Totalitarianism, Orgasims, Social Change

Why Women Had Better Sex Under Socialism - The New York Times:

It is important in the understanding of the Secular Humanist mind to realize that this is the NY Times, not "The Onion".

I read tons of books, meditate, think and pray on the topic of "meaning". Do we have a purpose? How do we discern it? What have great men of history had to say on this topic?  What is "the good" in life? I often lament that our Declaration of Independence says "Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness" as opposed to "pursuit of meaning, or service, or God's will, etc" ... Happiness is a byproduct, it can't be obtained by direct pursuit ... it is a very unfortunate mistake.

The Secular Humanist view is different. I open with their closing paragraph:

Those comrades’ insistence on government intervention may seem heavy-handed to our postmodern sensibilities, but sometimes necessary social change — which soon comes to be seen as the natural order of things — needs an emancipation proclamation from above. 

That is a good paragraph to ponder -- LOTS of "government intervention" ... gulags, secret police, building walls to keep people IN (the left was never bothered so much by that!); was worth it ... because? Well ...

A comparative sociological study of East and West Germans conducted after reunification in 1990 found that Eastern women had twice as many orgasms as Western women.

A rational person with any tiny understanding of human behavior, statistics, accuracy in self reporting / recollection" of different groups, etc, MIGHT find this "a bit" questionable. However, I'm going to to with it as gospel truth.Women in totalitarian socialist states have more and better orgasims! It's true! It's true!

While we are discussing "Havana", as in "baby I'm not from",  this wistfulness for socialist paradise reminds me of the joys of Castro lowering heart disease in the '90s. How did he accomplish this brilliant health success? Well, famine and starvation --- but hey, less heart attacks! Socialist success!

If one believes that material is all there is, and that love and consciousness, since non-measureable , are just as meaningless as "God", "Truth", and other unproveable things, then maybe they are "right"? In a purely physical, materialist world,  sexual release is probably as much an approximation for "the good" as anything else -- and likely better than many. For example, the "joy" of ritualistic killing of young virgin women, children, etc in rites almost as common in pagan cultures as various temple protitutes.

I suspect that many, even on the left, find it odd that the "big issues" of modern lefty "morality" come down to more and different sexual release. The pill! Abortion! freeing women to have more sex! Gays! Bi-sexuals! genders beyond belief (and imagination)! Perhaps that is the answer -- in a purely materialst world, sexual release is the "highest good" that can be scientifically verified and documented ... therefore,  the left dedicates themselves to more sexual release, even if it may need a little "heavy handed" state control as sort of a "totalitarian sex aid".

I did actually read the whole tedious article, and it is pretty easy to develop a hypothesis as to "why" ... guess what, most babies are born in July, August and September. Why? There tends to be less going on in the winter, nights are longer, days are shorter and, "things happen".  Give western women fullfilling jobs, lots of stuff to buy, lots of cool stores and malls to buy it in, health clubs, hair salons, all sorts of entertainment, etc, and sex is "one star in the sky" ...  when you are standing in line for toilet paper all day OTOH, there are next to no entertainment options, and there is nothing waiting for you at home except ...

Oh, and yes, I caught the "emancipation proclamation" allusion ... women are slaves, once the all powerful state issues the proclimation to free them, they can blissfully stand in line dreaming of  basic necessities and better orgasims! Socialist paradise!

Guesss what, the "revolution" is not likely to stop at tearing down statures of Civil War heroes!

'via Blog this'

Powerful Women And Trump

Every man should have a woman who looks at him the way the President of Croatia looked at Trump | Conservative News Today:

The relationship of women to alpha males is sometimes complex, but not always subtle.

While modern "science" and certainly politically correct socialization would tell you there is no such thing as gender, men and women are the same and sexuality is entirely a social construct, etc etc, we do actually still have male and female plumbing fittings (I'm sure that would have been outlawed had Hildebeast prevailed), and procreation actually still involes a certain ordered fitting of body parts.

So, sometimes powerful, confident females are attracted by males that stand above the other males both in physical and personal power. Obviously the women showing their "power" in pussy hats object to this sort of disply with the strongest whining they can muster.

It is as natural as "boy meets girl", which of course makes it abhorrent to the modern "progressive". Even worse from the leftist abandonment of personal responsibility standard, humans are entirely able (sometimes with significant difficulty) to not react to all our quite natural urges -- even on the left, the majority remain potty trained (so far), but same sex attraction is absolutely NOT controllable!

Since the left is certain that "Trump is Hitler", we might want to just consider the "small" difference between Trump and Hitler relative to his relations with the opposite sex. I understand that for the left, the only interesting sexuality is the current plethora of non-heterosexual options which of course are "major and defining" to every aspect of life, with no potential for character or conciousness to have an effect.

Here is a shot of the lefts favorite National Socialist with his final love interest -- you might want to look at a picture of Trump and Melania to see if you can detect slight differences.

Again, I realize that I am a moose of another time. Sexuality today is only significant when it is NON heterosexual, in which case it is the most significant part of a persons life and can't be ignored for even a second. I DO understand what I have been told -- it is just that the last shreds of independent thought have not quite been beaten out of me (yet)!

'via Blog this'