Did World War II Cause a Lasting Change in Sexual Mores?

phylo_roadking · Post by **phylo_roadking** » Fri Jul 07, 2006 4:35 pm

Wasnt strictly speaking the divorce that was more acceptable, it was easier to obtain because seom of the rules had been relaxed in and around remarriage, to cope with the number of MIA spouses.

phylo

Cott Tiger · Post by **Cott Tiger** » Sun Jul 09, 2006 5:24 am

The huge influx of hundreds of thousands hot-bloodied young American soldiers during the build up to D-Day had quite an impact on the ladies of southern England I believe!

Whether or not this had any long-term impact on sexual morality I’m not sure, but it certainly had an immediate impact on sexual promiscuity.

Aristaeus · Post by **Aristaeus** » Mon Jul 10, 2006 9:27 am

Commissar D, the Evil wrote:So, did WWII interrupt the decline of sexual morality or simply reinforce it?
One could argue that, after a war, societies become more conservative, not less, as people seek "normalcy".

Best,
~D, the EviL

I can not speak for the rest of Europe, but as far as Germany is concerned not much changed with regards to sexual immorality.
Germany went from a National Socialist Nation that promoted promiscuity for procreation to an immediate post war Germany that used that promiscuity in return for support and lively hood from Allied soldiers.
As a result of the war marriage, family, and sexuality in the United States became more conservitive and stayed that way well into the mid 1960's.
The 1960's signaled the beginning of immorality and sexual degredation in the U.S.

Helmut Von Moltke · Post by **Helmut Von Moltke** » Mon Jul 10, 2006 7:21 pm

The 1960's signaled the beginning of immorality and sexual degredation in the U.S.

Unfortunately that is true. With the birth of the hippies and the condomns and the women organisations chanting for all kinds of abortion being illegal. Not saying that abortion in all ways should be banned, but some sorts of abortion are simply too much. This decline in sexual morality is also part of the decline of the west, co inciding with political correctness, leftie socialist governments, large amounts of unpatriotic immigrants, birth rates going down, danger from Islamic terrorism, etc. Just like the Roman empire in it's dying days, with letting in all the barbarians while getting immoral. In a few hundred years Western culture and civilization would be a myth, a holy relic of the past. Glad I won't have to see that.

Kevin

phylo_roadking · Post by **phylo_roadking** » Wed Jul 12, 2006 7:48 am

Kevin, as we say in Northern Ireland, you're ass-about-face with your comparison with the Roman Empire; it was Golden Age Rome - from the time of Caesar thru to the fal of the Republic, and the first century of the Principate, that was the time of Rome's lowest moral nadir. The later Roman Empire was actually a VERY moral place in comparison, with the overwhelming moral guidance of the early Church of Rome. And as politcal amd military chaos spread, "Roman" life moved back out of the cities into a more rural, estate-centred environment again, where there was little opportunity to get enough of the neighbours in for a good orgy!

phylo

Nibelung · Post by **Nibelung** » Sun Jul 23, 2006 3:21 am

Kevin chill out, you will be very happy should you (or shall I say yoour other) need assistance of the abortion personnel...

Not to mention your claim of barbarians is correct! Rome was an old collapsing power which allowed that new powers (which were familiar with Roman culture) could rise and bring new and better means of production, trade, military, government control...etc.

As for westrn civilisation...what's the joke that you keep poundering the same Leon Degrelle theories? Chill out man! Sex never killed anyone...perhaps you will see that some day...Or do you plan that all people should be supervised and controlled so they are not immoral...Europe and Western Civilisation had enough of that, thank you. It had many names Inquisition to name just one. And then again, what is immoral?

phylo_roadking · Post by **phylo_roadking** » Sun Jul 23, 2006 8:01 am

Hey with MY blood pressure problems, Sex nearly kills ME!!!!

Helmut Von Moltke · Post by **Helmut Von Moltke** » Sun Jul 23, 2006 8:08 am

hello Miha,

the same Leon Degrelle theories?

no. Patrick J. Buchanan "Death of the West" doomsday theories, actually.

Of course sex is not harmful, it is a normal thing. However it is wrong to make a big deal out of it, or have sex with someone else when you are married. You should always remain loyal to your wife, this famous motto should apply to this: Mein Ehre Heisst Treu.

To do bad sex like this is, to be honest, "immoral".

need assistance of the abortion personnel...

Don't need it. I haven't had the magic 3 letter S word in my life yet.

Moral Regards,

~K, the EviL

Nibelung · Post by **Nibelung** » Sun Jul 23, 2006 10:36 am

Oh, Kevin my friend...I advise you to look at this thread in about 3 years!

...things change, people change and sooner or later you will have some issues with enforced authority of government and morals too...just you wait!

best,
Miha

Michael N. Ryan · Post by **Michael N. Ryan** » Wed Aug 02, 2006 11:09 am

From what I have been reading over the years on the subject, World War Two didn't in and of itself loosen morals but it certainly disrupted socieies of europe to allow the Leftists to come into power and through them morals were loosened.

We have all heard about the Lebensborns and the nazi promotion of promiscuity among the young to increase the birthrate.

The Wehrmacht issued condoms to its troops to reduce the spread of venerial disease. They set up brothels in occupied areas for the same reason as well as to prevent sexual harassment of women in occupied areas by German soldiers.

Most of Today's moral cancers didn't start during WWII but started coming afterward.

As has been mentioned, Weimar Republic Germany was europe's sexual debaucher hotbed though Austria also did have its rot as well.

Hitler promised to clean things up in order to obtain power.

Initially, he did do somethings. He forced prostitutes into licenced brothels. (So did Musolini). He banned much pornography and put a lot of restrictions on contraceptions. However as war began a lot of these restrictions were undone supposedly to encourage the birth rate.

As for his alleged persecution of Homosexuals. Through out the entire KZ history, only seventeen thousand pink triangles were issued. The official listing of deaths of Homosexuals is Ten to Twelve thousand. Which is pretty low. For a nation whose population is about eighty six million that is a very very low number whether you embrace the conservative estimate of One Point Five percent of Population or the Kinsey number of Ten percent. This is very low in comparison to other groups Hitler had it out for and sent the Gestapo after. In addition Paragraph 175 was not enforced outside Germany. Lesbians weren't prosecuted under it.

At the same time there are rumors about Walther Funk, Theorodre Eiche,
Rudolf Hess and variosu other top nazis and many allegations about KZ guards. I have also read of instances of Homosexuality among Baldur von Schirach's Hitler Youth leaders.

But most of the big stuff happened after WWII.

Rolf Steiner · Post by **Rolf Steiner** » Wed Aug 02, 2006 2:15 pm

Hi Michael

Would this imply that the party's approach was to publicly denounce homosexuality, but unofficially to 'look the other way' provided people didn't draw too much attention to themselves?

Michael N. Ryan wrote:
As for his alleged persecution of Homosexuals. Through out the entire KZ history, only seventeen thousand pink triangles were issued. The official listing of deaths of Homosexuals is Ten to Twelve thousand. Which is pretty low. For a nation whose population is about eighty six million that is a very very low number whether you embrace the conservative estimate of One Point Five percent of Population or the Kinsey number of Ten percent. This is very low in comparison to other groups Hitler had it out for and sent the Gestapo after. In addition Paragraph 175 was not enforced outside Germany. Lesbians weren't prosecuted under it. .

phylo_roadking · Post by **phylo_roadking** » Wed Aug 02, 2006 2:39 pm

Rolf, we probably have to be pragmatic about this; id guess a LOT of closet homosexuals were known about - and were TOLD they were known.....the THREAT of a KZ is great for promoting loyalty and hard work if one is essential and good at one's job LOL. Likewise, if the UK example was anything to go by, for serving troops etc. a blind eye was maybe turned...why persecute guys who were gonna cop it anyway? Let them play... But openly gay men were definitely against the NSDAP ideal norm, so by Nazi standards they were BEGGING for arrest....

phylo

Michael N. Ryan · Post by **Michael N. Ryan** » Wed Aug 02, 2006 3:20 pm

Any moralizing actions of their's was strictly public relations.

You might say the nazis were the first group to adopt a Don't Ask Don't tell policy. From what I have been reading up, if the Gestapo was interested in finding members of a group they found them.

I read Sepp Dietrich felt out of place among Hitler's original bodyguard in the fact he was the only one among them who didn't have a boyfriend.

Men were kicked out of the nazi party and the wehrmacht even if they were rumored to be partly Jewish or if they refused to divorce wives even rumored to be part jewish. Others outside the nazis lost their jobs. The actor Joachim Gottschalk is just one tragic case.

Walthur Funk was kept. Rudolf Hess has some material to him as well.

They employed the French collaborator Robert Brasillach.

Roehm and his crowd were shot because they challenged Hitler's power.
(One of them, August Schneidhuber was married to a Jewish woman).

Himmler publicly denounced it but I have read accounts of SS men molesting Hitler Youth boys without being punished.

Just as I have read of accounts of Homosexuals in the SS among its officer corps. SA leader Lutze would complain about them to Himmler demanding he stop calling the SA nasty things. Right up to the day of his 'accident'.

Lebesnborns aside, there was a lot of decadence and debauchery practiced by the nazis that had nothing to do with reproduction. The infamous spectacle Festival of the Amazons perpetrated on the grounds of the Nymphenburg palace, more like an orgy in practice, reveals quite a lot about them. Far from the German prudes they portrayed themselves, they were a very sexually tolerant group. Very very liberated. Socially they were really quite liberal in a society that was very very prudish.

Martin Borman and Joseph Goebbels were womanizers of the worst kind.

phylo_roadking · Post by **phylo_roadking** » Wed Aug 02, 2006 3:35 pm

Michael, your last line re Bormann and Goebbels - its best to avoid individuals as indicating a trend, becuase they're exactly that. For instance - does Eisenhower's panel of SIX mistresses throughout the war period, kept separate and taken care of by the Pentagon - monthly "health" checkups etc., indicate his was a raving sex maniac....or a hardworking general whom a realistic headquarters realised had A/ to be kept happy and hard at work and b/ safe from disease LOL and....does it indicate that this was provided to EVERY US officer? Don't think so lol the rankers wouldn't have been issued with nylons it it was LOL

phylo

Michael N. Ryan · Post by **Michael N. Ryan** » Wed Aug 02, 2006 4:46 pm

I have not heard about Eisenhower's mistresses. Most of the American Generals I know most about come from the Civil War.

I mention Goebbels and Bormann as examples. I wish to make everyone understand I am not singling out any group. The nazis embraced all debauchers while publicly denouncing them.

Would you wish me to bring up I believe madam Kitty's establishment, the Brothel Heydrich set up with all the microphones. I didn't mention it first since it isn't as much an example of the nazi immorality in practice but rather the exploitation of it.

Truth is that the nazis publicly championed morality to win support of the German people. They were among the most immoral people of their time.