General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsTime To Start Asking Republicans Directly: How Much Sex Is Too Much Sex?
One of the ways Conservatives pollute our moral and political discourse is that they get away with saying all kinds of repugnant things without having to come out and say them, which is how they keep their hard-core American Taliban base happy but also pick off enough low-information voters to make up the difference and win elections.
Most of the recent Conservative implosion is a direct result of their hard-core base going off the reservation and actually saying what they think out loud, in public. We should of course help them out with this at every opportunity, but it would also be great if they were just put on the spot more. Make them either say shit out loud, or force them to deny it. Either of those options is a loser for them, because it forces them to either alienate their base, or the low-info moderates they use to get to 51%.
If the Democrats want to insult the women of America by making them believe that they are helpless without Uncle Sugar coming in and providing them for them a prescription each month for birth control because they cannot control their libido or their reproductive system without the help of the government, then so be it.
...
Anyway, enough of trying to address all the tap-dancing conservatives are doing. Its clear that they both want to say that women who have non-procreative sex are Terrible Sluts but do not want to admit thats what theyre saying, because they also understand that theyre characterizing pretty much all adult women as Terrible Sluts. They should not be indulged in this desire. On the contrary! Huckabee himself said this: Let us take that discussion all across America because women are far more than the Democrats have played them to be. The discussion being, by his own measure, Do we believe American women are wonderful people or do we believe they have out-of-control libidos? I agree! This is a helpful conversation. I have long believed we need to lay it out on the table and stop dithering about red herrings like fetal life and religious freedom to impose your faith on your employees. We need to just have this discussion about sex and women and whether or not American women are having too much sex and whether or not too much sex means you dont deserve to be treated with respect.
However, I have one major problem with it. It seems the terms are ill-defined. We are a nation of quantifiers. When we say we control our eating or drinking, we mean we drink no more than X number of drinks or eat no more than X number of calories. We need to apply the same standard to the issue of controlling their libidos. Huckabee says he wants to have a discussion about whether or not women are in control or whether they need to be treated like a bunch of worthless slags. Okay. But we need to know: How do you tell a controlled libido from an uncontrolled one? We need to define our terms.
So I think the time has come. Huckabee said we need to have the discussion. The crowd fucking loved it. So heres questions reporters need to start asking Republicans:
How do we know if a woman is controlling her libido? Huckabee said it was when she didnt need to use contraception, but whats your definition?
Gary Bauer called Sandra Fluke a promiscuous coed. What makes someone promiscuous? How many sexual encounters before they cross the line from not-promiscuous to promiscuous?
If women who cant control their libidos are not respectable and the definition of not controlling your libido is using contraception, is that a lifetime thing? If a married woman has had all the children she wants to have, does she need to prove she can control her libido by never having sex with her husband again?
Rush Limbaugh claimed Sandra Fluke is having so much sex that her parents should be embarrassed. How much sex is it before it becomes embarrassing? Is there a lifetime cap on sexual encounters before youre an embarrassment, or is it more a yearly thing? Does having sex 10 times a year make you an embarrassment? Or is it more like having sex even once makes you an embarrassment?
Huckabee said a woman should be insulted by the suggestion that she needs contraception, because that indicates she cannot control her libido. Is contraception the only thing women should be insulted by? Should women also be insulted by the suggestion that they enjoy sex? Is the female orgasm an insulting concept?
Most importantly: What is it about having sex that is so terrible that women should be insulted at the suggestion that they have it, or have it too much, as defined by you?
Theres a lot of great questions that can be asked now that Huckabee has demanded a nationwide dialogue about womens sexual habits and whether or not they are degraded by sex and should be insulted at the very idea that they would do such a thing as have sex for fun instead of making babies. So yes, lets have that conversation. I think we should start today.
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/01/24/time-to-start-asking-republicans-directly-how-much-sex-is-too-much-sex/
Scuba
(53,475 posts)frazzled
(18,402 posts)is to ask WHOM these supposed slutty, libido-driven women in need of birth control are having sex WITH.
I mean really, if these women were having sex with themselves or with other women, they wouldn't need birth control. There are missing conspirators in this picture, and they need to be named. Where are the slutty, libido-driven men these women are having sex with?
If we're going to call women sluts who are having too much sex, we need equal attention given to their partners.
alarimer
(16,245 posts)A sort of Lysistrata gambit.
Everyone just stop sleeping with Republicans. Maybe they'll die out like the dodos that they are.
Viva_La_Revolution
(28,791 posts)madmom
(9,681 posts)I said it a little more bluntly... "Who the hell do they think these women are fucking anyway?"
pinboy3niner
(53,339 posts)In_The_Wind
(72,300 posts)Oh ... and I can control my libido.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)Why is it women's sexuality that is so goddamned scary to these neanderthals? Is it that men's sexuality is just taken for granted and not to be questioned?
PADemD
(4,482 posts)Ask him if he would prosecute and jail the banksters if he were President.
MissMillie
(38,560 posts)If you get pregnant, it's "God's will" and you should accept it
If you can't get pregnant, that's not "God's will" and you're perfectly allowed to try whatever fertility treatments you can get your hands on.
If a man can't get it up, that's not "God's will" and his insurance will cover whatever medication necessary to make sure he has a healthy sex life.
But women aren't allowed to have a healthy sex life unless they put themselves at risk for unwanted pregnancy--because well, it's "God's will."