If it weren't for the reference to four marriages, you'd think that James Dobson or Phyllis Schlafly wrote this
One significant, and enduring, effect of The Pill on female sexual attitudes during the 60's, was: "Now we can have sex anytime we want, without the consequences. Hallelujah, let's party!"
It remains this way. These days, nobody seems able to "keep it in their pants" or honor a commitment! Raising the question: Is marriage still a viable option? I'm ashamed to admit that I myself have been married four times, and yet I still feel that it is the cornerstone of civilization, an essential institution that stabilizes society, provides a sanctuary for children and saves us from anarchy.
In stark contrast, a lack of sexual inhibitions, or as some call it, "sexual freedom," has taken the caution and discernment out of choosing a sexual partner, which used to be the equivalent of choosing a life partner. Without a commitment, the trust and loyalty between couples of childbearing age is missing, and obviously leads to incidents of infidelity. No one seems immune.
The author is Raquel Welch.
She also had this to say about her career:
“When you're just a poster girl it’s such an empty, empty feeling, and even though people may admire you, it’s not for who you are. It's not about you, it's just about 'her' and that totally superficial kind of a look," Welch continued. "I don't think anybody wants to feel like that they're just good because of having looks. It’s just very uncomfortable and rather sad."
Update: Click over to my 2003 post on how both the strictest and loosest attitudes toward modesty devalue women. The money quote:
One [attitude] places sexual beauty on so high a pedestal that non-sexual beauty receives far less notice and appreciation as sexual beauty. The other perceives all or most aspects of female beauty to be erotic in nature, thus calling for a legalistic code of modesty that conceals even that which does not necessarily incite prurient interest.