As restraint on female sexuality has been removed, wealth inequality has increased. This is a natural outcome of the breakdown of morality caused by lack of restraint on women. As men are forced to compete with each other for sex, the bonds and trust between men in a society are broken and men feel free to screw each other over for their own benefit. It is no accident that the wealth disparity in America began increasing immediately after the sexual revolution and has been steadily increasing since.
70 comments
Men screw other men over because women have greater freedom?! Buddy, i hate to break it to you, that was happening long, long, LOOOOOONG before women's lib.
Hate to break it to you, bucko. The evils of the world did not come about because the mean old wimminfolk forgot their place. And with an attitude like that, it's small wonder you can't get laid.
Wasn't there a song from The Roaring Twenties that bemoaned the fact that the rich get richer and the poor get poorer?
Long story short, don't blame the fact that you can't get laid on anyone other than yourself.....
This guy again? (sigh) " Blah, blah, blah, I hate women, blah, blah blah." Give it a rest you misogynistic dirtbag.
Wealth disparity starting with the sexual revolution? The rich have been screwing the poor throughout the history of the United States and long before that. Men will screw over each other for more than just competition for women.
And men have been competing with each other for sex since prehistory. It's a simple part of nature. To say that women are causing it because they aren't sexually restrained is just plain stupid.
I know several strong women who would be happy to separate from more than his wealth - I mean his 'happy' bits. That would put some restraint on him, no doubt. Luckily for him they live on another continent, separated from his by an ocean.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't the sexual revolution make it easier to find casual sex, not harder?
If it's so bad with unrestrained sexuality, let's restrain the sexuality of men, for a change.
This is not fundamentalism. Not all opinions critical of the sexual revolution are fundamentalist. I don't see how someone can look at this and roar with laughter at the lunacy and dogmatism of the speaker. At worst, it's misguided and a little silly, and excessively resentful of women's liberation.
Can we go back to laughing at actual fundamentalists? A good solution might be to start a "misogynists say the darndest things" for those FSTDT-fundamentalists who are a little too interested in telling fschmidt to die in a fire.
So sick of this guy. I think we should stop posting his stuff. It's beyond a joke now. It's going to become fschmidt says the darndest things soon.
Plus I think he likes the attention. Better not to feed the troll.
Yeah, because Victorian Englad had so much wealth equalty and women's rights.
O wait. It didn't
This guy must be a Poe. Each comment of his keeeps getting dumber and more inflamatory.
Yeah, men never stabbed each other in the back until the 60's.
fschmidt is just jealous he never got a zipless fuck.
The wealth disparity coincides with Reagan Republicanism, and his reintroduction of the same so-called conservative ideology that brought us the Great Depression.
Further, before the sexual revolution, when women had few choices in employment, they were fored to marry for money and security, so men's only chances of securing a partner lay through their ability to compete against other men to earn a good enough living to provide for a woman.
Actually, no, Western society has pretty much always had this ruthless individualistic streak. It's millennia old. About the only reason it seems more rampant today is that technology now allows it to happen on a much larger scale.
He's right, you know. There's an omnipotent cosmic Jewish zombie who asks us to telepathically accept him as our master and symbolically eat his flesh because a rib-woman was convinced by a talking snake to eat from a magical tree about six thousand years ago.
Damn you, rib-woman! Damn you to hell!
You want serious wealth inequality? Look at countries where women are still treated like property then tell me that these women are better off economically.
Oh, and men and women have always had to compete with each other for sex. It's part of natural selection and it occurs in every species. What do you think things like rutting and mating dances are all about? And why do you think stallions will fight to the death over a mare in heat? The winner likely has better genes and gets to pass them on (provided the female is actually willing; attempted rape in the animal kingdom has a tendency to end with the female injuring or killing the offending male).
Anyway, I'd like to see "Sexists say the darndest things" start up soon. This isn't fundy, but it keeps coming up and it's fun to mock.
As men are forced to compete with each other for sex, the bonds and trust between men in a society are broken
Read the story of David, Uriah and Bathsheba in 2 Samuel. Read Chaucer's "Knight's Tale" and the battle between Palamon and Arcite for the hand of Emily. Read the Aeneid and the rivalry of Turnus and Aeneus over Lavinia. Men have always been competing with each other for sex.
Because I can't bring myself to believe that fschshit has ever had anything to do with a real woman I think he's blaming the alleged wealth inequality on these...
Pictured: Frank Schmidt with "wife" (and former levis model ;p)
image
"It's automation taking over I tells ya!"
Did this guy missed the Great Depression or the Industrial Revolution when he studied history?. I understand now why he homeschool his kids, just in case they think that their father is a nutcase(if they exist, that is)
So nobody prior to 1960 had ever heard of greed, rape, nepotism, war, violence, selfishness or anger and if they have now, it's women's fault. Right. Idiot.
Suuuuure it is. *pats OP on the head*
I also second the motion for an MSTDT, partly for organizational purposes and partly to acknowledge that misogyny doesn't always go hand-in-hand with religious fundamentalism (religious fundies are likely misogynists, but not all misogynists are necessarily religious).
Wealth disparity is not a bad thing in itself. As long as the poor are also getting better, I'm glad to see the Buffetts and the Gates getting richer. Their generosity has done more to benefit the poor of the world than my country's government has during its entire existence.
Informer
For more on fschmidt, check out his website: http://n2.nabble.com/CoAlpha-Brotherhood-f2773288.html
He is making a group of fellow misogynists so they can find non-Western wives for each other.
fschmidt is married to a Mexican woman who does not speak English and encourages other men to do the same.
Crikey!! When it's laid out in such an incredibly common sense manner, the conclusion is painfully obvious.
Such clear reasoning can only come from the mind of a critical thinking xtian.
As restraint on female sexuality has been removed, wealth inequality has increased.
Yeah, right.
On a side note, the stork bird populations have declined the last decades, while birth rates have also declined in the western countries. This proves beyond doubt (*ahem*) that the stork brings the babies.
Or in other words: "fschmidt", first learn about proper logic. Then make a statement. Not the other way round.
Yes, just look at Somalia and Egypt, and see how much more stable and prosperous they are, compared to Sweden.
“As restraint on female sexuality has been removed, wealth inequality has increased.”
“This is a natural outcome of the breakdown of morality caused by lack of restraint on women.”
"As men are forced to compete with each other for sex, the bonds and trust between men in a society are broken and men feel free to screw each other over for their own benefit.”
"It is no accident that the wealth disparity in America began increasing immediately after the sexual revolution and has been steadily increasing since.”
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.
