Thursday, March 28, 2013

Karezza is dangerous & abusive - teaches us to be afraid of orgasms, very afraid

Shocker: Science reveals orgasms feels good.

Shocker: Science also shows certain drugs feel good.

Drug abuse - bad and therefore orgasm - bad.


art credit:
Welcome to the world of blue balls, prostate cancer, and inflamed epididymides & seminal vesicles.

And welcome once again to the world of sexual shaming, first brought to you by religious fucks, and now later by New Age nut jobs.

In Karezza they really really like orgasm avoidance, and fear about the natural hormonal & neurochemical cycles that come with sex.

One good example of all this bull is at the site

Worrying about orgasming too soon is one thing. Yes, you should try to go longer. But not too long! Going days on end with painful blue balls, or having your partner "milk" your prostate so that you can avoid orgasm - that is wacky, strange, unnatural, and not healthy.

A relevant quote from these idiots:
...karezza is a gentle, affectionate form of intercourse in which orgasm is not the goal, and ideally does not occur in either partner while making love...
Karezza is not gentle. Worrying about whether you can avoid orgasming AT ALL is not gentle nor loving.

Karezza is not kind. Fearing orgasm, and having orgasm avoidance as the IDEAL situation, is not loving nor kind.

Kerezza is dangerous claptrap bullshit.

Further quote from:
"...Marnia admits that she and her husband are not religious, both enjoy orgasms, and feel no sexual guilt. They simply feel very convicted about this one idea: orgasm addiction is an undercover problem, creating chaos between our sheets!..."
...misleading doubletalk. And being fearful of sex the same way one fears cocaine really is abusive. Sex is about life. Sex is about love. Sex is love. And so is orgasm. "Chaos between the sheets" - yes, that is part of sex. Don't be afraid of the wonderful chaos. Don't be afraid of the cycles of life. The ups and downs of life that come through sex - yes, you should learn to deal with them & embrace them, not be afraid of them.

Teaching people to avoid orgasm, as the ideal situation, really is abusive. That's the bottom line.

Here's a good quote I found at another site:
"...if someone said lets have sex but you won’t have an orgasm, I think most of us would rather go to bed...So on that note, I call Bullshit on Karezza, because sex without an orgasm is like hunger with no food"
As at

Fear the natural normal consequence of sex: orgasm! 

Teach your children to fear masturbation and what an orgasm might do to their brains Orgasms & brains - oh my, they should never mix!

...sounds all damn similar to the bullshit I learned in Mormonism about masturbation.

Here's a pertinent response to all that:
I have a penis,or: the evils of the Mormon stance on masturbation
as at

More relevant links:

The Mormon fear of masturbation & orgasm - a fear apparently shared by advocates of karezza:

Sin & Death in Mormon Country - deadly consequences to teaching children to fear masturbation & sex: : discover the perversity or Mormonism: and - the same shit just in different clothes, one from fucking hippies, and the other from fucking squares. Don't be sucked in by shame based quakery, from any side or source.

To recap:

Orgasm is good. Orgasms are good. Orgasms help your marriage! Orgasms help you be happy! Orgasms are healthy! Orgasms SHOULD be part of sex, most every time! Oh, and masturbation with orgasms is good also!
Yes, delaying orgasm can be fun and very useful - up to a point. Eventually you, your body, and your partner need an orgasm, and you should not be afraid of that either!

American Indians: No group of humans are uniquely more noble

Today I happened across the following story:

Hollowed out: US Army fights brain drain

The story had a reference to the American Indian Wars. Then I decided to check out some wiki articles on the American Indian wars...

302 years of war with the Amerindians...

Note how the wars apparently started with a massacre in 1622 of humans from Europe.

But we also have the earlier Spanish conquest:

People are people & savages are no more noble than anyone else. Also people born here are just as much a 'native' as anyone else. That's what native means - born in a given place. Also everyone here is a descendant of immigrants, whether it's 100 or 500 or 10,000 or 20,000 years ago. And children should not be saddled nor blamed for the sins of their parents or people who happen to have the same skin color. Again people are people regardless of color. Sometimes noble & sometimes not so much.

Monday, March 18, 2013

Tariq Ramadan to speak in Salt Lake City - commentary

The Salt Lake City Public Library & several other public & private groups have invited slick Islam apologist Tariq Ramadan to speak. Speech title: "Islam and Human Rights: How will the Arab Spring bring Peace to the Middle East?" Some of the sponsors of his March 20, 2013 visit: Friends of the City Library, University of Utah, Westminster College, Gandhi Alliance for Peace, with more listed at

My commentary in response:

Links, videos, and books for your research:

Ibn Warraq's review of a book by Caroline Fourest on Tariq, a book entitled Brother Tariq: The Doublespeak of Tariq Ramadan. Book review:
Ibn Warraq speaking at the Secular Islam Summit:

In the book Infidel by Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Christopher Hitchens wrote the forward. On page xviii Hitchens states the following about Tariq Ramadan:

...end of quote.

Here are links to views & videos critical of Ramadan's views & history:

Article including an interview with Fourest:

Tariq Ramadan’s Arab Winter by Samuel Helfont

The Flight of the Intellectuals: The Controversy Over Islamism and the Press by Paul Berman

Terror and Liberalism by Paul Berman

Panel discussion: Independent Voices on the Middle East, which includes Paul Berman and Ibn Warraq

Ibn Warraq and Paul Berman talk about "Is the West Best?"

Ibn Warraq's review of Fourest's book on Ramadan:
Brother Tariq and the Muslim Hoods: Towards a Taxonomy of Islamic Subterfuges

NER Interview with Ibn Warraq - The Albatross of Liberal Guilt

Christopher Hitchens and Tariq Ramadan Debate: Is Islam a Religion of Peace?

Ayaan Hirsi Ali has debated Ramadan in the past on more than one program. Hirsi Ali worked on the film Submission (a film critical of Islam) for which Theo Van Gogh was killed. Thus Hirsi Ali's views are a counterweight to that of Ramadan's.

Ayaan Hirsi Ali speaking at the Friends of Simon Wiesenthal Center for Holocaust Studies. Has a lot of great background & research info which is critical of the apporach of people like Ramadan:

Hirsi Ali responding to questions at Ohio State University - further background info:

Additional background info from Hirsi Ali on Islam:

Irshad Manji debates Ramadan about cartoons:
part 2:

My own blog post on all these issues:
Liberal Socialist Democrats against Islam - yes we are here too

I frankly feel like all the groups who are sponsoring Ramadan's Salt Lake visit have been hoodwinked by his charms, charisma, and slick presentational style. Your own presuppositions have allowed you to be sucked in. But, the City Library is a public institution, and as such they're subject to public comment about events and about how public money is spent.

So, how about having Ayaan Hirsi Ali or Sam Harris in to speak about "Islam & World Peace" and how to achieve it? Hiding the truth & facts about Islam & it's founding prophet is not a path toward peace. Neither is forcibly sticking our heads in the sand. Honesty, and being willing to state that the emporer has no clothes is perhaps the most important thing we can do in this case, and in the case of all religiouns founded by charismatic charlotans.

Friday, March 8, 2013

Margaret Sanger - as amoral as Peter Singer sadly

Ayaan Hirsi Ali has stated that everyone is a little bit racist & I agree. Maybe everyone is a little bit of a eugenicist also. Margaret Sanger, founder of Planned Parenthood, apparently wrote a rather distasteful article on the issue. Check out page 107 of the following document:

And a more readable version:

"The main objects of the Population Congress would be:
    a. to raise the level and increase the general intelligence of population.

    b. to increase the population slowly by keeping the birth rate at its present level of fifteen per thousand, decreasing the death rate below its present mark of 11 per thousand.

    c. to keep the doors of immigration closed to the entrance of certain aliens whose condition is known to be detrimental to the stamina of the race, such as feebleminded, idiots, morons, insane, syphilitic, epileptic, criminal, professional prostitutes, and others in this class barred by the immigration laws of 1924.

    d. to apply a stern and rigid policy of sterilization and segregation to that grade of population whose progeny is tainted, or whose inheritance is such that objectionable traits may be transmitted to offspring.

    e. to insure the country against future burdens of maintenance for numerous offspring as may be born of feebleminded parents, by pensioning all persons with transmissible disease who voluntarily consent to sterilization.

    f. to give certain dysgenic groups in our population their choice of segregation or sterilization.

    g. to apportion farm lands and homesteads for these segregated persons where they would be taught to work under competent instructors for the period of their entire lives..."

---end of quote

Well, isn't that nice. All the good old fashioned family values we've come to expect from rather famous eugenicists. I guess what pops into the brain of one totalitarian zealot who had only one testicle can easily somehow pop into the pretty brain & eyes of another - the second person having no testicles at all. What's up with that? Was advocacy for eugenics just a 1932 "thing," or was this all just a coincidence?

Further thoughts:

Hitchens on abortion:

I am reminded of the crazed hysteria on the left revolving around overpopulation, a hysteria which has caused some people, sadly, to not have children of their own. "Those people in the third world have a lot of babies & so therefore I should have none." Crazy & stupid in my view.

More smart people and more atheists should have children. Yes, Planned Parenthood may do some good. But, Margaret Sanger was a eugenic authoritarian nutbag also - no better than parents who consider after-birth abortion today. Oh, who else thinks such a thing is ok? Peter Singer:

In looking at source documents by Margaret Sanger, it appears that she was an amoral fuck also.

Women raped, and all women up until the baby is viable, should be able to get abortions if they want them. But I also agree that the procedure should, in general, be highly discouraged.

Not everything is equal. Sanger & Singer are in rather the same boat - a boat I prefer not to be in.

Monday, March 4, 2013

Evil Santa is in Islam also - related Ayaan Hirsi Ali video found

Here's a video about how, what is essentially, yet another evil Santa Claus view of a god exists in Islam. Making a list and checking it twice, to find out who's naughty or nice - and burning in hell forever the naughty.

In Islam "...our energy ... goes into investing in the hereafter..." and apparently teaching children to fear hell and the Islamic god.

Santa Jesus / Allah...

can quickly turn into Evil Santa Jesus / Allah

when he gets upset about your not kissing his ass...

Another great video of Ayaan speaking at the Friends of Simon Wiesenthal Center for Holocaust Studies...

...has a lot of great background & research info.

Friday, March 1, 2013

Iceland porn ban - thoughts on porn & the proposed banning of it

In response to two recent BBC World Have Your Say programs on banning pornography:

Iceland's pornography ban audio file:

Is pornography ever acceptable? audio file:

The first program about Iceland was more thoughtful. The second program though contained highly frantic and angry arguments on the anti-porn side. It's also true that the pay-for-porn industry has a corrosive aspect to it.

Speaking as an atheist, exmormon, & naturalist, there's actually several aspects at play here. But one thing I am reminded of is what people did in Pompeii. Has Iceland already banned films such as Caligula, Intimacy, or Destricted?

See what libraries have Destricted for example:

And Destricted played during the Sundance Film Festival.

And check out what most everyone saw at they went around Pompeii:

The frantic fear of human sexuality is sadly rampant, and as per today's program it's clear that such fear is not only present in the religious right, it's also present in "progressives" who appear just as eager to micro-manage what people do on the Internet as abusive fools like former Mormon prophet Spencer Kimball tried to do.

Here's relevant reviews of his hate filled book on sexuality:
and the content of his evil hate filled book:

and the consequences:

Online dating sites can waste a great deal of time. Online porn sites can indeed waste time also, and skew a person's view of normal natural human sexuality. On the other hand there is a need to have sites similar to youtube which do allow for free and open sharing of sexual content between adults.

So, how can such sites be paid for if not by advertising? How about these "progressives" who want to micro-manage what people see online pay to start a non-profit advertisement free versions of sites like xtube or youporn? That sounds like a good alternative. Don't like what Manwin does online? Then by F start your own advertisement-free web 2.0 adult video sharing site, rather than trying to shut down what you will not be able to shut down.

What is porn? Uncensored viewing of all aspects of human sexuality? Or is it just the commercialization of such? Mormons would view any viewing of sex in video or picture form as porn. Maybe in Iceland their definition is more limited. But the bottom line is that no amount of censorship will keep adults from seeing what they want to see.

No amount of frantic hand wringing, either from the frantic Christian/Islamic religious right, or from the frantic feminist controlling & micromanaging left, is going to stop that. But parents can and should take steps to protect their children from the highly commercialized, inaccurate, and violent content.

Further info:

Iceland's porn ban 'conflicts with the idea of a free society', say critics

Iceland's Plan To Ban Online Porn Spurs Outrage

Iceland’s proposed porn ban ‘like repression in Iran, N. Korea’ – activists