both platforms we like but also parts of both we don't like. Fiscal responsibility. Socially liberal (social justice). But the Dems support choice and other life issues we simply can't (or shouldn't) and they are not fiscally responsible. The Reps are supposed to be fiscally responsible but they haven't been for a long time, they lean toward being pro-life but won't commit. (See number one and two above..) No one can get elected telling the truth. We can't handle the truth. As a result we are turned off because there are no good alternatives. Also because we just haven't been put into enough agony yet (despite all appearances). We also lack national vision. Where are we going and how are we going to get there. We are rudderless and adrift... no moral compass..

[edwest2]

Originally Posted by SgtSchultz

Please elaborate. Do you not think that excessive disposable income played no role? Maybe not by itself, the Kinsey types and the deviants helped, no doubt, but the consumerisation of everyday life certainly is an attitude that effected how many look at relationships. Everything is about "consumers" and "consuming" and "markets" these days. Nothing is treated as off limits from this perverse mindset where everything is a commercial transaction for one's own benefit.


I agree. They also wanted to make money. Like drug dealers, they lure people in with cheap thrills, then get you hooked. These facts don't disprove that affluence played no role. In fact, the rise in disposable income fuelled the growth of these establishments.

Wow. That's just amazing. It reminds me of a claim made recently that illegitimate pregnancy increased because of the mass produced automobile. Just recently, a friend of mine who lives in a small town, was taking his dog for a walk. Though not visible until he got close to it, he noticed two sheets of plywood that were painted a certain color in the nearby woods. He took the long way around and saw a nude couple inside, because it was open on two sides. The following day, he checked and they were gone, so he had it taken down and left for trash.




Peace,
Ed

[edwest2]

Originally Posted by migueltojose

What caused the sexual revolution...

The combination of science (the pill), luck (?) (little or no economic competition for either reosurces or production), technology (explosive growth of disposable income and lesiure time), advertising (sex sells, commercial radio, TV, music) and a sense of entitlement (hey, we just won WWII, time to enjoy the spoils of victory)... whether or not thedevil and the Holy Spirit were active participants or bystanders, I don't know, that's a mystery, but the major drivers were too big and strong to overcome.. We complain a lot about the way things are but from the perspective of creature comfotrts, they are a lot better than the way things were. Technology is the answer to all our ills, coupled with a moral compass and the Father, Son and Holy Spirit behind us, with us and out front of us clearing the path.

That is incorrect. And there is no mystery. Leisure time? We mowed the grass with a push lawnmower. People painted their garages and went for trips as families. My growing up included picking strawberries, cherries and apples just like I lived on the farm. In fact, most people still live in rural areas today than in cities.

In my working class, Catholic neighborhood, people worked hard on shop floors. Stores were closed on Sundays - people saved money. Nobody had a credit card. Even kids were taught, "If you really want that, you are going to have to earn it." So, in the Summer, I cut people's grass or did a little painting, and in the Winter, I carried my snow shovel to every house that did not have their snow shoveled and asked if I could do it. We got about 50 cents a week from our parents, and they did without to pay for school tuition.

Technology is not the answer to all our ills. Never will be. Ten years ago, Time magazine devoted a special issue to all the medical advances that should be coming out around now and in the next few years. Amazing stuff. The next issue, a doctor, the head of a major medical association, had a letter published that told readers: Even if all the planned advances occur, HALF of the population would still be at risk for major medical conditions.

Why? Not one time, he wrote, was the word behavior mentioned in that entire issue. Right now, if we aren't eating right, getting exercise, and avoiding junk food - we are all in that boat.



Peace,
Ed

[Do Good Then Go]

Originally Posted by edwest2

Wow. That's just amazing. It reminds me of a claim made recently that illegitimate pregnancy increased because of the mass produced automobile. Just recently, a friend of mine who lives in a small town, was taking his dog for a walk. Though not visible until he got close to it, he noticed two sheets of plywood that were painted a certain color in the nearby woods. He took the long way around and saw a nude couple inside, because it was open on two sides. The following day, he checked and they were gone, so he had it taken down and left for trash.




Peace,
Ed

Ed, what?? I'm really not understanding what you're saying here.

You do think affluence had something to do with it?

You don't think affluence had something to do with it?

And the plywood sheets painted a certain colour - is the fact they were a certain colour significant? Are you saying the fact that most people began to have access to automobiles (when once most people didn't) had nothing to do with it or something to do with it?

I'm not trying to be sarcastic, I'm really not getting it.

[Geist]

Originally Posted by Robert Sock

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.

Satan>communists>hippies.