ADVERTISEMENT

Bernie LUNATIC Sanders......

Habah

HR All-State
Aug 4, 2009
883
44
28
And you libs talk about a war on women.... This guy is a liberal nut..

Bernie Sanders Once Wrote That Women Fantasize About Being Gang-Raped

This story contains mature subject matter. Reader discretion is advised.

Democratic presidential contender Bernie Sanders wrote an essay in 1972 that women fantasize about being raped by multiple men.

“A man goes home and masturbates his typical fantasy. A woman on her knees, a woman tied up, a woman abused,” the Vermont senator wrote in the now-defunct Vermont Freeman. “A woman enjoys intercourse with her man — as she fantasizes being raped by 3 men simultaneously.”

Sanders was 30-years-old at the time of publication.


Image source: Mother Jones
The essay on gender was titled “Man—and woman” and was uncovered by Mother Jones writer Tim Murphy in a story published Tuesday evening. It then gained traction Thursday when media-watchdog Newscasters highlighted it in a story.

Here it is in its entirety:

A man goes home and masturbates his typical fantasy. A woman on her knees, a woman tied up, a woman abused.

A woman enjoys intercourse with her man — as she fantasizes being raped by 3 men simultaneously.

The man and woman get dressed up on Sunday — and go to Church, or maybe to their “revolutionary” political meeting.

Have you ever looked at the Stag, Man, Hero, Tough magazines on the shelf of your local bookstore? Do you know why the newspaper with the articles like “Girl 12 raped by 14 men” sell so well? To what in us are they appealing?

Women, for their own preservation, are trying to pull themselves together. And it’s necessary for all of humanity that they do so. Slavishness on one hand breeds pigness on the other hand. Pigness on one hand breeds slavishness on the other. Men and women — both are losers. Women adapt themselves to fill the needs of men, and men adapt themselves to fill the needs of women. In the beginning there were strong men who killed the animals and brought home the food — and the dependent women who cooked it. No More! Only the roles remain — waiting to be shaken off. There are no “human” oppressors. Oppressors have lost their humanity. On one hand “slavishness,” on the other hand “pigness.” Six of one, half dozen of the other. Who wins?

Many women seem to be walking a tightrope now. Their qualities of love, openness, and gentleness were too deeply enmeshed with qualities of dependency, subservience, and masochism. How do you love — without being dependent? How do you be gentle — without being subservient? How do you maintain a relationship without giving up your identity and without getting strung out? How do you reach out and give your heart to your lover, but maintain the soul which is you?

And Men. Men are in pain too. They are thinking, wondering. What is it they want from a woman? Are they at fault? Are they perpetrating this man-woman situation? Are they oppressors?

The man is bitter.

“You lied to me,” he said. (She did).

“You said that you loved me, that you wanted me, that you needed me. Those are your words.” (They are).

“But in reality,” he said, “If you ever loved me, or wanted me, or needed me (all of which I’m not certain was ever true), you also hated me. You hated me — just as you have hated every man in your entire life, but you didn’t have the guts to tell me that. You hated me before you ever saw me, even though I was not your father, or your teacher, or your sex friend when you were 13 years old, or your husband. You hated me not because of who I am, or what I was to you, but because I am a man. You did not deal with me as a person — as me. You lived a lie with me, used me and played games with me — and that’s a piggy thing to do.”

And she said, “You wanted me not as a woman, or a lover, or a friend, but as a submissive woman, or submissive friend, or submissive lover; and right now where my head is I balk at even the slightest suspicion of that kind of demand.”

And he said, “You’re full of _______.”

And they never again made love together (which they had each liked to do more than anything) or never ever saw each other one more time.
 
Lucas and AnyC proably have this guy on speed dial.. Bernie is what a true liberal hero is all about...What a freak..
I've said repeatedly I don't like him.
Congratulations on not going immediately to the second handle to boost the post. Seriously, you need help. You're a very sad person.
 
I've said repeatedly I don't like him.
Congratulations on not going immediately to the second handle to boost the post. Seriously, you need help. You're a very sad person.
So your voting for the Hillary Crime Family Foundation? She seems more your type Lucas...LOL
 
And you libs talk about a war on women.... This guy is a liberal nut..

Bernie Sanders Once Wrote That Women Fantasize About Being Gang-Raped

This story contains mature subject matter. Reader discretion is advised.

Democratic presidential contender Bernie Sanders wrote an essay in 1972 that women fantasize about being raped by multiple men.

“A man goes home and masturbates his typical fantasy. A woman on her knees, a woman tied up, a woman abused,” the Vermont senator wrote in the now-defunct Vermont Freeman. “A woman enjoys intercourse with her man — as she fantasizes being raped by 3 men simultaneously.”

Sanders was 30-years-old at the time of publication.


Image source: Mother Jones
The essay on gender was titled “Man—and woman” and was uncovered by Mother Jones writer Tim Murphy in a story published Tuesday evening. It then gained traction Thursday when media-watchdog Newscasters highlighted it in a story.

Here it is in its entirety:

A man goes home and masturbates his typical fantasy. A woman on her knees, a woman tied up, a woman abused.

A woman enjoys intercourse with her man — as she fantasizes being raped by 3 men simultaneously.

The man and woman get dressed up on Sunday — and go to Church, or maybe to their “revolutionary” political meeting.

Have you ever looked at the Stag, Man, Hero, Tough magazines on the shelf of your local bookstore? Do you know why the newspaper with the articles like “Girl 12 raped by 14 men” sell so well? To what in us are they appealing?

Women, for their own preservation, are trying to pull themselves together. And it’s necessary for all of humanity that they do so. Slavishness on one hand breeds pigness on the other hand. Pigness on one hand breeds slavishness on the other. Men and women — both are losers. Women adapt themselves to fill the needs of men, and men adapt themselves to fill the needs of women. In the beginning there were strong men who killed the animals and brought home the food — and the dependent women who cooked it. No More! Only the roles remain — waiting to be shaken off. There are no “human” oppressors. Oppressors have lost their humanity. On one hand “slavishness,” on the other hand “pigness.” Six of one, half dozen of the other. Who wins?

Many women seem to be walking a tightrope now. Their qualities of love, openness, and gentleness were too deeply enmeshed with qualities of dependency, subservience, and masochism. How do you love — without being dependent? How do you be gentle — without being subservient? How do you maintain a relationship without giving up your identity and without getting strung out? How do you reach out and give your heart to your lover, but maintain the soul which is you?

And Men. Men are in pain too. They are thinking, wondering. What is it they want from a woman? Are they at fault? Are they perpetrating this man-woman situation? Are they oppressors?

The man is bitter.

“You lied to me,” he said. (She did).

“You said that you loved me, that you wanted me, that you needed me. Those are your words.” (They are).

“But in reality,” he said, “If you ever loved me, or wanted me, or needed me (all of which I’m not certain was ever true), you also hated me. You hated me — just as you have hated every man in your entire life, but you didn’t have the guts to tell me that. You hated me before you ever saw me, even though I was not your father, or your teacher, or your sex friend when you were 13 years old, or your husband. You hated me not because of who I am, or what I was to you, but because I am a man. You did not deal with me as a person — as me. You lived a lie with me, used me and played games with me — and that’s a piggy thing to do.”

And she said, “You wanted me not as a woman, or a lover, or a friend, but as a submissive woman, or submissive friend, or submissive lover; and right now where my head is I balk at even the slightest suspicion of that kind of demand.”

And he said, “You’re full of _______.”

And they never again made love together (which they had each liked to do more than anything) or never ever saw each other one more time.

My college roommates sister once told us she had reoccurring dreams of floating in a pool of semen. Maybe she and Bernie should get together.
 
  • Like
Reactions: naturalmwa
Could be that the Mother Jones writer doesn't like anybody getting in the way of "Hillary!"
Good guess. I am a fan of Mother Jones. They cover a lot of important issues that get neglected by the MSM, they do decent investigative reporting, and their slant is generally anti-crazy. BUT, they are very much embedded in the 2-party mindset. Bernie is essentially an outsider. Not a true D (or R). It's disappointing but not altogether surprising that they look for dirt on Bernie. They treated Nader the same way. And Ron Paul. Look hard enough at oldtimers and you'll probably come across something they said that sounds pretty stupid in today's context.

What's perhaps more interesting and disturbing is a trend I've noticed for Greens to also attack Bernie. Going green isn't a prominent element of Bernie's platform - so you can see Greens wanting someone of their own (unless or until Bernie gets stronger on that issue). But they aren't just saying they want someone better on environmental issues, they are actually trashing Bernie. Mainly because he supports Israel. He's only a luke-warm supporter of Israel when compared with the rabid views on the right, but even a luke-warm supporter is too much for some of the outspoken Greens on Facebook. Given that Bernie and the Greens agree on nearly everything else (as far as I can tell), I don't get the attacks.
 
The biggest threat to our union right now is income inequality. As many here know my views I am pretty open minded and love me some wealth accumulation but it has gotten to an insane level and is entirely way out of balance, like eventual uprising in the next 25-50 years level. Sanders is the only candidate that is willing to honestly discuss this issue and while I probably don't agree with his solutions to the problem I appreciate that he is crusading on it bc he is definitely swimming against traditional political waters in this area.

The fact that when he was 30 he had a very healthy sex imagination and views is of no concern to me and really shouldn't be fore anyone else either. I read his items as if he was taking a stab at trashy romance fiction writing bc it reads that way to me.

I like Bernie and am surprised more don't. Its funny when people state they want more honest politicians but then support someone like Hillary and trash someone like Bernie...makes no sense.
 
The biggest threat to our union right now is income inequality. As many here know my views I am pretty open minded and love me some wealth accumulation but it has gotten to an insane level and is entirely way out of balance, like eventual uprising in the next 25-50 years level. Sanders is the only candidate that is willing to honestly discuss this issue and while I probably don't agree with his solutions to the problem I appreciate that he is crusading on it bc he is definitely swimming against traditional political waters in this area.

The fact that when he was 30 he had a very healthy sex imagination and views is of no concern to me and really shouldn't be fore anyone else either. I read his items as if he was taking a stab at trashy romance fiction writing bc it reads that way to me.

I like Bernie and am surprised more don't. Its funny when people state they want more honest politicians but then support someone like Hillary and trash someone like Bernie...makes no sense.
Well said.

On your last point - people claiming to want honest politicians, yet rejecting those who are - that reminds me of the 2000 election. Possibly the #1 "issue" then was integrity. Which candidate had essentially unassailable integrity? Ralph Nader. Who did people vote for? And what's almost as bad is that those who DID vote for Nader get blamed by the Ds for helping Bush win.
 
Well said.

On your last point - people claiming to want honest politicians, yet rejecting those who are - that reminds me of the 2000 election. Possibly the #1 "issue" then was integrity. Which candidate had essentially unassailable integrity? Ralph Nader. Who did people vote for? And what's almost as bad is that those who DID vote for Nader get blamed by the Ds for helping Bush win.

Yep and people shouldn't blame Nader voters for Bush winning, Bush won bc Al Gore is more unlikeable and robot like than Mitt Romney.

Also GWB had a secret weapon that Obama has as well (and Hillary certainly lacks) in the fact that they are two extremely likeable people (politics aside). People can beat up on Bush all they like but his biggest mistake to me was hiring and listening to Donald Rumsfeld and Dick Chaney. I think GWB wanted the best for Murica but he got terrible advice and listen to the wrong people who had other motives. Same with Obama, he could have done so much more but instead of things like universal HC we get Obama care (ugh).

Anyways I will probably now get bashed by some here for saying GWB seems like a decent and relatable human being at his core.
 
I hope he scares the living sh*t out of every facet of the 2-party system. The more he scares them, the more I'm for him... even if I completely disagree with a lot lot of his policies. I need to find out where he stands on US military involvement around the world.
 
  • Like
Reactions: unIowa
I'm more disturbed by his crappy writing than the subject matter.

Clearly, he was reaching for an impactful metaphor. But that was a big swing and a miss.

I plan on reading it to my wife tonight to see if it has a 50 Shades of Grey effect on her. Here is to sleeping on the couch.
 
Yep and people shouldn't blame Nader voters for Bush winning, Bush won bc Al Gore is more unlikeable and robot like than Mitt Romney.

Also GWB had a secret weapon that Obama has as well (and Hillary certainly lacks) in the fact that they are two extremely likeable people (politics aside). People can beat up on Bush all they like but his biggest mistake to me was hiring and listening to Donald Rumsfeld and Dick Chaney. I think GWB wanted the best for Murica but he got terrible advice and listen to the wrong people who had other motives. Same with Obama, he could have done so much more but instead of things like universal HC we get Obama care (ugh).

Anyways I will probably now get bashed by some here for saying GWB seems like a decent and relatable human being at his core.
And just like GWB, Obummer added a lot of questionable people in his cabinet.
 
Anyways I will probably now get bashed by some here for saying GWB seems like a decent and relatable human being at his core.

George W. Bush was a very likeable, conscientious human being... with horrible men around him. He's a bit too connected to some of the most powerful people in history to be guilt-free on having his hands in on the really corrupt activity.

Also, just being a likeable guy doesn't make you executive material. It kinda makes you ideal to be a lackey for people who are really in charge. I'll never understand this inane fear of Barack Obama being some Stalin-esque dictator who rules with no regard for anything. He's as much of a flunkie as every other president I ever saw. They don't get that position if they're too headstrong and have a predisposition of going rogue. The last one that did that got a toe-tag and a ride home in the cargo area of Air Force One.
 
Yep and people shouldn't blame Nader voters for Bush winning, Bush won bc Al Gore is more unlikeable and robot like than Mitt Romney.

Also GWB had a secret weapon that Obama has as well (and Hillary certainly lacks) in the fact that they are two extremely likeable people (politics aside). People can beat up on Bush all they like but his biggest mistake to me was hiring and listening to Donald Rumsfeld and Dick Chaney. I think GWB wanted the best for Murica but he got terrible advice and listen to the wrong people who had other motives. Same with Obama, he could have done so much more but instead of things like universal HC we get Obama care (ugh).

Anyways I will probably now get bashed by some here for saying GWB seems like a decent and relatable human being at his core.

Molly Ivins said Bush wasn't dumb. I trust Molly Ivins. And, yes, he seems rather likeable.

Hard to separate Bush from his policies or to know for sure where he would have taken us without the neocon cabal he brought into office. Still, he DID bring the neocons into office with him. Most of the reports suggest that Bush was gung ho to invade Iraq from the beginning, but was it his own idea? Even if you want to cut him some slack on that, he also gave us the awful Bush tax cuts which have played a big role in the inequality that you correctly objected to in your earlier post.

I would probably have voted D in that election if Bill Bradley had won the nomination. I later came to appreciate Gore, but that was several years later when he started taking strong stands on the war (in addition to his good work on the environment) - but at the time he was pretty awful. Better than Bush - just because he was better on most issues - but not someone I wanted in office.
 
So writing about women's fantasies makes you a lunatic? Cool - good to know.:cool:

Indulging in sexually perverse, quasi-satanic rituals as a pre-requisite to becoming full fledged members of the Skull and Bones fraternity, like the Bushies did, is what - normal?:confused:

Full disclosure: I wouldn't vote for a Republican or a Democrat. Or a Socialist even; though now I'm just being redundant.;)
 
Molly Ivins said Bush wasn't dumb. I trust Molly Ivins. And, yes, he seems rather likeable.

Hard to separate Bush from his policies or to know for sure where he would have taken us without the neocon cabal he brought into office. Still, he DID bring the neocons into office with him. Most of the reports suggest that Bush was gung ho to invade Iraq from the beginning, but was it his own idea? Even if you want to cut him some slack on that, he also gave us the awful Bush tax cuts which have played a big role in the inequality that you correctly objected to in your earlier post.

I would probably have voted D in that election if Bill Bradley had won the nomination. I later came to appreciate Gore, but that was several years later when he started taking strong stands on the war (in addition to his good work on the environment) - but at the time he was pretty awful. Better than Bush - just because he was better on most issues - but not someone I wanted in office.

I agree that those tax cuts accelerated the income gap however I still think the biggest culprit in what is happening from an emotional standpoint (and not just the math) has more to do with the lack of opportunity or income opportunity in the lower and middle classes of America. Yes those tax rates helped some zoom ahead but the real tragedy is the loss of real wages at those lower and middle levels. I will say though if we are going to have such concentrated wealth then those with the most should be providing the most to fund the govt, to me that means increasing Cap Gains rates and bringing back the death tax. Some might claim that to be unfair but I am talking about the top of the top where this would have an impact. Not the 1% (Docs, Lawyers, High comp Sales Professionals, Beau Thomas, etc.) but the 1% of the 1% who holds extraordinary amounts of wealth when compared to everyone else combined. I don't fee much monetary sympathy for this group as they will be ok either way.
 
So writing about women's fantasies makes you a lunatic? Cool - good to know.:cool:

Indulging in sexually perverse, quasi-satanic rituals as a pre-requisite to becoming full fledged members of the Skull and Bones fraternity, like the Bushies did, is what - normal?:confused:

Full disclosure: I wouldn't vote for a Republican or a Democrat. Or a Socialist even; though now I'm just being redundant.;)
Ha. I wonder how our GOPs and cons would react to being called "socialist" over and over.
 
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT