Forty years ago, it started. Forty years ago, there was no nudity and rarely foul language in movies or on tv. Forty years ago, “no one” lived together. The college debate topic in 1968 was whether living together before marriage was a good idea. As a debate team member, I remember that there was virtually no usable sites in US literature. Everyone knew who the "girls" were who "did it." Drugs were something that were done on skid row. There were 3 sexually transmitted diseases that were of concern to the US Medical community. They were all under control with penicillin and other wonder drugs.
Three years later, in 1969, the major news magazines declared that the three years between 1966 and 1969 saw the most radical change in social mores in history.
By 1969, it was de rigor to sleep with your future mate before marriage, and probably live with them first. Sex between virtual strangers, including orgies were common on college campuses. Drugs of every kind, including the new LSD and others were common. Deep Throat attracted main stream Americans into the theaters.
But we were assured that this was great for society. Twenty five years later the main remaining source of poverty was single moms. Twenty five years later there were 27 sexually transmitted diseases, many of them at epidemic levels. Twenty five years later kids were having kids at levels never seen before in an advanced nation. Twenty five years later gangs were controlling the street. According to many sociologists and penal authorities, it was because these young men didn’t have dads in their lives.
Out of control sexual behavior. Natural consequences. See other posts under the topic Sex Kills and Porn at Http://www.ideaplace.blogspot.com
Article comments
— go to most recent comments1 - sydney
In all honesty Randy, I don't know why I bother, but I feel I have to tell you off because you make me sick.
I really find your shit offensive and I would like nothing better than beat some sense into you.
You said earlier that you arn't here to evangelize. Well it sounds to me like your evangleizing. Are you not espousing a moral philosophy and suggesting that God is going to condemn are assess if we don't follow your interpretation of the bible? That is evangelism. You are an evangelist, amoung other things.
Please, just remove your posts and go to some other nether-region of the internet. I'm dieing here reading your shit..
2 - ms. kitka
THANK YOU, SYDNEY, for your short but sweet rebuttle... Randy has no idea what he's talking about. He's too clouded by his faith to realize what really holds the world back. Christianity has held the world back for so many centuries... science was unable to progress because the church ruled the people. If Christianity had never got this popular, we would have been more educated sooner... we would have had advanced math sooner and we would have all known about the motion of the Earth and space itself. Currently, Christianity is holding us back with stem cell research... thanks to the Christian overlord Emperor Bush. Idiot.
3 - sydney
well, thank you ms. Kitka I don't quite go as far as you, since I am a christian myself. But... I'd like to say, don't let randy represent all Christians. He's a mixed up fellow.
But I have to say,...the Christains here in America seem to be of a different variety than the ones I knew growing up in Canada.
I notice your a ms. I'm a single at the moment..
Wouldn't it be ironic if we hooked up here at Randy's post, and had un-consecrated sex. Where you at? :-)
4 - Randy Kirk
I'm old and confused.
1. I care about people. Even strangers. Have all my life. Do you?
2. I can't make you do anything or stop doing anything. I'm just one voice in the wilderness. But I feel as though you feel threatened by me. I don't feel threatened by you.
3. I'm not proposing laws, but some might be a good idea. I'm only discussing natural consequences of acts. If you smoke it has consequences. If you drink too much, it has consequences. If you bite your fingernails it has consequences. If you attempt to cross a minefield without map or mine detector, it has consequences. If I was offering you a map to a minefield that you had to cross, would you be offended?
4. You seem to fear me or my ideas. What great and horrible consequence do you foresee if I continue to talk or publish my ideas?
5. Some feel it necessary to insult me or act rudely. Do you believe that this adds to the conversation?
6. Some seem to think that blogcritics is a private club for folks who think a certain way. Is it?
5 - Temple Stark
>>6. Some seem to think that blogcritics is a private club for folks who think a certain way. Is it?
About the only consensus I can find among Blogcritics is that we're all against:
1 ) Being judged by self-described experts, especially people who come out of the gate as if their words are ordained by God.
2) Extremism in language and views. (Though people's ideas of extremism vary.)
3) One view of the world being right and the rest wrong.
4) Someone posting too often and dominating the site.
No. 4 is a strong hint. You might take a look around the site and your audience more before feeling shocked and opressed to get a better idea of what to expect. It may improve your writing and your way of discussion (or destroy both LOL )
- Temple, has a role at this site.
6 - sydney
Well you got me feeling a little bit sorry for you Randy. I don't mean to brake your spirit completely, but you have to understand how offensive your methods are. Temple Sharks rules really are sound advice for a guy like you. Despite the fact that I've broken rule #4 tonight also...
So I've suspended my anger for a few hours. Going out to get drunk. But really, I don't know to what degree I should feel sorry for a person like yourself... I wish I understood you a little better.
7 - Temple Stark
Stark. Stark. Stark :-0
8 - Nicolette Rivers
***1. I care about people. Even strangers. Have all my life. Do you?***
Yes, me too. Just because people disagree with you doesn't mean they don't care for people or are "bad."
One of the things I care about is how much damage is done by telling people there is only one acceptable way to be sexual.
***2. I can't make you do anything or stop doing anything. I'm just one voice in the wilderness. But I feel as though you feel threatened by me. I don't feel threatened by you.***
I'm not threatened -- what I am is annoyed by people spewing illogical beliefs. Any of my friends can tell you that I don't have patience for people who don't make sense.
Every ill that you are ascribing to sex is really having to do with irresponsibity or the abuse of another human being.
You refuse to acknowledge that some people might be able to view porn or have more open sex lives and be happy, well-adjusted and responsible. Instead you chose to base your proof on borderline rapists, porn addicts, and women who were abused.
What you are talking about is akin to putting everyone on a diet 'cause a whole lot of people are fat. But, again, you are more interested in lust than gluttony.
***3. I'm not proposing laws, but some might be a good idea. I'm only discussing natural consequences of acts. If you smoke it has consequences. If you drink too much, it has consequences. If you bite your fingernails it has consequences. If you attempt to cross a minefield without map or mine detector, it has consequences. If I was offering you a map to a minefield that you had to cross, would you be offended?***
Choices do have consequences. Unfortunately your theory of the cause and effect is all out of whack.
You are not offering anyone a map for a minefield...you are offering an opinion. One that has more holes in it than Swiss Cheese.
***4. You seem to fear me or my ideas. What great and horrible consequence do you foresee if I continue to talk or publish my ideas?***
You just said that there are natural consequences to acts. There is a natural consequence to posting in a place where many disagree with you.
You either step up your game or learn to ignore.
***5. Some feel it necessary to insult me or act rudely. Do you believe that this adds to the conversation?***
You have felt the need to imply that anyone not taking a vow of chastity or unwilling to have sex according to your guidelines is depraved. Think that adds to the conversation?
***6. Some seem to think that blogcritics is a private club for folks who think a certain way. Is it?***
Have you bothered to read other people's blogs? Often there are controversial opinions and debates. But if you post something absurd and flawed you'll hear it. We are adults here and there are no free rides. You make a statement -- particularly a controversial one -- and you need to be prepared to defend it. And not by quoting yourself.
The years you are focusing on were also the years where a lot happened with civil rights and equal rights for women? Also Roe Vs Wade...any issues there?
9 - JoJo
Poor spelling...isn't there legislation pending against poor spelling? and using...ellipses?
10 - RJ
"I really find your shit offensive and I would like nothing better than beat some sense into you."
How in the hell is this post "offensive"? Why does it warrant an urge for a physical attack?
11 - HW Saxton
I do not see anything written here that
would justify any kind of attack.Be that
verbal,physical or otherwise.
Perhaps the authors opinions are rather
provincial.But your attack is really out
of line,Syd. Out of curiousity just what
exactly was said to make you put this
writer on your (s)hit list ? Curious.
If it's because he's espousing religion,
I'll agree there ARE more appropriate
forums for this. But since that does not
seem to be the case, what was it that he
did? I'm not defending Christianity and
would be happy if no religion at all was
discussed here(secular bastard that I am
I am)but I truly feel you over reacted,
Sydney.
12 - Randy Kirk
Back from youngest son�s baseball practice, so would like to see if I can get to some middle ground with some of you. It is an interesting environment to have multiple positions and attitudes to deal with at one time. I have tried to name the person whose comment I was addressing, but in the last list I didn�t. Therefore may have painted with a wide brush. For that I apologize.
I found Nicolettes response the most well reasoned, so will attempt to shed some light on who I really am by that response.
***Yes, me too. Just because people disagree with you doesn't mean they don't care for people or are "bad."***
Some of the comments appeared to be insensitive to others in our community who might be harmed by the consequences of inappropriate (you suggest irresponsible or abusive) sex.
***One of the things I care about is how much damage is done by telling people there is only one acceptable way to be sexual.***
There is not, nor have I implied, that there is only one way to be sexual. I don�t even think there is only one way to be sexual that will result in the best possible consequences. I do believe based on solid research from multiple sources, and my own experience in counseling others, that there are many unacceptable ways to be sexual and many sexual activities that result in great damage. Not only to the participants, but to their children, friends, etc.
***I'm not threatened -- what I am is annoyed by people spewing illogical beliefs. Any of my friends can tell you that I don't have patience for people who don't make sense.***
Some seemed threatened. They couldn�t go on with the discussion, felt they needed to hurt me, etc. I admit to be overly patient with people who don�t make sense. However, only rarely in all of this discussion has anyone with any authority been able to give a counter to my arguments using any kind of citations (even remote ones that they can�t give an exact link to.
***Every ill that you are ascribing to sex is really having to do with irresponsibility or the abuse of another human being.***
There are many individuals who are involved in any act dealing with porn. To the extent that anyone purchases porn or is an audience for it, they encourage the production of it. Based on all studies, the individuals who are acting in these are almost always under some kind of duress, have a mental or emotional problem, etc. Thus those who take advantage are exploiting people they don�t even know who very likely are in a great deal of pain.
***You refuse to acknowledge that some people might be able to view porn or have more open sex lives and be happy, well-adjusted and responsible. Instead you chose to base your proof on borderline rapists, porn addicts, and women who were abused.***
I think there are cases when this does happen. I think there are more cases when hubby is putting pressure on his wife to watch or do things she doesn�t want to. I think there are more cases when one partner is very upset or would be if they knew the other was doing porn.
***What you are talking about is akin to putting everyone on a diet 'cause a whole lot of people are fat. But, again, you are more interested in lust than gluttony.***
My mother-in-law just died 6 months ago. She was severely overweight. I made many suggestions with regard to the health consequences. My partner is very overweight. I make many suggestions and encourage him to get the weight down. If you�re happy being overweight, don�t mind the physical stress and strain, the shortened life span, and the appearance issues, then go for it. I will undoubtedly, as lovingly as possible, try to be a nudge.
***Choices do have consequences. Unfortunately your theory of the cause and effect is all out of whack.***
Be specific
***You are not offering anyone a map for a minefield...you are offering an opinion. One that has more holes in it than Swiss Cheese.***
27 sexually transmitted diseases, many of which are not even remotely discouraged by condoms (HPV, etc.) with sterility, warts, horrible itching, death as possibilities. That is a minefield. My map is only have sex with one partner after marriage. (I didn�t succeed at this, by the way, and regret it.)
Randy 4. You seem to fear me or my ideas. What great and horrible consequence do you foresee if I continue to talk or publish my ideas?***
Nicolette You just said that there are natural consequences to acts. There is a natural consequence to posting in a place where many disagree with you.
You either step up your game or learn to ignore.
I�m not thin skinned at all. I have done hundreds of radio interviews on secular radio, hosted my own talk show for 3 years, and appeared on the old Geraldo show regarding bisexuality I have been insulted and yelled at on many a show. However, some of the comments said that they feared where my ideas would lead.
***You have felt the need to imply that anyone not taking a vow of chastity or unwilling to have sex according to your guidelines is depraved. Think that adds to the conversation?***
If you believe I have implied that, you are very mistaken. Read my words. I�m very poor at implying. I talk straight off the shoulder.
***Have you bothered to read other people's blogs? Often there are controversial opinions and debates. But if you post something absurd and flawed you'll hear it. We are adults here and there are no free rides. You make a statement -- particularly a controversial one -- and you need to be prepared to defend it. And not by quoting yourself.***
Some seem not very adult. Several others are very articulate. But I still find there is a lack of detail in the arguments in favor of porn, or in disputing my ideas.
***The years you are focusing on were also the years where a lot happened with civil rights and equal rights for women? Also Roe Vs Wade...any issues there?***
Civil RIghts, excellent.
Women�s rights, mixed bag. I�d like to see less anomie� in the roles
I�d like to see more women who desire to be stay at home moms be able to afford to do so. I�d like to see more balance in women taking responsibility for their foibles, and not merely dissing men.
Abortion. Take a wild guess. If a building was being torn down, and someone watching the action said there was a child in the basement, but others said no there wasn�t, do you think there would be a major effort to determine if there was, before the building was demolished.
Sorry to be so wordy.
13 - Duane
Self-professed Christian, Sydney, threatens to "beat some sense" into Randy, then propositions Ms. Kitka, all in the fine tradition of walking the Lord's path. Christianity ain't what it used to be.
14 - dee
Randy..in 1969 I was a teen ager. I was sleeping with a boy I was not married as were many of my friends. It was the sixties,man. You must not have lived thru the sixties. People did have sex and they were not married. They just did not talk about it. But there were alot of ten pound preemies born to people married less than the nine months it takes to make a baby.
Men were beating their wives senseless and you did not hear about it because no one talked about it. Children were being sexually and physically abused but you did not hear about it because no one talked about it. It was all a big secret.
Ah, man, where were you in in the sixties if you did not see the drugs on campuses and other places?
Then people started talking about it. Women found out they did not have to settle for men who beat them and moved out to find their own way in the world. Children found out that people would believe them if they told about the uncle who snuck into their bedroom at night and it just seemed to snowball.
Yes we may have gone over board on some things. But do we really need to go back to a time when people closed thier eyes to what was going on around them?
There are things I do agree with you on. I do not think you deserved the nast attacks that came your way for simply stating your opinion on things.
15 - HW Saxton
I just looked up "Contradiction" in my
dictionary. Sydney's picture was where
the definition should've been.
16 - Tom French
Wow, I like to blame religion for a lot of things, but wanting to beat up Mr Kirk for attributing a moral slide to sex and drugs doesn't sound like an evangelical position.
Everyone who posted must have some history with Mr Kirk, because from just reading this one post it sounds like a valid opinion.
I also looked at the top ten posters list and Temple Stark was there but Mr Kirk was not, so how can you say that he posts too much.
17 - Nicolette Rivers
Randy -
You keep on missing that the the negative effects are not cause by sex, but by irresponsibility.
I know and have known a lot of people who have been involved in porn; none of the people I have known seemed to be under duress. I've written erotica for many years and enjoy it and it has been completely by choice.
My husband freely views porn and he is a good man who comes home to be every singe evening...rarely even ten minutes late.
The people who regret their sexual decisions are going to often not take persona responsibility if they can avoid it. The people that are abused are going to not have a realistic perception of healthy sexuality. And both of these groups very well might seek refuge in religion.
I said your view was like telling everyone they had to diet because many people were fat. Your response had very little to do with my point, although you did share about your family. The point was that not everyone has suffered from viewing porn or more open lifestyles and therefore it is incorrect to expect everyone -- including the many people who are well-adjusted -- to embrace the lifestyle that you deem fit.
To clarify where you asked for clarification: everything we do has consequences. Responsible choices tend to lead to better consequences. Bad decisions tend to lead to negative consequences.
And sometimes people do the right things and bad things still happen, but it does not mean the action was bad. I once heard of a woman who became paralyzed trying to save her dog from a fall.
Maybe we should ban dogs; they are dangerous. They paralyze people, and bit them, and have fleas, and get rabies, and...
18 - gonzo marx
it appear to your humble Narrator that most of the ills described by the Articles Poster don't really stem from sex itself..
but from a lack of taking personal Responsibility for one's actions
when approached form this angle..much progress can be made by helping to educate young folks in the science of critical thinking as well as cause and effect
i do take some Issue with the bit about 3 versus 27 STD's...as far as i am Aware there has only been one brand new STD under the sun..HIV/AIDS...whose source is still under debate...i find it disturbing whenever anyone attempts to cast aspersions on sufferers from this modern Plague merely because of it's vectors of transmission
that leaves umm..23 diseases that the Poster asserts are brand new diseases?
i would like some links to a medical reference for such a claim before i could even begin to take it seriously
also, when presenting some statistics, please ensure they are modified by the changes in communications as well as increases in populations and effecincies of gather data due to technological and sociological advances...
pet peeve of mine is how some folks can cherry pick stats and data to present favorable "factoids" for their opinions, but do not take into account all the variables for formulating an accurate Equation or comparison
i know..nothing funny from the Jester here...but i'm trying to be a good puppy...and while i strongly disagree with Randy Kirk here on many issues put forward so far...i will try and remain civil until i am given cause to do otherwise...
one last bit here..Randy Kirk sez..
*My partner is very overweight. I make many suggestions and encourage him to get the weight down*
you say "partner" and "him"...am i correct then that you are an unmarried female with a live in partner? if not, might i ask for elucidation..it may help in understanding just where you are coming from and allow for a greater level of communication...
i hope this helps..
Excelsior!
19 - Randy Kirk
The statistics are well known and available online including CDC and elsewhere. No one disputes that numerous new STD's have come on the scene. Some virtually unknown ones have flourished.
I am married (2nd time) for 18 years. I have two adopted daughters 2 sons and 2.8 grand children (one due in 4 weeks.)
My partner and I own a manufacturing business which produces California Springs, Trek, and Extreme Bicycle Water Bottles, and MR. Tuffy bicycle inntertube protectors.
My book, A Generation Betrayed: Its Time to End the Sexual Revolution, was published in 1993 by Huntington House. I have three published books about bicycle retailing, and my second on running a small business due in February under the Warner Books label.
20 - gonzo marx
thaks for the background info....it does help a bit..
Randy sez..
* No one disputes that numerous new STD's have come on the scene.*
ummm..i just disputed it and asked for a reference..i find no such mention on the CDc site...but maybe i need to do more digging, since i am not a medical doctor i may be missing something
i find the "virtually unknown" bit to be disturbingly vague...
it has been quite common, historically..for such diseases to be unknown in one geographical area, but common in another...until those two cultures meet...then, like any other disease, a spreading occurs...
this is the same no matter what the vector of transmission
good luck with your business
but i am sorry to say we will just have to disagree with some of the tenets involved in the philosophy you espouse
i will say that i admire anyone that tries to help others, i consider that a basic tenet of Ethics...my problems stem from some of your basic Postulates and the Hypothesis you draw form them...
i understand that this is in large part due to the difference between my personal Thoughts and the tenets of your Faith, and i will not insult you by attempting to change or belittle your Beliefs...
be forewarned that this Jester's purpose is to point out when the "emperor has no clothes"...and it is my Opinion that some of your "theories" fall into that category...
i hope that helps to explain...
Excelsior!
21 - htom
1968? Oh, it's all a blur ... not. At least for me, scotch and tobacco were the drugs, one illegal, one not. Not so for most of my companions, who didn't care for scotch and had lots of "wackybacky". Sex ... well, the pill was beyond popular. That actually having sex was illegal was ignored.
22 - Lono
sex kills? Lemme give you a tip, sex made you! Sex made me, and it continues to make me very happy.
As for drugs, this is a point I have been wanting to make publically for years. The problem with a lot of drugs is mis-information. Of course drugs can ruin your life... that is totally true.
but what they don't tell you is that if you are very safe and plan according drugs can be a shitload of fun.
seriously.
I hope we didn't come off as intolerant though, Randy. You truly are a unique voice in our environment and for that you should be applauded. You are totally welcome to post your nutjob end of the world rants here whenever you want. In fact, I look forward to them.
seriously
23 - Dave Nalle
Anyone notice how bizarrely unfitting the title of the original post is? There's not actually anything in the article about sex killing and there's certainly no proof of anything.
Dave
24 - Temple Stark
Posts are the articles, not comments. There have been a flood of similarly minded writers who signed on this week and they turned the site a little. All together their posts made the site appear to be dogmatically one way.
Clearly the site is not.
There was some reaction -Satirical Wal-slut pieces and, mostly comments - to this domination, by a mind-set that was not as wholly represented before.
Faith is what it is and is not easily discussed when "judgment" is the first order of the day. It is also not easily discussed when people start denying that is their POV, when it is.
25 - gonzo marx
bah..they tempt me to start my own blog and join the sinister cabal!!
isn't that a sign of the Apocalypse?
Excelsior!