In Reply to: Re: Go on please posted by romantic reflections on March 02, 2003 at 17:14:09:
I’m going to step in here, I totally agree with Ms. “R” that the consequences for the free-sex were radically different for women as opposed to men. Which gender carries a baby 9 mos and simultaneously cares for other little ones while preparing meals and cleaning after everyone so teams could go out and raise money? The argument here is not about whether women enjoy sex or not, but the situation surrounding the act. A sexual encounter can either be the most beautiful experience on earth or one of the most humiliating, devastating and emotionally damaging experiences that will scar one for life. Women are more vulnerable because in our society and in most societies in fact, women are trained to follow and be submissive, couple that with several children tying you down to the kitchen and home and there is no room for dissent. While it’s true that some women in the F. were able to milk this part of the cult experience to their advantage, that would have to be the exception rather than the norm. Most husbands and/or brothers would not be satisfied taking on the role of Mr. Mom while mom is out “preaching” at the local disco or fishing hole. No, I rarely saw it, though I did see it on 3 or 4 occasions and usually those were women who were very manipulative, bullish and had husbands who were subservient. They selfishly used the scenario to their own advantage while their many children languished in other people’s care or the children’s fathers became house maids. Again, as I saw it, this was the exception and not the norm. No, women want to be loved and nurtured, men appear to be programmed to ejaculate and not give a second thought as to whom they are having this encounter with. Why is it we see female prostitutes but not men prostitutes? Maybe we do, but not out on the street offering a blow job for $20 to any John walking by. Most women would not stoop so low, the need is simply not there.