Click for Past Idiots Click for Past Idiots

Idiots, Insurgents,Intellectual Terrorists, they're everywhere. Let
Richard Woods keep you ahead of the game

In the past, I have taken many shots at the Christian Right wing of this country, and how they try to impose their own version of morality on others, rather than just attempt what seems to be impossible for them, live up to their own standards. Since the days of the Puritans, people have been attempting (often successfully) to gain power through fear and intimidation (like the Mafia). Only instead of threatening you with a bat across your kneecaps, or a .38 slug through the back of your skull, the various religious types will terrorize you with the threat of eternal damnation. Traditionally, this has much less to do with any god than it does with self-appointed, hate-filled, small-minded zealots forcing their views on others. Amazingly many people, in fact the majority of people have found themselves feeling guilty for having natural wants, needs and desires. The quandary that most of us find ourselves in is that we are made to feel ashamed because nature provides us with a libido.

By Demonizing women, religion in general has been able to control the minds of those willing to be led by imposing guilt shame and angst on those who have the gall to acknowledge biology. In some Muslim communities, they go so far as to “wrap up” women by not allowing them to show anything but their eyes, thus reducing them to a lower status on the social and economic scale... If not creating an atmosphere where women can be viewed as property.

Depending on where the Vanilla Cult has slotted you, (meaning what type of household you were born into), there is usually some kind of religion in place to establish this nonsense early in your lifetime, and by the time you have reached the age of consent, the burden someone bears from their upbringing can often paralyze their objectivity, if not their better judgment.

Thus far the Jews have escaped such criticism for me…but not this time. I submit the following:

Kosher Coupling
Shmuley Boteach

Should Wives Be Porn Police?

Why women have every right to insist on mental as well as physical fidelity.

About two years ago I agreed to debate the first openly Jewish Playboy playmate, Lindsey Vuolo, in New York City. My purpose was simple: to uphold the dignity of Jewish women, which is not consistent with taking their clothes off for money. From the beginning, however, it was clear that I had lost the debate. The room was filled with mostly leering men who came armed with the November issue of Playboy, asking for Lindsey's autograph. But what really disappointed me was all the women who came to cheer Lindsey's courage in not being ashamed of her body. What sane woman, who isn't motivated by financial profit, would support the portrayal of women as sport to entertain lecherous men?

Moreover, what wife is misguided enough to allow her husband to read Playboy?

Recently, we've seen the Kobe Bryant sex scandal and the publication of Hillary Clinton's memoir, which regurgitated the Monica Lewinsky story. I believe that these and other incidents are warnings to wives not to be naïve about the dangerous effects pornography-and opportunities for adultery-can have on a marriage. And they must do something about it. While Hillary bore her husband's betrayal with dignity, there is the legitimate question of whether she should have been keeping a far more watchful eye on her husband whose roving ways were well known, especially when he told her that he was spending time with an intern for the purpose of "guiding her life." Shouldn't an alarm have gone off in her head?

The idea of wives "policing" their husbands, of calling men to account for their behavior, might sound antiquated or petty, but I believe it is valid and, indeed, essential. When I've asked wives how they feel about their husbands looking at pornographic material, I've heard an astonishing range of answers. There are those who are quick to assert how "cool" they are with it and even claim to join in the viewing; and there are those who are utterly horrified but feel they have no right to object to their husband's adult behavior. But women must wake up to the fact that they do have a right to nip this behavior in the bud.

Pornography is destructive not only because it is insulting to one's wife, but because it takes one's erotic focus away from one's spouse. In this respect, the principal harm it inflicts is not radically different from adultery. When infidelity occurs, it destroys the marriage not only by causing hurt and humiliation, but by starving the marriage of attention, affection, and effort. The hurt that a husband causes his wife by being unfaithful is not, in itself, the deal-breaker in their marriage. The wives whom I have counseled through a husband's infidelity are prepared to forgive him if they love him. The real deal-breaker is the fact that the wife is no longer the focal point of his sexual and romantic energies. When husbands and wives are not wholly focused on one another as the means of finding erotic excitement, they begin to drift apart. Initially, men believe that a little peek at another woman's nudity is a harmless means of generating some excitement and certainly nothing as significant as an actual act of infidelity. But these "harmless" leers are the first symptoms of neglect.

There are so many ways in which pornography undermines healthy relationships. Excessive exposure to a variety of nude, female bodies contributes to the penchant for men to think about other women while making love to their wives. Indeed, 84 percent of men admit to doing just that (and they're dumb enough to believe that their wives don't notice). We can even go so far as to say that once you bring another woman into your bed, even if only mentally, you are practicing a form of mental infidelity and merely using your wife's body for friction. I call it mental decapitation. The Torah, which is very concerned with fostering the mental and emotional intimacy that physical intimacy is meant to promote, actually calls men to task by deeming it a prohibition for a man to fantasize about other women while in bed with his wife.

Unfortunately, as I discovered at the debate, women today are so brainwashed into being manly and tough that few will admit to being pained at the notion that their significant other would be dreaming of another woman during their intimate moments. But fantasizing about another woman is a degrading act. It indicates that one's wife is not worthy or thrilling enough on her own. Most men tell me that it is unrealistic not to sometimes think about other women during sex with one's wife. Perhaps that is so. But there is no excuse not to resist it.

Furthermore, pornography desensitizes men to the female body. Instead of being automatically drawn to a woman as he should be, today's man has seen too much to ever lose himself completely upon being exposed to a woman's nakedness. The nature of erotic attraction, which should bring men and women together, has been utterly compromised, and neither sex is above evaluating the other according to the most stringent criteria. This impairs our ability to build deep relationships. Sexual intimacy is meant to bring a couple together on emotional and mental levels. Once a man feels removed enough to judge his wife by comparing her with other women, he loses some of his excitement for her and mistakenly believes that a more perfectly formed woman would provide him with the physical titillation that he craves.

The irony lies in the fact that a real woman is infinitely more exciting than the manufactured images that attract the consumers of pornography. Rather than being a one-dimensional experience, interacting and allowing oneself to be aroused by a live partner--despite her apparent physical flaws--is ever-changing and therefore consistently exciting. Ultimately then, pornography deadens a man's attraction for his partner, which in turn deadens his ability to have healthy and sustainable passionate relationships.

The truly unfortunate element in the prevalence of pornography today is actually the acceptance that so many women silently or overtly provide by refusing to demand that their husbands (or serious boyfriends) turn off the computer and turn them on instead! Once upon a time, women were seen as and treated as man's superior. Today, women have leapt off of their pedestal to say that they are equal to men. When we hear of women accompanying their partners to strip clubs, we see why men no longer feel they have to make themselves worthy of such a sidekick. You can't convince me that women are actually enjoying the array of bras and G-strings while swigging back beers with the boys.

In her efforts to get closer to man, woman has lost her own uniquely feminine attributes, at a great cost to both genders. What happened to being a gentleman? Why isn't the party line that a man doesn't look at another woman because he doesn't need to and has too much respect for his wife to ever degrade her by making such a comparison? Why not? Simply put, because women today no longer require their men to be gentlemen.

When I've asked women about why they don't insist that their husbands turn off the cable smut or throw out the dirty magazines, the answers I receive fall resoundingly into two basic categories. The first is that many women believe that they have no right to determine what their husbands see or, especially, what they think. The second is a desire not to appear insecure, petty, or nagging. Yet it's not petty to demand that your husband be with you and you alone when you are in bed together. It's not nagging to show your hurt, your vulnerability.

How far we have sunk in our expectations of marriage and commitment! Once upon a time it was not politically incorrect to think of a husband and wife as belonging to one another. Today we are conditioned to think that independence is the be-all-and-end-all, and to be possessive is seen as an a priori sign of insecurity. Husbands and wives see each other as independent creatures who happened to be joined by the institution of marriage.

The staggering divorce rate is a symptom of this unfortunate conditioning. It's easy to sever a bond that wasn't that strong in the first place. But if you belong to one another, then you have a right to make demands of exclusivity in thought, speech, and action and to freely express that an action or behavior hurts you and to expect that your spouse, whose number-one concern is your happiness, to amend the hurtful behavior. When two people belong to one another, there is nothing they won't do to protect that bond.

In Judaism we are taught that everything belongs to G-d. It is not degrading to be so possessed and, in fact, the kippah [head covering] worn by men is a reminder and a symbol of that bond. Thus G-d makes demands upon us and we, in our attachment to Him, ask for what we need. Our intimate relationships reflect this divine relationship. We should never hesitate to insist that our needs be met by our husband or wife. Remember, you are not only married in body, but also in mind, heart and soul.

Wives have a right, indeed an obligation, to police their husbands from going into the gutter to get excitement. Miss November and her fellow playmates are women like all others. One day they'll marry and they'll be just as hurt and insulted if their husbands turn to strangers for excitement.

Boy, Shmuley (damn I love that name) can bullshit with the best of them huh? Jesus Christ in a space suit, this guy is hilarious. The very premise that he operates from is insulting to anyone who has the slightest ability to discern. I love the terms he uses, such as “Policing”, and “allow”, which by their very nature involve control, if not abuse, especially when it is behavior exhibited by a spouse. It implies that women are not sexual beings, and have no desires of their own. These estrogenical eunuchs seem to be nothing more than breeders, meant to bear children and perpetuate the species…for a woman to exhibit any type of sensuality she must be “giving in” and have no self esteem. What a bigoted insult to empowered women all over the world.

Now I realize that Shmules here doesn’t speak for all Jews, much in the same way that Franklin Graham doesn’t speak for all Christians, and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad doesn’t speak for all Muslims. Still it raises some real questions about religion in general, and how it can use guilt, fear and intimidation to make one deny nature and biology. I’ve stated in UnLEARN!… that religion is the most powerful tool the Vanilla Cult uses to make people conform. Religion invariably becomes less about loving and understanding, more about self-righteous indignation. This is one particular Rabbi’s interpretation of God’s will, and he feels compelled to tell us all how God wants us to act. Of course, the reality is that when it all boils down, this is him playing the role of God’s messenger in your life (if not God himself). In this case, religion even gets a certain flock to all dress the same. I’m dying to know where in the Old Testament, the Torah, or the Hebrew Handbook it says to wear a brimmed hat and overcoat? If tomorrow, Lutherans all decided to wear Spiderman costumes as a way to distinguish themselves from the rest of us we’d think they went friggin’ nuts. Hell, Mormons don’t even dress alike and we all think they’re not wrapped too tightly…But this is what the fear of an invisible omnipotent force of creation whose will is interpreted by a few fanatical self-important nutjobs can do to people. “Hey, God wants you to wear this, you’d better do it or he’ll be pissed.”

Hari Krishna… Krishna Krishna.

You would think that with the history, certain people would be more conscious of extremist, fundamentalist points of view… Remember March 23, 1933…. The history of sexuality is that it has always been persecuted (sound familiar?) The history of religion has brought us such notable things as the Spanish Inquisition, the Crusades, The World Trade Center, The Gaza strip, Salem Massachusetts, the Kafr Qasim massacre, suicide bombers, and something that we might have read about called the Holocaust. It always seems to be the people with the “other” religion who are responsible for the violence.

It would seem that the war over religion is around for as long as there has been a ruling class, and people who need to keep control. To this day the economics of religion are staggering, and like any other army, they need recruits. The assault on sexuality is just another method of pressuring the easily led to be coerced. “Join our chorus, we’ll give you the key to the vault of knowledge of wisdom, and the key to the gates of heaven. We love you and want you. Here’s a gun.” Be all that you can’t be.

Hey Rabbi Boteach… you need a rim job from an orally talented professional, and a nice heaping plate of pork ribs.