|Back to Back Issues Page|
The Chastity Vs Sophistication division: Wisdom Vs Elitist Celebritwittery.
July 16, 2007
Chastity Vs Sophistication
We need to look more closely, perhaps more consciously, at the Chastity Vs Sophistication dichotomy, and the cultural message that we are subliminally subjected to every day of our lives. You can’t really get away from it, unless perhaps you move into a monastery or a convent, or become some kind of hermit.
Contemporary big-screen, small-screen and live entertainment, music, talk radio, broadcast and print media, the internet, formative education, advanced education, contemporary literature, advertising, even the “news”; all and more, treat illicit sex, so long as “discreet” and within certain new contemporary norms, as the activity of sophisticates, and the practice of chastity as the impractical naiveté of backward dolts and simpletons. Even in the face of incontrovertible evidence to the contrary, elitist celebritwits state flatly that chastity doesn’t work and that the practice of chastity is impossible. Among the elite, the chastity vs sophistication question is no longer even a question; it has been answered.
In fact, in the collective contemporary subconscious, chastity vs sophistication has morphed into another scientistic theory in the tradition of Darwinism, Freudianism and Marxism, all of which insist that we “know”, in our modern sophistication, that they are all true. The simple fact that not one single shred of real scientific evidence supports any of these theories, and despite the fact that all existing real scientific evidence opposes them matters not at all, because all of these theories enjoy heavy scientistic consensus among all of TTRSTF who are universally recognized as the subject-matter experts by the elite class of celebritwittery.
Celebritwittery represents the so-called intelligentsia who are most responsible for the ideas being discussed in public forums, editorials and popular essays, the topics of talk shows and so forth. They put forth, publish and guide public discourse on trends in thinking. The intellectuals of a society are the ones who deal professionally in ideas and who put them forth, with a certain spin, for public digestion.
I submit that contemporary American intellectualism is dominated by celebritwittery.
Today, consensus trumps the scientific method. There is and can be no application of critical thinking here.
The Chastity Vs Sophistication question has been elevated, in the public consciousness, into yet another scientistic theory enjoying universal uncritical acceptance. Those who preach chastity are written off as nerds, religious nuts and general dummies and traditionalists still lost in the pre-scientism dark ages of thought. Those who enjoy random copulation are seen to be more sophisticated. The more randomly and the more perverse their sexual activities, the more sophisticated they are seen to be.
At its basic root, the theory of chastity vs sophistication can be best illustrated by a simple examination of its treatment of the scientistic theory of the human Population Problem and its step-child scientistic theory justifying Artificial Contraception.
Modern day celebritwits will stand before the cameras with their bare faces hanging out and solemnly declare that China and India have a population problem, but England and Italy do not; and that Bangladesh has a population problem, but Hong Kong does not, in open, public, absolute defiance of simple mathematics. And they get away with it, because celebritwittery knows best, and celebritwittery is driving the social discourse bus.
Another scientistic motive for people to practice artificial contraception involves the silly notion that we are running out of “our precious resources” due to overpopulation, and that people produce more pollution and man-induced global warming, etc., etc., etc. And yet, as you can see in the Eco-Naxi Movement page,
Nevertheless, we are to believe that our own scientistically deduced population problem is dooming us to oblivion unless we practice artificial contraception and elect more celebritwits to high office.
Chastity vs sophistication theory, which enjoys major consensus among most of TTRSTF, recommends two courses of action:
Now, I’m no intellectual, but it would seem to me that those two things are pretty close to being mutually exclusive. And yet, chastity vs sophistication theory tells us that doing those two things is the sophisticated way to behave. And, believing in the chastity vs sophistication theory has become an important mark of sophistication. Chastity vs sophistication theory is now an atheist/secularist religious dogma.
Chastity vs sophistication in education.
National Education Association (NEA) induced and State mandated sex education in the government-run school system has morphed into sexual perversion how-to classes. Students are taught the mechanics of safe fornication, protected sodomy and responsible promiscuity. As a direct result, rates of teen and pre-teen pregnancy, venereal disease and even abortion have rocketed to incredible rates.
Celebritwittery never said a word; in fact, celebrttwittery supports giving condoms to other people’s children, and teaching them about the acceptability of sexual experimentation, the overall goodness of homosexuality and other forms of illicit sex and so forth, and even sneaking them around to abortion clinics without parental notification. Chastity vs sophistication theory sees all this in a positive, sophisticated light.
When some pro-chastity groups try to include chastity information into the curriculum, nationally syndicated talk show hosts like Neal Boortz go ballistic over it, because, as all sophisticated celebrtitwits know, chastity doesn’t work, and neither does chastity education. Talk show celebritwits are not smart enough to figure out how so-called sex education doesn’t work either, or, worse, that it does the exact opposite of what it was planned and intended to do.
The celebrtwits of the world are either too dumb to oppose state mandated sex education in state-run schools, or they are, in truth, evil in their intent, know full well what sex education is doing to our youth, and they support it.
Boortz and others apply chastity vs sophistication theory in the same manner in which they strongly support the legal establishment and enforcement of atheist/secularist dogma over America’s foundational and enduring Judeo-Christian guiding ethos. They get all exercised over any attempt to include any part of that ethos, such as the Ten Commandments, into education, as a feigned violation of a Constitutional principle which in fact does not exist. But they are not smart enough to figure out how the imposition of pure secularism upon the education system is forcing us, by law, to gradually become disciples of the state religion of atheism/secularism, and to oppose, at least publicly if not totally, our own traditional family religions.
They do their part to squeeze us and mold us into the thought patterns and morality of history’s giants of atheism and secularism: Joseph Stalin, Adolph Hitler and Mao Tse Tung. That is the moral guiding ethos our elite class of celebritwittery seeks to promote, as it openly opposes all open public expressions and free exercises of Judeo-Christianity, in direct opposition to the First Amendment of our Constitution.
Chastity vs sophistication in entertainment.
Current situational comedies, or sit-coms, continually portray sexual purity and chastity as unexpected, abnormal, backward and unsophisticated. Un-chastity and impurity, however, are treated as expected, normal, forward and sophisticated. Parents worried about junior’s hidden activities are relieved to discover his great secret involves his stash of Playboys rather than a stash of dope. The celebritwit nod always, always goes to the great Masturbation Industry, and to the super-sophisticated scientistic discoveries of the likes of Freud, Jung and Kinsey. After all, everybody does it, including even ex-President Clinton. Jacking off is sophisticated, see?
The worst thing about entertainment today is that it appears to be driven by sexual impurity and simple, unmitigated un-chastity. Celebritwits editorialize on how parents, in those fewer and fewer houses in which there are any legitimate parents, should be constantly monitoring and restricting TV and internet access of their legitimate and/or illegitimate children, to “protect” them from “adult” content. (Definition: Adult entertainment is entertainment who’s main object is sexual impurity and un-chastity, and is therefore sophisticated.) But you can be watching the news and suddenly be subjected to an ad for some male sexual enhancement product, or the latest offering on the Playboy channel. You simply cannot get away from it, unless you put on EWTN and then just leave it there, and throw away the remote.
Chastity vs sophistication in commentary.
Elitist celebritwits love and promote open, active homosexuality as if it might somehow save the world from some feigned calamity. The interesting thing about that is how all other forms of un-chastity are seen to be sophisticated only so long as they are discreet, meaning done in a hidden and secretive way. But homosexual perversion, to be sophisticated, must be out there, hanging out in the open. Homosexuals who “Out” themselves are applauded and lauded as heroic, and as leaders, and are always given every opportunity to put themselves on public display, and are always editorially treated in the most positive manner imaginable. The Homo-Nazi Movement page and the HIV=AIDS=DEATH Hoax page go into the details of how elitist celebritwittery is steadily prodding America toward legally becoming the new Sodom.
At the same time, adultery and fornication are seen as highly sophisticated activities (mostly) when done discreetly, meaning, done while the participants publicly pretend to be chaste. Only the homosexual variety of un-chastity is encouraged to be highly public about itself. Go figure.
Yet whenever non-homosexual un-chastity somehow becomes public knowledge, as in all the many, many Clinton cases, involving such things as forcible rape, gross sexual imposition, sexual harassment, various sex acts in the Oval Office and so forth, the typical celebritwit response is a wry smile, tongue-in-cheek offered naughty-naughty little quips, attacks on the victims and/or story breakers, and a changing of the subject to more important matters. (So long as the offender is a celebricrat.) After all, these were all events involving consenting – well, usually consenting adults – well, mostly adults – and if the various “participants” had any sense at all they would have consented and been happy to do so. It’s sophisticated.
The elite are so under the spell of the chastity vs sophistication scientistic theory that they look at Billary and see a highly sophisticated world leader, who went about the business of bombing Iraq for its weapons of mass destruction while trying hard to homsexualize and de-fund our military, all activities they supported. I look at the same pig and all I see is an adulterous lech, a twisted pervert, and an out-of-control slobbering jerk-off. I guess I’m just not sophisticated.
Chastity vs sophistication in social discourse.
In any conversation anywhere, the chaste person is likely to be offended in direct conversation, by indirect conversation between others, or even by overheard conversation. The typical example:
Using artificial contraception reduces the human sex act to a mere act of achieving sexual gratification, pure and simple. It is no different than masturbation. It reduces the sex partner to a mere object, a sexual playground, of use solely in the achievement of sexual gratification for its own sake. It is precisely the same thing as Onan spilling his seed on the ground. Yet today the chastity vs sophistication theory is so solidly socially embedded that not using contraception is most commonly seen as irresponsible, to the Earth, to the environment, to the larger culture, and even to the family unit.
In the chastity vs sophistication theory we are reaping the rewards of hijacked feminism morphed into the Femi-Nazi Movement and promoting legal enforcement of sexual equality in all areas of social life, including even areas in which women and men are quite obviously not equal. Equal job opportunity led to women doing many jobs traditionally done by men, and that’s not all bad. Equal pay for equal work led to women getting the same pay for the same work done by men, and that’s not all bad.
But these advances led to a general lowering of worker output, which led to a general across-the-board lowering of free market pay rates for all these jobs, which was indeed all bad. It eventually hit a point where one man’s job, on average, could no longer sustain a family. The “average” family became a two-worker household, out of absolute necessity. This didn’t happen solely because women are not as productive as men, except in those jobs where strength is a factor. The primary problem was and is attendance. Women simply miss more work days than men, always. It is an indisputable fact that women get pregnant more often than men. As it has always been, so it will always be.
But men today don’t make nearly as much, in constant dollars, as they did before women became such a massive proportion of the entire work force. Nobody does. That’s the problem. Big labor bosses got rich by gradually raising labor costs so much that they began pricing American workers out of the free market. In a similar manner, misguided feminism made wonderful gains for women, on paper, while lowering all pay across the board, and while making working in America most profitable for single people, and for people with few or no children. It thus became a self-fulfilling prophesy. Once upon a time, one working man, like Abe Lincoln’s father, could do well by his quite large family relying only his own labor. But just as soon as the typical wife left home and went to work, the typical male worker could no longer do that. The whole job market has been unnaturally changed for the worse.
Chastity vs sophistication theory feeds this negative trend by encouraging contraception, at least, and by discouraging marriage. Today, you can’t even discuss such things as temporarily living celibate, or even life-long celibacy, with any disciple of chastity vs sophistication theory. Celibacy is impossible is the immediate cry from those who never learned and never practiced any form of self control. Living celibate is even given as the reason for the sex scandals involving the Catholic priesthood.
The same celebritwits who promote the chastity vs sophistication myth will never recognize the simple fact that there have been and are higher rates of child sexual abuse among government school coaches and government school teachers, or that there are and have been similar rates among non-Catholic clergy and “youth ministers”, none of whom are celibate. Devoid of any semblance of self discipline and self control, they emotionally convulse at the mere though of a celibate lifestyle. Remember, these are the same guys who promote open homosexuality.
The celebritwits join the scientistic twits on the subject of the chastity vs sophistication theory. The entire SLIMC is on-board here. Turn on the Discovery channel to see all the nature crockumentaries showing how celebritwittery joins all of TTRSTF in definite scientistic consensus on how we increasingly harmful humans are destroying the increasingly sacred World.
Watch the old PBS Cosmos series with TV scientifical-type-feller Carl Sagan to witness the absolute certainty, certainty, with which modern scientism concludes that God does not exist, and that man is, basically, a cancer on an otherwise beautiful cosmos. This scientistic certainty is not based on any empiricism or application of any scientific method, but solely and exclusively on scientistic consensus regarding various scientistic dogmatic “truths.” Today, scientistic consensus equates to scientific fact.
Today you will see commercials involving “couples” in which one partner has genital herpes and the other is not yet infected, and they want to keep it that way, but they still want to continue fornicating. So, it involves all the latest scientistic methods for them to continue screwing as safely as possible, with the help of a somewhat or a potentially and only partially effective drug for that purpose. You might see another commercial involving a pre-teen girl playing with a skate board and wearing a baseball cap backwards. She’s giving “information” on how she and others can continue sexual promiscuity while lessening the possibility of getting HPV, with a drug touted to be able to do that, sometimes, with limited effectiveness. This shows how scientism is working for us, and for a brighter future.
This is sophisticated? Excuse me? The chastity vs sophistication theory is so ingrained into modern culture that few people are even shocked by any such TV advertisements. Chastity vs sophistication has been falsely portrayed to the public by dumb asses masquerading as super-sophisticates. It’s a great lie; you can tell how great a lie it is by it’s effectiveness. Compare chastity vs sophistication with any of the other scientistic lies, hoaxes and myths you will find in this site, and the comparison will show a comparable effectiveness. Everybody knows it to be true.
Everybody knows that chastity is dumb and un-chastity is sophisticated, just like everybody knows that HIV=AIDS=DEATH, just like everybody knows that Darwinism is true, just like everybody knows that man-induced global warming has doomed us all, just like everybody knows that we have a human population problem, just like everybody knows that we are running out of oil, just like everybody knows that it is Christianity that causes the most wars, and on, and on, and on. Chastity vs sophistication is so successful it doesn’t have to be preached any more; it’s just accepted, like Darwinism.
The chastity vs sophistication theory has reached Nirvana; the highest point achievable by any scientistic hoax. This is due to an overwhelming consensus, among all of TTRSTF, the entire SLIMC, and our elite class of celebritwittery. Chastity vs sophistication has become another important tool of use in moving us all from our existing national Judeo-Christian guiding ethos, to the guiding ethos of BMDFP and Clintons.
Question any part of chastity vs sophistication dogma and the response is likely to be “STNSEACPB that chastity vs sophistication theory is in any doubt.” Or, “SNRTACBT that chastity is somehow sophisticated, and that sexual impurity is not.” Social Darwinism tells us that cultures evolve, and thus that, GESGEAEOT, chastity vs sophistication evolved as part of our culture. Although it might have had a significant PEWAG boost from the sixties sexual revolution geological moment.
Celebritwittery denounces Victorianism as hypocritical, because, as anyone who watches the History channel knows, there were real live fornicators and adulterers operating under cover during the Victorian era. They just swept it under the rug, and treated offenses that became public as scandals. Modern chastity vs sophistication theory application prefers to treat these publicized events as normal, rather than scandalous, so long as the perpetrators are celebritwits or celebricrats. It’s the sophisticated thing to do.
Queen Victoria and her era were infinitely more sophisticated than today’s celebritwits, in an era where vice was recognized as vice, virtue was recognized as virtue, and few pretended that anything was other than what it actually was. Certain behaviors belonged in the gutter, and that’s where you found them. Today, you can go to the sophisticates to find the same filth; but it is no longer recognized as filth. The gutter has now been raised to the level of the celebritwit class. Chastity vs sophistication theory says that un-chastity is not only normal, but sophisticated behavior. In actual fact nothing has changed at all.
The celebritwits actually promote the actual causative behaviors of all sorts of medical, social and psychological maladies, while scientism works feverishly to alleviate or minimize all of the clearly natural consequences of those very causative behaviors.
Now, ain’t that just flat out sophisticated?
This is the free periodic e-zine of the Thinking Catholic Strategic Center.
Forward this e-mail to a friend.
All previous articles are available right here.
|Back to Back Issues Page|