New York Times columnist Charles Blow had an interesting observation about Rick Santorum this morning:
Santorum may now cloak his current views in Catholic fundamentalism and Constitutional literalism, but, at their root, they are his reaction to, and revulsion for, the social-sexual liberation that began in the 1960s. In fact, Santorum’s distaste for the sexual revolution of the 1960s leaks over into a deep dislike of everything that the 1960s represents….The kind of conservatism that Santorum represents has been described as a war on women, but I would rephrase that. It’s a war on sex beyond the confines of traditional marriage and strict heterosexuality in which women, particularly poor ones, and gays, particularly open ones, are likely to suffer the greatest casualties.
Rick Santorum has more hangups than a nightclub coat rack in January. He appears to be a sexually stunted individual who is stuck in the 1950′s — or even the 1850′s. He does not need tobe president — he simply needs a team of qualified therapists to get him over his irrational fear of human sexuality.
This is an excellent article.
He was born in 1958, so should have been ‘formed’ by the 60s culture that he grew up in. Something went very wrong with him. Even his strict Roman Catholic upbringing is not entirely to blame, as millions of kids were raised the same way, but still came to embrace the best of what the 60s gave us.
Yeah, he’s damaged goods.
Damaged goods, but I strongly suspect that the Mormon Bishop has just as extreme views. He is (like all good mormon missionaries), very good at playing dumb when the questioning gets too close to the truth. Don’t think the “savior of Salt Lake” has anything good planned for working people, women or gays.
The War on Sex and the War on Women are closely linked. Fear of sexuality leads them to fear the strong effect that women have on men. Men are very sensitive to sexual stimuli (something that’s obvious, but also has a lot of shame attached to it). That’s why we have these ancient stories of ‘temptresses’ that men blame for their sexual urges. The woman became the object of evil for ‘seducing’ men from celibate holiness. This also leads to the double standard we see regarding sex; since men are so easily stimulated, it’s seen as natural for men to desire sex, and unnatural for women to desire it.
Then, of course, there’s the fact that since the sexual revolution of the ’60s, these holy rollers are waging war on sexual enjoyment due their own sexual repression and shame. If everybody else was as celibate and repressed as they were, it would be easier for them to deny their nature. This is why gay sex is especially so offensive to them. Gay sex doesn’t produce babies so it can only be for enjoyment. This is a vicious cycle that’s taking its toll on women and doesn’t belong in the 21st century.
Addendum to Bonnie @5, I got two words: Vagina Dentata.
I think the 1960′s was probably one of the biggest cultural turning points for this country. There were a lot of positive ideals regarding desegregation and artistic expression, which were fulfilled, but I think overwhelmingly it ended up pretty badly.
And think it’s unfair to say that Rick Santorum is “sexually stunted,” I mean, he has a ton of kids, right?
“Sexually progressive cultures gave us literature, philosophy, civilization and the rest, while sexually restrictive cultures gave us the Dark Ages and the Holocaust”.
(Alan Moore)
Richard,
The 1960s protests gave us desegregation, women in the workplace, contraceptives which reduced the need for abortion, and environmental regulation and conservation. The 1960s gave us Stonewall. The protests also curtailed a misguided war in Vietnam. And they enabled the consumer-advocacy movements of the 1970s which gave us safer automobiles and saved countless lives (mostly children) from unsafe products. Finally, the 1960s forced the media to be more vigilant — exposing Watergate and the Pentagon Papers.
I don’t think the 1960s ended badly, despite the deaths of some celebrities from drug abuse. Quite the opposite: Life got worse for Americans when they stopped protesting and started accepting harsh and corrupt rule from above.
Interesting, Sera, I guess that wouldn’t be a very popular tentacle hentai, or would it? :P
BTW, my aunt grew a tooth in her ovary.
It fascinates me how much mythology came out of fear and misunderstanding of women. I actually admire it to an extent.
as for santorum having lots of kids, he very well may be sexually stunted in the sense that he feels that enjoyment of sex itself is bad, but that the dirty and disgusting act can be redeemed by producing kids.
i’ve always thought sexual repression is a hugely important part of social control – people are by nature sexual beings, and if you teach them to feel guilty about that but promise them you can grant them absolution through whatever ritual, you’ve got them where you want them.
This article is spot on. Fundamentalists would have us all back in the 50′s in an instant if they could.
Granted, the 50′s were indeed all shiny and nice. On the surface.
But delve a little deeper, and there was so much repression, pain and hiding from all facets of society (apart from rich straight white men. For them, it always was a free country).
I recently saw the Julianne Moore movie “Far From Heaven”, and found this to be a very good illustration of the pain that went hand in hand with the repression of the pre-1960s West.