| | This has gone on long enough! By what objective standard is it an expression of self-esteem to pay a girl for a lap dance?
You have a perfect political right -albeit in abeyance - to smoke crack cocaine, but it is not pro-life to do so.
As for the "biddies" - by which you mean bitches: calling women dogs - they lost their youth and beauty being wives and mothers -- at a time when dysentery, cholera, and typhoid killed half their children, when the median life expectancy was below 50 and likely only 35. They washed their family's clothing by hand, for hours at a time in soaps that they likely made themselves from ashes and fats... when not churning butter, mending clothing, and cooking all day on a wood-fired stove - those that had stoves and not mere fireplaces.
What you consider by today's standards "beautiful" women of the 19th century were idealized abstractions which did not exist, or else were the idle rich.
When you respond positively to the physical attractiveness of another human being, you are reflecting your own view of the best in human nature, whether or not that person actually possesses such virtues.
When you demean a woman for not being physically attractive according to an arbitrary cultural standard, you negate her mind. You negate her mind when you pay her for your own momentary sexual stimulation.
|
|
Denouncing masculine oppression, Women's Lib screams protests against the policy of regarding women as "sex objects"—through speakers who, too obviously, are in no such danger.
