Ponderable
- Thread starter Bruddah IZ
- Start date
Sheriff Joe
DA
NOVEMBER 5, 2018
Liberal women call for 'sex strike' before midterms
By Rick Moran
What if liberal women called for a "sex strike" against their men and no one cared – least of all men?
It's true. A bunch of liberal women have bared it all in the "grab them by the ballot" campaign that calls for women to deny sex to their mates and boyfriends to protest...something.
The familiar litany of feminist complaints against society can be addressed by refusing to have sex with men until they vote the "right" people into office. It's not a novel idea. One of the most famous Greek playwrights, Aristophanes, penned an antiwar play called Lysistrata, where Greek women refused to have sex with their husbands until they ended the Peloponnesian War.
This campaign is predicated on the simple notion that men are animals and are so desperate for sex that they will do anything to get a woman to open her legs.
What is the "reasoning" behind this campaign? Apparently, women are incredibly miserable in and out of the bedroom, and by denying sex to (presumably) males, their situation will improve.
...especially in the field of marital relations, where women are forced into "service sex" – having sex with their partners even if they don't want to.
It's time for a revolution. At the polls, and in the bedroom. And in our understanding of who women are, sexually and otherwise. Given the tight interweaving of economic and political power with sexual entitlement, female sexual autonomy has never been more urgent, and women's sexual pleasure has never been more political. Let's consider what it might mean to go on a sex strike of sorts – to get what we want, rather than give what we think we owe others.
I don't hate this woman. I have enormous pity for her if she actually believes that sexual pleasure is political in any way. Sexual pleasure is one of the greatest gifts given to the human race and to reduce it to politics is, well, crazy.
But Ms. Martin isn't finished. Because women make so much less than men, a sex strike would actually empower women:
Resetting the balance so women no longer provide service sex is not in itself a comprehensive answer to gendered inequalities, of course. But making sex female-focused and female-pleasure-centric could begin to force other shifts in thinking in important ways. When we cease to consider what women like and want as foreplay and reframe it as the main event, for example, we begin to challenge, from the most intimate and private and emotionally powerful place, a long-accepted, deeply believed but nearly invisible world view, and make an impossible-to-miss statement about who and what counts. In the ancient Greek comedy by Aristophanes, the character Lysistrata urges women to go on a sex strike to get men on both sides to end the Peloponnesian War. In our case, a sex strike against service sex can be a powerful statement – that female desire, a metric of agency like women's votes, will be heard.
Another reason to pity this woman is that she's obviously never been in a truly loving relationship with a man – a real man, anyway. Perhaps she's the Obamacare Pajama Boy's girlfriend?
Would he even care if his girlfriend went on a sex strike? Perhaps he hasn't had sex at all? It's hard if you're living at home with Ma and Pa. Intimate relationships with women are a logistical nightmare. Where to do it? In the back of a car? Does he sneak his girl into the basement after his parents go to bed?
Clearly, Ms. Martin has had relationships only with "men" like Pajama Boy. Real men care about the real pleasure their women experience during sex and are supportive, loving, caring, nurturing, with all the manly virtues that this poor, deluded woman is unaware of.
Denying men sex is not the answer to greater political power or even more pleasure in the bedroom (although some men could probably use a wake-up call). How desperate and unhappy these women are! Sex is sex, and politics is politics, and the idea that you can conflate the two is a feminist intellectual construct that looks to make life itself a political arena.
The fact that Ms. Martin believes that women are incapable of being sexually fulfilled unless they are not in a monogamous relationship tells me this woman could never make any man – unless he is a cuckold – happy and content. I'm not saying this should be the goal in life of every woman – to make her man happy. It should be the goal of every married couple to make each other as happy as they can. Equal happiness, equal pleasure – these are the things that truly make life worth living, and this miserable woman will never experience that joy.
Liberal women call for 'sex strike' before midterms
By Rick Moran
What if liberal women called for a "sex strike" against their men and no one cared – least of all men?
It's true. A bunch of liberal women have bared it all in the "grab them by the ballot" campaign that calls for women to deny sex to their mates and boyfriends to protest...something.
The familiar litany of feminist complaints against society can be addressed by refusing to have sex with men until they vote the "right" people into office. It's not a novel idea. One of the most famous Greek playwrights, Aristophanes, penned an antiwar play called Lysistrata, where Greek women refused to have sex with their husbands until they ended the Peloponnesian War.
This campaign is predicated on the simple notion that men are animals and are so desperate for sex that they will do anything to get a woman to open her legs.
What is the "reasoning" behind this campaign? Apparently, women are incredibly miserable in and out of the bedroom, and by denying sex to (presumably) males, their situation will improve.
...especially in the field of marital relations, where women are forced into "service sex" – having sex with their partners even if they don't want to.
It's time for a revolution. At the polls, and in the bedroom. And in our understanding of who women are, sexually and otherwise. Given the tight interweaving of economic and political power with sexual entitlement, female sexual autonomy has never been more urgent, and women's sexual pleasure has never been more political. Let's consider what it might mean to go on a sex strike of sorts – to get what we want, rather than give what we think we owe others.
I don't hate this woman. I have enormous pity for her if she actually believes that sexual pleasure is political in any way. Sexual pleasure is one of the greatest gifts given to the human race and to reduce it to politics is, well, crazy.
But Ms. Martin isn't finished. Because women make so much less than men, a sex strike would actually empower women:
Resetting the balance so women no longer provide service sex is not in itself a comprehensive answer to gendered inequalities, of course. But making sex female-focused and female-pleasure-centric could begin to force other shifts in thinking in important ways. When we cease to consider what women like and want as foreplay and reframe it as the main event, for example, we begin to challenge, from the most intimate and private and emotionally powerful place, a long-accepted, deeply believed but nearly invisible world view, and make an impossible-to-miss statement about who and what counts. In the ancient Greek comedy by Aristophanes, the character Lysistrata urges women to go on a sex strike to get men on both sides to end the Peloponnesian War. In our case, a sex strike against service sex can be a powerful statement – that female desire, a metric of agency like women's votes, will be heard.
Another reason to pity this woman is that she's obviously never been in a truly loving relationship with a man – a real man, anyway. Perhaps she's the Obamacare Pajama Boy's girlfriend?
Would he even care if his girlfriend went on a sex strike? Perhaps he hasn't had sex at all? It's hard if you're living at home with Ma and Pa. Intimate relationships with women are a logistical nightmare. Where to do it? In the back of a car? Does he sneak his girl into the basement after his parents go to bed?
Clearly, Ms. Martin has had relationships only with "men" like Pajama Boy. Real men care about the real pleasure their women experience during sex and are supportive, loving, caring, nurturing, with all the manly virtues that this poor, deluded woman is unaware of.
Denying men sex is not the answer to greater political power or even more pleasure in the bedroom (although some men could probably use a wake-up call). How desperate and unhappy these women are! Sex is sex, and politics is politics, and the idea that you can conflate the two is a feminist intellectual construct that looks to make life itself a political arena.
The fact that Ms. Martin believes that women are incapable of being sexually fulfilled unless they are not in a monogamous relationship tells me this woman could never make any man – unless he is a cuckold – happy and content. I'm not saying this should be the goal in life of every woman – to make her man happy. It should be the goal of every married couple to make each other as happy as they can. Equal happiness, equal pleasure – these are the things that truly make life worth living, and this miserable woman will never experience that joy.
Sheriff Joe
DA
I just love towel heads.
Muslim Convert Sinead O’Connor: Won’t Spend Time with ‘Disgusting White People’
Muslim Convert Sinead O’Connor: Won’t Spend Time with ‘Disgusting White People’
Sheriff Joe
DA
Why do liberals hate Hispanics?
US News
Rich white Hollywood liberals are trying to get this Hispanic Uber driver fired because he’s a Trump supporter
US News
Rich white Hollywood liberals are trying to get this Hispanic Uber driver fired because he’s a Trump supporter
Sheriff Joe
DA
I love honest Muslims,
Newly-Muslim Sinead O’Connor Rings In the New Political Era with a Stunningly Racist Tweet
Take a ganders at her Tuesday tweet:
“I’m terribly sorry. What I’m about to say is something so racist I never thought my soul could ever feel it. But truly I never wanna spend time with white people again (if that’s what non-muslims are called). Not for one moment, for any reason. They are disgusting.”
Newly-Muslim Sinead O’Connor Rings In the New Political Era with a Stunningly Racist Tweet
Take a ganders at her Tuesday tweet:
“I’m terribly sorry. What I’m about to say is something so racist I never thought my soul could ever feel it. But truly I never wanna spend time with white people again (if that’s what non-muslims are called). Not for one moment, for any reason. They are disgusting.”
Sheriff Joe
DA
Ann Coulter: I'm Glad to See the Pro-Amnesty Republicans Go
ALANA MASTRANGELO 8 Nov 2018
Ann Coulter joined Breitbart News and SiriusXM Patriot on Tuesday for special coverage of Election Night 2018.
Breitbart News Editor in Chief Alex Marlow, along with co-hosts Andrew Wilkow of the Wilkow Majority, David Webb of the David Webb Show, and Rick Ungar of the Steele & Ungar show were joined by special guest Ann Coulter on Tuesday night for special live coverage of Election Night 2018 on SiriusXM Patriot. (Interview begins above at time-code 2:05:40.)
Coulter seemed optimistic, despite the GOP being in imminent danger of losing the House of Representatives.
“I always figured the House was lost,” said Coulter, “I was worried about the Senate, and wow, we did not lose the Senate.”
“We held seats, picked up seats,” said Coulter excitedly, “The Senate is the important body, as the Kavanaugh hearings just demonstrated. We can still confirm the judges, Trump isn’t being removed from office, and this temporary [Democrat] control of the House, I mean, that’s the way things go.”
“How many seats did Obama lose in his first midterm election?” Reminisced Coulter, “It was like 63, it was a blowout.”
Coulter added that she was glad to get rid of “deadwood” Republicans in the House.
“It’s never good for Democrats to have control of anything, don’t get me wrong.”
“I’m glad to see a lot of those Republicans go — and also, now Trump can’t sit around blaming the admittedly useless congressional Republicans. So, maybe someone will remind him that he’s the Commander-in-chief, and he doesn’t need Congress to build the wall.”
“Just build the wall and put lots of judges on the courts — and you’ll guarantee your reelection,” said Coulter, as advice to President Donald Trump.
Coulter closed her interview by reminding our hosts what the future will be like under Democratic Party leadership in the House.
“The annoying thing — and I mean, it’ll be annoying to Trump, but I think he should get over it,” laughed Coulter, “It’s going to be fantastic, and will guarantee his reelection — what we’re going to see is a lot more of Maxine Waters and Adam Schiff.”
Sheriff Joe
DA
DACA illegals voting in Texas? O'Keefe's Project Veritas has a disturbing video
NOVEMBER 7, 2018
Texas Gov. Abbott is right to call for an investigation into new evidence of DACA recipients voting in U.S. elections.
https://www.americanthinker.com/blo...s_project_veritas_has_a_disturbing_video.html
NOVEMBER 7, 2018
Texas Gov. Abbott is right to call for an investigation into new evidence of DACA recipients voting in U.S. elections.
https://www.americanthinker.com/blo...s_project_veritas_has_a_disturbing_video.html
Sheriff Joe
DA
MSNBC beclowned themselves handling Gillum’s loss in Florida
By Thomas Lifson
The most hilarious coverage of the midterms was MSNBC’s handling of Andrew Gillum’s losing campaign for Florida’s governorship. The 90% of the media that hates Trump and his supporters really, really wanted Andrew Gillum to win: he’s a radical leftist who is charismatic, articulate, and very left wing. Oh, and he is black, which means he has the potential to drive black turnout to Obama-like levels.
MSNBC reported a Gillum victory before voting even started. Erik Pederson and David Robb of Deadline.com noticed a bit of wishful thinking at the Peacock Network’s cable propaganda outlet, MSNBC Monday night:
MSNBC screen grab via Deadline.com
“Quick clarification here,” a rather embarrassed All In host Chris Hayes told viewers. “Just want to say, earlier this hour, uh, we showed a graphic of the Florida gubernatorial race. May have caught your eye because our system had inadvertently populated some test numbers. Obviously, we do not yet have any vote totals here, the night before the election. That was a misfire. Don’t worry. I was pretty confused when I saw it up there, to see it myself.”
When actual votes started coming in, MSNBC was still pretty certain that Gillum would win. They clung to that hope so long that they were forced to cut away from their coverage of Gillum’s concession before they called the race for him:
Nicole Wallace, formerly a Republican and now a rabid Trump-hater, noticed that they had been handling this race with a bit too much optimism on Gillum:
But predictably, blame for the loss was placed on Rrrrracism! And equally predictabley, it was Eugene Robinson of the Washington Post flinging the poo.
Frustration is understandable. Florida is a swing state and will be critical to the 2020 presidential election. An ally in the governor’s mansion will be a big help to Trump.
Now, Gillum can turn his focus to the corruption probe ongoing in Tallahassee.
By Thomas Lifson
The most hilarious coverage of the midterms was MSNBC’s handling of Andrew Gillum’s losing campaign for Florida’s governorship. The 90% of the media that hates Trump and his supporters really, really wanted Andrew Gillum to win: he’s a radical leftist who is charismatic, articulate, and very left wing. Oh, and he is black, which means he has the potential to drive black turnout to Obama-like levels.
MSNBC reported a Gillum victory before voting even started. Erik Pederson and David Robb of Deadline.com noticed a bit of wishful thinking at the Peacock Network’s cable propaganda outlet, MSNBC Monday night:
MSNBC screen grab via Deadline.com
“Quick clarification here,” a rather embarrassed All In host Chris Hayes told viewers. “Just want to say, earlier this hour, uh, we showed a graphic of the Florida gubernatorial race. May have caught your eye because our system had inadvertently populated some test numbers. Obviously, we do not yet have any vote totals here, the night before the election. That was a misfire. Don’t worry. I was pretty confused when I saw it up there, to see it myself.”
When actual votes started coming in, MSNBC was still pretty certain that Gillum would win. They clung to that hope so long that they were forced to cut away from their coverage of Gillum’s concession before they called the race for him:
Nicole Wallace, formerly a Republican and now a rabid Trump-hater, noticed that they had been handling this race with a bit too much optimism on Gillum:
But predictably, blame for the loss was placed on Rrrrracism! And equally predictabley, it was Eugene Robinson of the Washington Post flinging the poo.
Frustration is understandable. Florida is a swing state and will be critical to the 2020 presidential election. An ally in the governor’s mansion will be a big help to Trump.
Now, Gillum can turn his focus to the corruption probe ongoing in Tallahassee.
Sheriff Joe
DA
NOVEMBER 7, 2018
Biggest loser at midterms? Barack Obama
By Monica Showalter
The midterms weren't a blue wave, but they weren't shark fin soup for Republicans either, given that they lost the House by a small margin.
That said, the big loser who stands out here is hard-campaigning President Obama, the guy who thought he was the star of the Democratic Party and who, throwing the tradition of former presidents staying aloof from politics out the window, campaigned hard, long, and loud, for Democrats in this midterm. Turns out the ones he fought the hardest for lost.
Now he stands exposed as politically irrelevant, powerless, an embarrassment. Sorry 'bout that legacy thing, Barry-O.
First, he did some easy ones and those candidates marched right through, Obama or no Obama:
Tim Kaine of Virginia and Joe Manchin of West Virginia for the Senate, Jennifer Wexton of Virginia for the House. J.B. Pritzker for the Illinois governorship. A couple of minor leaguers for the House in Illinois as tag-alongs.
Kaine and Pritzker, given their ties to the Obama administration, were probably favors repaid, and they ran in blue states, anyway, as did the Illinois pickups. Manchin, meanwhile, was primarily re-elected on his Kavanaugh vote, so Obama was likely irrelevant.
But then there were the midterm campaigns that weren't gimmes, some very high profile, and high media-exposure ones: Joe Donnelly of Indiana for Senate. Bill Nelson of Florida for Senate. Andrew Gillum of Florida for governor. Stacey Abrams of Georgia for governor.
Those were the ones Obama went hoarse campaigning for, yelling and waving his arms, voice cracking, speeches described as fiery, telling voters to vote for these guys or die. With Gillum in particular, racial appeals were a factor and Obama's presence was supposed to help. Gillum had a big media buildup about being a first black governor of Florida as an argument to draw votes, and he later cried racism to fend off corruption allegations. Adding Obama to campaign was obviously part of the appeal. This time, the race-politics identity card simply failed.
Biggest loser at midterms? Barack Obama
By Monica Showalter
The midterms weren't a blue wave, but they weren't shark fin soup for Republicans either, given that they lost the House by a small margin.
That said, the big loser who stands out here is hard-campaigning President Obama, the guy who thought he was the star of the Democratic Party and who, throwing the tradition of former presidents staying aloof from politics out the window, campaigned hard, long, and loud, for Democrats in this midterm. Turns out the ones he fought the hardest for lost.
Now he stands exposed as politically irrelevant, powerless, an embarrassment. Sorry 'bout that legacy thing, Barry-O.
First, he did some easy ones and those candidates marched right through, Obama or no Obama:
Tim Kaine of Virginia and Joe Manchin of West Virginia for the Senate, Jennifer Wexton of Virginia for the House. J.B. Pritzker for the Illinois governorship. A couple of minor leaguers for the House in Illinois as tag-alongs.
Kaine and Pritzker, given their ties to the Obama administration, were probably favors repaid, and they ran in blue states, anyway, as did the Illinois pickups. Manchin, meanwhile, was primarily re-elected on his Kavanaugh vote, so Obama was likely irrelevant.
But then there were the midterm campaigns that weren't gimmes, some very high profile, and high media-exposure ones: Joe Donnelly of Indiana for Senate. Bill Nelson of Florida for Senate. Andrew Gillum of Florida for governor. Stacey Abrams of Georgia for governor.
Those were the ones Obama went hoarse campaigning for, yelling and waving his arms, voice cracking, speeches described as fiery, telling voters to vote for these guys or die. With Gillum in particular, racial appeals were a factor and Obama's presence was supposed to help. Gillum had a big media buildup about being a first black governor of Florida as an argument to draw votes, and he later cried racism to fend off corruption allegations. Adding Obama to campaign was obviously part of the appeal. This time, the race-politics identity card simply failed.
NOVEMBER 5, 2018
Liberal women call for 'sex strike' before midterms
By Rick Moran
What if liberal women called for a "sex strike" against their men and no one cared – least of all men?
It's true. A bunch of liberal women have bared it all in the "grab them by the ballot" campaign that calls for women to deny sex to their mates and boyfriends to protest...something.
The familiar litany of feminist complaints against society can be addressed by refusing to have sex with men until they vote the "right" people into office. It's not a novel idea. One of the most famous Greek playwrights, Aristophanes, penned an antiwar play called Lysistrata, where Greek women refused to have sex with their husbands until they ended the Peloponnesian War.
This campaign is predicated on the simple notion that men are animals and are so desperate for sex that they will do anything to get a woman to open her legs.
What is the "reasoning" behind this campaign? Apparently, women are incredibly miserable in and out of the bedroom, and by denying sex to (presumably) males, their situation will improve.
...especially in the field of marital relations, where women are forced into "service sex" – having sex with their partners even if they don't want to.
It's time for a revolution. At the polls, and in the bedroom. And in our understanding of who women are, sexually and otherwise. Given the tight interweaving of economic and political power with sexual entitlement, female sexual autonomy has never been more urgent, and women's sexual pleasure has never been more political. Let's consider what it might mean to go on a sex strike of sorts – to get what we want, rather than give what we think we owe others.
I don't hate this woman. I have enormous pity for her if she actually believes that sexual pleasure is political in any way. Sexual pleasure is one of the greatest gifts given to the human race and to reduce it to politics is, well, crazy.
But Ms. Martin isn't finished. Because women make so much less than men, a sex strike would actually empower women:
Resetting the balance so women no longer provide service sex is not in itself a comprehensive answer to gendered inequalities, of course. But making sex female-focused and female-pleasure-centric could begin to force other shifts in thinking in important ways. When we cease to consider what women like and want as foreplay and reframe it as the main event, for example, we begin to challenge, from the most intimate and private and emotionally powerful place, a long-accepted, deeply believed but nearly invisible world view, and make an impossible-to-miss statement about who and what counts. In the ancient Greek comedy by Aristophanes, the character Lysistrata urges women to go on a sex strike to get men on both sides to end the Peloponnesian War. In our case, a sex strike against service sex can be a powerful statement – that female desire, a metric of agency like women's votes, will be heard.
Another reason to pity this woman is that she's obviously never been in a truly loving relationship with a man – a real man, anyway. Perhaps she's the Obamacare Pajama Boy's girlfriend?
Would he even care if his girlfriend went on a sex strike? Perhaps he hasn't had sex at all? It's hard if you're living at home with Ma and Pa. Intimate relationships with women are a logistical nightmare. Where to do it? In the back of a car? Does he sneak his girl into the basement after his parents go to bed?
Clearly, Ms. Martin has had relationships only with "men" like Pajama Boy. Real men care about the real pleasure their women experience during sex and are supportive, loving, caring, nurturing, with all the manly virtues that this poor, deluded woman is unaware of.
Denying men sex is not the answer to greater political power or even more pleasure in the bedroom (although some men could probably use a wake-up call). How desperate and unhappy these women are! Sex is sex, and politics is politics, and the idea that you can conflate the two is a feminist intellectual construct that looks to make life itself a political arena.
The fact that Ms. Martin believes that women are incapable of being sexually fulfilled unless they are not in a monogamous relationship tells me this woman could never make any man – unless he is a cuckold – happy and content. I'm not saying this should be the goal in life of every woman – to make her man happy. It should be the goal of every married couple to make each other as happy as they can. Equal happiness, equal pleasure – these are the things that truly make life worth living, and this miserable woman will never experience that joy.
All of the women calling for a " Sex Strike " are Lesbians, so now what do they do....
Sheriff Joe
DA
Lets ask husker, her husband hasn't touched her in years I bet.
Sheriff Joe
DA
Sheriff Joe
DA
Gotta love Ca democrats,
Linda Sanchez withdraws bid to become chair of House Democratic Caucus after husband indicted on theft of public funds
NOVEMBER 9, 2018
Scandal has struck the leadership of the House Democrats as they prepare to take over that body. Representative Linda Sanchez, just re-elected to her ...
https://www.americanthinker.com/blo...usband_indicted_on_theft_of_public_funds.html
Linda Sanchez withdraws bid to become chair of House Democratic Caucus after husband indicted on theft of public funds
NOVEMBER 9, 2018
Scandal has struck the leadership of the House Democrats as they prepare to take over that body. Representative Linda Sanchez, just re-elected to her ...
https://www.americanthinker.com/blo...usband_indicted_on_theft_of_public_funds.html
Sheriff Joe
DA
What type of gun laws does Australia have?
Dramatic video: Melbourne police shoot suspected “known wolf” terrorist during attack
Ed Morrissey Nov 09, 2018 10:01 AM
Top Pick
“We are treating this as a terrorism incident
Dramatic video: Melbourne police shoot suspected “known wolf” terrorist during attack
Ed Morrissey Nov 09, 2018 10:01 AM
Top Pick
“We are treating this as a terrorism incident
Bruddah IZ
DA
Silly girl. What's next? She steered contacts toward her husband's business and affiliates?
Was Sanchez one of the family members who enjoyed junkets and other luxuries? Would the Democrat-dominated House care?
We’ll keep our eyes on this story because the mainstream media will have very little interest in it, since Trump and Republicans can’t be blamed.