Quote# 85093

[On Mae West]

The sexual inroads made in the 60's were blazed by West's movies in the thirties. Her films helped to establish an aura of promiscuity and acceptance of sexual immorality beyond that of Valentino in the 20's. Police were often ushered in to put a stop to her stage performances, and the movie censors were in full steam to ban her lavish sexual portrayals. The Penal Code at the time prohibited "obscene, indecent, immoral or impure drama," and prosecuted all who aided and abetted such performances. In spite of authority's attempts to protect society from her licentious ways, her popularity and fame soared. Men and women everywhere flocked to see the latest films and to take in her seductive messages.

Satan, mastermind that he is, is completely aware of how to produce wanton desire in the hearts of men. Mae was his puppet for such feats. West has been hailed as a prodigy with insight beyond her years for the simple reason that she wrote and produced many of her movies and stage acts. However, West did not create her productions of her own accord, they were completely given to her. West's contact with the spirit world was responsible for producing the scripts that catapulted her into stardom as the “Queen of Sex.”

Jason Kovar, Good Fight Ministries 44 Comments [12/27/2011 3:57:37 AM]
Fundie Index: 51

Username  (Login)
Comment  (Text formatting help) 

1 2 | bottom


Who's Mae West? Wait, was she like a Marylin Monroe before Marylin Monroe?

12/27/2011 4:34:49 AM


Mae West was condemned in the 1930's because of her "licentiousness", but, more likely, her portrayls of independent women who took control of their own sexuality. That was radical for the 1930's. Her portrayals seem tame by today's standards.

12/27/2011 4:39:49 AM


Mae West. One of the first women with the balls (pun intended) to portray a self-conscious woman. ON FILM! AND IN PUBLIC! god forbid!

But of course, then she must have been of the debil...

12/27/2011 4:44:44 AM

Percy Q. Shunn


12/27/2011 5:22:12 AM

Jubba the Mad

Anything I don't agree with = SATAN!

12/27/2011 5:32:53 AM

Fanny Hill was published in the late XVIII century . I don´t think she invented more than her(or she was a nun in comparison with the female character and her creator)

12/27/2011 5:59:32 AM


Mae West?

How about the "Virgin" Mary shamefully showing her breasts:

12/27/2011 6:24:44 AM

Zosimus the Heathen

Interesting that this screed also mentions Rudolph Valentino, who was apparently condemned in his time for contributing to the "feminization" of the American male. Just one of the reasons I dismiss all the current scaremongering about the "feminization" of the modern male as the hysterical nonsense it is. As for the OP's rant about West, what's he been smoking (and, more importantly, where can I get some for myself)?

12/27/2011 7:01:37 AM


Blaming Mae West for the licentiousness of 60s movies?! Dude, you need to get with the program. Try some 2011 porn to really blow your mind.

12/27/2011 7:34:26 AM

Doubting Thomas

Those filthy movies from the 1920's & 30's, all full of sex and lust! Nobody ever wanted to have sex before Mae West became a star! Next thing you know women will be wearing pants instead of a dress!

12/27/2011 7:40:19 AM

rubber chicken

Whereas Clara Bow, Fatty Arbuckle, Charlie Chaplin et al were veritable models of propriety and innocence ?

12/27/2011 7:50:50 AM


Wait, so what you're saying is that we've been emasculated and feminized and have had our gender roles taken from us for almost a century now? When, pray tell, exactly WERE Men Men and Women Women? Your examples reach back to "the 20's" which were very nearly 100 years ago. At this point I think all the "damage" that could possibly be done has been done.

12/27/2011 7:54:42 AM


Mae West was her own mastermind.

To the guy who thinks an image of a woman breastfeeding equates to something sexual: You're an idiot. The twisted ideas of nitwits like yourself have resulted in millions of American babies being deprived of good nutrition because somebody was offended by the sight or sound of a baby nursing. Viva La Leche League!

12/27/2011 8:35:32 AM


Several millenia ago, some wise men noted the correlation between indiscriminate sex and disease (STD's today), and the lack of disease for virginal, monogamous sex partners. Because they had no knowledge of germs, bacteria, etc., they believed the diseases contracted by the sexually indiscriminate was a sign from God that he disapproved of indiscriminate sex. The correleation was the proof of this.

They were so sure of the correlation, that they labored mightily to channel folks away from indiscriminate sex. One way was to deem any lustful thoughts/desires as sinful in and of itself along with condemning wanton sex in general. Thoughts lead to action, and those thoughts might lead to actions that lead to disease. Of course, the opposite action of sex between virgin, monogamous partners was deemed blessed by God as it avoided these diseases.

Of course, for some time now, mankind has known that the origins of STD's to be germs, bacteria, etc. Which means that the evil the ancients thought they saw, based on their limited knowledge, really isn't the evil they deemed it to be. It's well past time for the Abrahamic religions to re-think their sexual mores in light of this new knowledge.

As matter of fact, Christianity has no excuse on this. Jesus taught his followers to seek the truth and the truth will set you free. The truth is that the ancients were wrong on the cause of STD's, therefore the "sin" proclaimed by them was wrong, too.

IOW, the secular world is way ahead of the religious world on matters of sex because the religious world refuses to incorporate new knowledge in its moral calculations. Ironically, I think this was what Jesus was trying to instill in followers when he instructed them to seek the truth. They still haven't figured it out.

12/27/2011 8:37:30 AM

Brendan Rizzo

In other words, "Waah, people before the sixties weren't all as prudish as the Victorians, Waah!!!"

In all seriousness, the sexual revolution had little to do with Ms. West. Why complain about something from eighty years ago, anyway?

12/27/2011 9:07:13 AM

Thinking Allowed

I'm surprised that Jason didn't mention this character. After all, legend has it she was based on Mae West.

12/27/2011 10:03:52 AM



To the guy who thinks an image of a woman breastfeeding equates to something sexual: You're an idiot.

Did you feel that sight breeze? That was the point of that post flying way way over your head. Ironic humor isn't one of your stronger traits, is it? ;-) Not to mention renaissance paintings. "Renai-what?" Renaissance.

12/27/2011 10:13:15 AM


Oh, JK, if you could only go back and enact a law to prevent Mae West from being born, then no one would ever think of sex.

12/27/2011 10:57:13 AM


I can't recall we thought much at all about Mae West in the Sixties. Now, if she's inspiring demonic thoughts in anyone, though, it seems to be Cheri, here.

12/27/2011 11:48:07 AM


So she empowered women and is of the devil. Nice to see how the devil empowers women over your god. I think I like the devil more and more the more Christians talk about him.

12/27/2011 12:39:25 PM

Old Viking

I know that whatever accounted for Mae's success, goodness had nothing to do with it.

12/27/2011 1:48:58 PM


If this guy had received an education rather than a Christian indoctrination he might have heard of the Greek tragedies/comedies, Chaucer, and a guy named Shakespeare. Heck! Even his own Buybull is full of tales of seduction, rape, sexual slavery, and prostitution. I am forced to conclude that the poor freak is incapable of reading, much less understanding, anything with more words than a gum wrapper.

12/27/2011 1:53:09 PM


This Satan of yours sure takes the long way around for such a "mastermind". Three words:

Rome. Go fuck yourself.


The Victorian era you guys have a hard-on for was chock-full of brothels. You seem to love hypocrisy. Since you value appearance over substance, that shouldn't surprise me.

12/27/2011 1:54:59 PM


I thought it was the gays you guys didn't like? Now everyone's not allowed any sex?

12/27/2011 2:39:49 PM


Okay, this is just silly.

12/27/2011 2:59:49 PM

1 2 | top: comments page