Just In
for Emma Watson, Underage Sex, and Women's Roles

7/6/2006 c1 jon jamison
I love to see Emma Watson
12/31/2005 c1 19Kat-Renee Kittel
Your essay is really very interesting- I like the chutzpah and political incorrectness of it. I also find it fascinating that I can't exactly tell where you're coming from...yet. I love the tongue in cheek. Bravo and well done.

Just some more shtuff below.

FYI's: I only give myself to one and only one man because I only need One of those, not for my "protection and security," per se. Although I know that attitude is inter-related to the "I now pronounce you Man & Wife"-woman married to houses mentality. (I think the dictionary definition of matching words is Husband & Wife, and Man & Woman). Now artistic and efficient housekeeping are good though-I can find things then!

Second FYI: Ephesians chapter five was written by a Jew talking about mutual submission. The paragraph begins with "submit yourselves one to another." He knew that women already understood that and didn't need a picture drawn for them... the men well, that was another story.

Third FYI: Corinthians 11:8-this statement is stemming from what Rabbi Shaul (yeah, Paul was a Rabbi-go figure) stated in verse three of chapter 11, concerning what the English version of scripture translates as "head."

However the Greek word there means source, like the heart of a cabbage, not a hierarchical, western drive-the-cattle-to-slaughter term. Case in point, if Rav Shaul meant some hierarchical relationship, he would have stated things in a linear vertical fashion. Instead he says 1) the source of men is the Messiah, 2) the source of the wife is the husband, and 3) the source of the Messiah is G-d. This placement actually shows that he had something more interconnected in mind, versus this hierarchy thing that was culturally acceptable at the time. (And still is in some circles...well I'll leave to Richard Belzer. Please see my essay...)

I disagree with Bohlin-whoever that happens to be. G-d made creation in a logical order of preparation for the next cherished item on His list, like putting in the foundation for a building before erecting the second floor...(otherwise where would the 2nd floor go? suspended in mid-air? That doesn't work too well.)

Sounds like poor Bohlin actually believes that scripture supports his self-centered cultural viewpoint-that scripture actually validates traditional male oriented thinking... When the Maker of All Things created Man-male & female-both in the Creator's image (Genesis 1:27). Sorry, Mr. Bohlin, the sun does not revolve around you...and the earth isn't flat. Galileo said it wasn't and Columbus proved it-both believers in Providence.

What scripture actually says and what is taught in the majority of Christian and other religious circles actually doesn't match...(a religously incorrect statement. lol)

Kind Regards,

A Jewish Believing Egalitarian who agrees with an organization called Christians for Biblical Equality...(among other things. I confess, I'm eccentrically meshugunah...) ^..^
12/29/2005 c1 15Bianca3000
Great!You have just inspired me to start writing.I loved it.

Read some of my work, and review it, so I'll know if some people like it!
12/29/2005 c1 8Pace
i do not like your title. there we are to the point. it is an eye catcher i am sure but you are also suuporting the impression that this is simply going to be yet another stupid essay on the lives of Hollywood's rich and famous.

also i didn't see a really clear thesis. this 'One question that remains unclear is whether the casualization of sex among youths is good for feminism' is what i thought it to be. however i had to re-read and find it. maybe this is because i didn't read closely enough.

this is a very interesting subject and an incredbily well supported paper. great job
12/28/2005 c1 28Diana Shore
"Today, many females go to university and focus after their careers after" - I think you meant to put 'focus on their careers after'

I enjoyed this essay. It was well written and you actually put some effort into research.

You grabbed the reader's attention with a strong opening paragraph and kept it throughout with good qoutes and references, yet the essay is lacking conviction.

You've shown what other people feel, but what's your opinion?

Take care, D.
12/26/2005 c1 57tofujunky
" Some of the comments on the site include someone who called Emma a "conservative, reserved young lady" who "will NOT become a sex symbol by choice." However, someone else said, "Bitch, you shut your mouth. Women are made for looking at, even the young ones, so why don't you shut up, and maybe look at this picture of Emma Watson's underwear?" "

lol . . . have you ever read Isaac Asimov's 'The Sensuous Dirty Old Man'? I think it's one of the funniest little book I've ever read. Anyway, that just happen to sprung to mind while reading the above paragraph.

"Evidence is then given from the Bible."

lol . . . also one of the most humorous book I've ever read.

"A biblical quote is given: 'For man does not originate from woman, but woman from man; for indeed man was not created for the woman's sake, but woman for the man's sake (1 Cor. 11:8-9)."

lol . . . find it kind of amusing that the guy who made that one up undoubtedly came out of a woman's pussy.

"Some feminists believe that these women have betrayed the movement."

Obviously there are extremists and nutcases in all factions and groups, so what can I say? Screw 'em. Screw 'em all! Just make sure they're of legal age, though.


PS: Sorry for all the 'lol's'; feeling a bit cheery today that's all.
12/25/2005 c1 27Typewriter King
This would have been interesting if she weren't a complete dog.

Someone else would have said it if I didn't! Write about Harry and Ron! They were made for each other! 0_0

Seriously, why is it ok for fangirls to write slash involving little boys, while men become pariahs for even looking at a girl a little under 18? Women are sexist pigs that see little boys as sex objects, no doubt.

Twitter . Help . Sign Up . Cookies . Privacy . Terms of Service