Atheist Video About Being a Virgin of Sexually Abstinent – My Critique of the Atheist’s Critique
When I am on You Tube, I seldom seek out videos about marriage, sex, dating, or singleness.
When I do visit You Tube, I normally seek out subject matter such as movie reviews and cute animal videos, but this video by “Paulogia” was bumped to the top of my ‘suggested videos to watch’ list by You Tube, so I decided to take a look.
I actually do not enjoy reading or watching content by people who are critical of ‘virginity- until- marriage,’ or who pick apart and criticize Christian teachings about sex. I find these types of things tedious, insulting, and annoying, depending on their take.
In this video, the atheist, Paul of “Paulogia” on You Tube, has a woman co-host in the video with him (I suppose she is an atheist too), Liz, where they are critiquing the video of some guy, Joe Kirby (who is a Christian), who is advocating for sexual abstinence until marriage (which is not a bad thing to advocate for, despite Liz’s seemingly sounding disdain for this).
I’ve never heard of Joe Kirby before. His You Tube page is (Link): here, “Off the Kirb Ministries”. I’ve never watched any of his videos before. All I’ve seen are the clips of the one Kirby video in the Paulogia video.
Okay, yes, as I watched more of the video, Paul says that Liz is an ex-Christian who gives sex advice on her You Tube channel (more about this below).
Off to the side, you can see a screen capture I made from part of the video where a cartoon Liz, with a cartoon Paul, are watching Kirby’s (who doesn’t appear as a cartoon) video. Watching cartoon talking heads discuss sexual mores was strange
Here is the video in question to which I refer:
(Link, You Tube, 13.30 long video): If You’re Still a Virgin – You MUST See This! feat. Liz LaPoint) (Off the Kirb response)
This video will also be placed within this post at or near the bottom of this post
As I’ve said before on this blog, in earlier blog posts going back years, while conservative Christians and secular social conservatives have, on occasion, erred in regards to their beliefs and teachings about sex, dating, and marriage (I’ve done many critiques about their views, see the section below under “Related Posts on this Blog” for a few samples) your Non-Christians (including atheists, progressive feminists, and so on), are also in error on different points.
Sometimes obnoxiously so.
In the atheist video on the Paulogia channel, near the opening, the woman co-host, Liz, brings up Purity Culture.
Many ex-Christians (some of whom now identify as atheist) and still-Christian-yet-now-progressive, have sticking points with, and grudges against, Purity Culture, and particularly the analogies that were sometimes used in Purity Culture in years past – such as, Purity Culture teachers comparing promiscuity or fornicators to things such as used chewing gum.
Which is actually not an altogether bad analogy, whether the object is used chewing gum, a rose that has lost its petals, a tape that has lost its stickiness, or dirt in a glass of clean water, considering the following:
Do you know when someone develops a sexually transmitted disease, and if the CDC is interested in tracking down the disease’s origins or rate of spread, they will ask the diseased or infected person to provide them with a list of everyone in their sexual history?
As I recall it explained some time ago, in the context of medical science and sexual infections, you’re not just sleeping with one partner at a time – you’re effectively sleeping with everyone your partner has ever slept with, too. That is pretty gross and illuminating.
(That is a science- based fact that I seldom see purity culture-, celibacy-, and virginity- scoffers and mockers mention. Condoms are not always 100% effective. If you’re part of the two percent with that failure rate, well then, it sucks to be you. Good luck with that sexual risk taking. I almost forgot about this: (Link): Vietnamese Factory Busted Recycling Hundreds of Thousands of Used Condoms)
The pro-virginity guy, Kirby, being critiqued by the atheists on You Tube uses a “used tape” analogy at the top of his video.
The more he sticks the tape to his arm, peels it off, and attempts to re-stick it to his arm, the more the tape loses its stickiness.
Use of Condoms / Rates of Sexual Activity Among Teens
Liz the atheist mentions some old study from years ago about how teens raised in purity culture (ie, sexual abstinence until marriage) are less likely to use condoms and the like if they do become sexually active. (I may have blogged about that years ago.)
Here are some other studies and research that dampens her point (and note that it’s not always religious persons who object to, or have trouble with, realizing their spouse had sex with others prior to marriage):
So, maybe promiscuity isn’t as great or physically or mentally healthy as Liz, or ‘sex positive’ feminists, seem to think it is.
Maybe the “used chewing gum” or “used sticky tape” analogies do have some truth or merit to them after all.
Secular Champions of Singleness and Sexual Abstinence
There are secular, pro-singleness, pro-asexuality, pro-celibacy persons, such as Bella DePaulo, who periodically reports studies and commentary pointing out that often times, people who remain single and/or chaste (who do not engage in sex), including teens and 20 somethings who abstain, are often times more physically and mentally healthy than their peers who date and/or who have sex.
I have various posts on my blog with links to such research and commentary. Here is an example or two:
DePaulo recognizes that SECULAR – not just Christians, but SECULAR – culture is obsessed with marriage, with making people who are single by choice or by circumstance, or who aren’t interested in having sex, feel like weirdo freaks, and such people are often treated in a negatively discriminatory or mocking fashion in culture.
Not by DePaulo, but along the same lines (I have no idea what this author’s religious beliefs are):
As far as I know, DePaulo is NOT a Christian (if she is, I’ve never seen her promote her pro-singleness, pro-abstinence views in the context of Christianity, or quoting Bible verses to support her positions).
It’s not just conservatives or Christians who do this. Will Liz and Paul make a video covering this secular aspect of dating, sexual behavior, and societal attitudes about all of these topics? Probably not.
By the way – a lot of secular progressives, including self proclaimed feminists, love to mock or criticize women who choose of their own volition to remain virgins until marriage, or to remain chaste if they were at one time sexually active, regardless of the motives – regardless if it’s due to fear of contracting a disease, fear of unwanted pregnancy, due to religious convictions, whatever it may be.
I have examples of this on my blog. Here is just one (I have others):
Choice is Supported by Leftists – Until it Conflicts With Leftist Narratives and Leftist Values
Feminists, liberals, and progressives are supposed to support “choice,” but they don’t, not when those choices oppose left wing narratives.
I have samples on my blog of secularists / progressives / liberals / feminists who MOCK and CRITICIZE adults for being virgins into their 30s and beyond, whether by conviction or by circumstance.
Leftists, some feminists, and some liberals also mock and criticize adults with homosexual orientations who chose to remain celibate (these are usually Christians who identify as having homosexual orientations, who abstain due to religious beliefs).
The Left’s Love Affair with Cramming Transgenderism Down Culture’s Collective Throat
The secular far left, and some liberals, are now also supporting things like insisting that non-trans persons should date trans persons, and they are supporting things like biological men who identify as women (transwomen) in doing things like harassing biological women who are lesbian into having sex, when these lesbians have no interest in having sex with persons who have penises, regardless of how those penis-owners identify.
How is that any better than some Christian guy promoting purity culture on You Tube via scotch tape analogies?
Here are several examples on my blog of non-Trans persons, or of “TRAs,” (Trans Rights Activists) or trans themselves, harassing and bullying people into dating, having sex with, trans persons, or allowing “transwoman” (biological men) into women’s only spaces, and other forms of bullying by progressives, feminists, and leftists:
(Link): Lesbian Biological Women Are Being Pressured (by Liberals, Trans Rights Activists and Progressives) into Having Sex With Biological Men Who Claim to be Transwomen – Trans Rights Movement is Toxic to Women; TRAs Perpetuate Rape Culture
^Again, that would not be Christians, Republicans, conservatives, pro-purity culture individuals, or Trump voters who are engaging in that behavior.
Liberals and the left have become the “Dating and Sex Gestapo” in the last few years.
What I mean is that the left, and many liberals, are now running around on social media and their blog posts insisting and screaming that people should be pressured into, or forced to, date or have sex with people who they are not attracted to or interested in romantically or sexually.
It’s THE LEFT and some liberals who are doing this judgmental and shaming behavior; NOT “pro purity culture” Christians.
Celibacy or Virginity Being Shamed and Derided by Secularists (and by Christians)
Instead of respecting someone’s choice or circumstance of not being sexually active, there are dunder-headed non-Christians (and some progressive Christians) equating an adult’s choice (or situation) to be sexually abstinent as being the same thing as being “sexually repressed,” which is terribly inaccurate and patronizing.
I have a few examples of that on my blog as well (some may be under the “related links” section at the bottom – you can find them by doing a search on this blog).
Having Sex Does Not Make A Person An Adult
A person does not have to engage in sexual intercourse, oral sex, or other sexual acts, to be a full fledged adult.
I am an adult whether I have sex or not.
This false notion that it takes sex (and marriage) to make a person into a full-fledged adult (which is a view also shared by a lot of pro-Nuclear Family Christians) results in single, celibate adults over the age of 25 being mistreated by most denominations and churches (and by secular culture as well).
Ask any single, Christian adult over the age of 25, especially ones who are not having sex, who’ve never married, how their church treats them, and the vast majority will tell you that they’re condescendingly viewed as children and not given the same “perks” and respect as their married- with- children peers, because many Christians view sexually abstinent, single adults as being the same as children.
More discussion of that here:
I’m not keen with Christians associating having sex with “being an adult” and being repressed (which they do, especially the progressive Christians) any more than I am delighted to see atheists or secularists equate “being an adult” with “having sex,” or abstaining from sex as “being repressed.”
Stop pathologizing people who chose to refrain from having sex, or who may want to have sex but have been unable to find a compatible partner.
More Teens and Adults Around the World are Opting Out of Marriage, Dating, and Sex – And Christian Purity Culture Has Nothing to Do With These World Wide Societal Shifts
Studies in the last few years have been reporting that more and more people, including teens and 20 somethings, in the United States and other nations, are choosing to stay single, are choosing to avoid sex, either because of the financial costs or just plain lack of interest!
And these are not all theists or Christians.
I have many examples of that on my blog as well, here is just a few (you can use my blog’s search feature and tags to find even more examples) – is Liz going to blame all the following lack of sex and lack of marriage all on American, purity culture Christians?
Are all these celibate people covered in the news stories below “repressed,” or are they not adults, and if you think so, upon what basis?
(Link): Why Are Young People Having So Little Sex? America is in a Sex Recession – by K. Jullian – via The Atlantic
Most Christians and Conservative Groups No Longer Support Purity Culture, Celibacy, or Virginity Until Marriage
I’ve done a series of posts on my blog over the years – with links to news stories as example – of how Christians and conservative think tanks no longer truly support sexual abstinence until marriage – if you’re a virgin over the age of 25, many Christians will treat you just as poorly as secular culture. I have examples of that on my blog.
Most Christians revere marriage and parenthood to such an insane degree that they will ridicule, shame, or insult any adult who, by choice or by circumstance, is single, childless, and/or a virgin past the age of 25.
An example or two of that (Al Mohler is a well known Southern Baptist Christian):
(Link): Conservatives Have Now Abandoned All Pretense of Advocating For Sexual Abstinence and They Actually Lament the Lack of Fornication – The Bradford Wilcox [conservative writer who often publishes pro-marriage/natalism pieces for media outlets] Piece, 2019
These Christian groups and persons are so heavily into promoting marriage and natalism, especially now as declining marriage rates have increased in the last few years, that they’ve gone to besmirching singleness, and they’re actually alarmed that teens are NOT fornicating (having sex outside of marriage). I have examples of that on my blog (a few of such examples are linked to above this paragraph).
For the past several years, Christians prefer to use former sex addicts and porn stars as Sexual Purity guest speakers – instead of using actual virgins past the age of 25 for that purpose (I have a few examples of that phenomenon on my blog, such as (Link): this one).
People such as myself, middle-aged, held on to my sexual morality convictions into middle-age, are of no interest to them. Churches prefer to allow former porn stars into their midst to deliver sexual purity pep talks, (Link): rather than actual adult virgins who were never in porn; it’s twisted.
Secular Culture Teachings About Sex Can Be Harmful
I hope at a future time that Paul and Liz acknowledge the shortcomings of liberal or progressive sexual teachings and beliefs.
If you think Mr. Christian Tape guy is too strict about sex, I’ve seen how progressives regularly go in the reverse direction and are far too lenient, to the point they are advocating for age of consent laws to be lowered, and dangerous, disgusting, or troubling things like this start happening:
(Link): Perverted Company Sells Infant Shaped Butt Plugs So Biological Males Who Like to Say They’re Women Can Pretend to Give Birth – Also: Men Faking Periods, Sucking on Helium to Inflate Their Stomachs
That deviancy is brought to you by secular culture, not by Christians, certainly not by Christians who adhere to “purity culture.”
Which isn’t to say that some self professing Christians are not also perverts, because some are, some of the time – but some of this sexual lunacy and deviancy is brought to us by secularists and/or progressives.
Don’t lay it all at the door step of Christians, evangelicals, Christian purity culture advocates, Republicans, or Trump voters.
Many Secular Persons Are Unhappy With Secular Teachings and Conditions About Dating and Sex
A lot of secular women have been admitting to themselves – and this shows up in podcasts and blog posts now – that the “hook up” culture of years past has harmed them (I have links on my blog with examples; some are in this post).
A lot of these women would like a steady boyfriend or a husband – with meaningful sex, as opposed to casual sex, if they choose to have sex – but they keep running into societal expectations or pressure to keep having meaningless sex, one night stands, some of it influenced by pornography.
These younger women complain that today’s boys and men assume that all women want to emulate acts seen in porn videos, such as choking and so on, but no, most women do not want that.
Over ten years ago, I read the secular book that I think was entitled, “He’s Just Not That Into You,” where, in some chapters, the male author republished dating and sex advice questions mailed to him by women.
This was not a purity-culture book by Christians… it was by and for secular readers.
In the book, especially in the letters, there was widespread female hurt, disappointment and betrayal – these women wanted a normal, old school, committed, loving relationship with men, but they kept feeling pressured to have kinky, weird, sex acts with men, in some cases, hook ups.
I believe (if memory serves) one woman talked about feeling coerced into a sex act with a man in a dirty public bathroom. She was distraught about it. That was not what she wanted.
She wanted old school conditions – wanted a man who truly cares about her, one who’d converse with her over dinner on a date, not toss her up against a wall for a quickie sex act in a dirty restaurant bathroom.
From what I recall of the book (it’s been years since I read it), the male author felt bad for women who were going through this, and so he basically told them to hold on to their values and to not cave in and have all these casual sexual encounters and so on, because that behavior was not going to lead them to the steady, loving relationships that they really wanted.
On a related matter, this is another trend in the world of secular dating and secular sex:
I’ve been seeing reports in the last year or two that Gen Z is considered by some in the media to be “anti sex.”
What’s wrong with Gen Z wanting to have sexual standards?
Here’s one essay by a secular site’s author bemoaning the fact that Gen Z has higher sexual standards than their millennial counterparts:
(Link, off site): Why Is Gen Z So Sex-Negative?
Another, related post (or two):
(Link – via secular site Huff Post): ‘Secrets Of Playboy,’ Hugh Hefner And The False Promise Of Sexual Empowerment By Candice Frederick
Reverse Slut Shaming: Celibate or Virginity Shaming
See how portions of secular culture spin the choice to remain sexually abstinent, for whatever the reason (and some Christians do this as well): they dismiss you as a prude, anti-sex, as repressed, or as weird – when such may not be the case for every person who chooses to forgo sex.
I believe there is a point in the video where Liz unfortunately equates choosing to be sexually abstinent with being a form of repression, in a negative sense. That is “slut shaming” in reverse – it’s shaming, criticizing, and judging another adult’s (or a teen’s) choice to not engage in sexual behavior. It’s “celibate shaming.”
Sexual Visual Aids
In the video, Liz mentions that “purity culture” Christians like to use “visual aids” in their discussions of sex (e.g., used chewing gum, etc).
Has Liz not noticed that Non-Christians also use sex related visual aids? Is it okay and acceptable for Non-Christians to use “visual sexual aids” but not for Christians? Why? Why not? Says who and based upon what reasoning or studies?
Secular culture that promotes kink and sex to even young children also love to use visual aids.
The “sex positive” feminists, progressives, and liberals have their “Gingerbread Gender Man” and “Gender Unicorn” graphics, and they show school children (as young as grade school aged, from what I recall reading in the papers years ago) how to put a condom on to a banana in classroom presentations – that’s been going on at least since the 1990s. (I’ve included some such examples in this post).
The left, the progressives, and many liberals, have also been trying to put sexually explicit material into public schools, complete with drawings of people performing sex acts on one another – there were scanned examples taken from these books of this on Twitter by various users.
Here are a few articles about it:
(Link, ABC News): School system pulls 2 books with graphic sex from libraries
(Link, You Tube video): Loudoun Parents Read Excerpts of books from the LCPS Smut Library for the School Board
(Link, Federalist): Mom Says Superintendent Defended Gay Porn Book In School Library After Complaint
(Please scroll down to the very end of this post to see more examples, under the “Progressive Sexual Visual Aids – More Examples”)
Sometimes, Christian culture has adopted (on an unconscious level) gender stereotypes about men, women, and sex via secular culture, but they read these secular stereotypes back into the Bible and think such ideas are from or by God and are “biblical.”
Going back decades, secular culture, for example, has taught and promoted this idea that all men and teen boys are randy horn dogs who want to have sex all the time, while women have no desire for sex, and that men are “visual creatures,” while women are turned on only or primarily by emotional connection, not visuals.
Christians – in particular patriarchalists and gender complementarian Christians – also buy into this same set of beliefs about sex put forward by secular society, and it shows up all the time in their Christian podcasts, books, sermons, and videos about men, women, dating, and marriage.
Occasionally, a secular study or report comes along to dispel or at least challenge these stereotypes as being the erroneous garbage it is.
A few examples:
(Link): Study: Men Think About Sports More Than Sex by J. Gratton
Same type of content as above, but from a Christian source or two:
Wacko, weirdly hyper-pro sexual, hedonistic, gross, deviant liberals and progressives have been aiming to get explicit sexual books into public school libraries for years now.
Some of these books depict drawings of teens (or adults – on – teens) performing oral sex on another person.
Why is that OK? How is that trash any better than a band-aid or sticky tape visual or analogy in a purity video or pro-purity lecture? Help me understand, Liz! (Rhetorical question.)
Why are condoms on bananas, gingerbread and unicorn gender diagrams all fine and dandy to show young people in American public schools, but it’s somehow worse for a Christian to show visual aids such as used chewing gum in a lecture encouraging sexual abstinence in a You Tube video or Sunday School class at a church?
Both sets of material and aids, both secular and Christian, are being used to persuade or propagandize.
Are visual representations in sex lectures only acceptable to you when in service of making people feel less shamed to engage in certain type of sex acts, or having sex at all?
I don’t see how that is any more defensible than the Christian guy using a band-aid or roll of tape to make a point for his perspective.
I think I’d rather err on the side of caution and sexual prudence than just sleep around whatever with whomever as often as ever, so as to avoid disease, unwanted pregnancy, or being used for sex only to be dumped right after.
In the video, Liz mocks the guy’s idea that human beings are designed to be bonded to one person for life.
She mentions humans being hardwired for novelty – says who?
I have had an anxiety disorder since childhood.
I can assure Liz I seldom have a desire to engage in “novel” acts.
I find having to drive by myself to a Wal Mart I’ve never been to before challenging enough. I prefer the familiar, the static. I don’t like change. I’ve spent most of my life trying to run away from change, not run towards it.
We can argue on if and how my anxiety disorder may have limited me in this or that way (it possibly has), but I sure don’t feel “hardwired” to chase down the new and novel.
I have to force myself to get out of my comfort zone, go to new places, to socialize. I have to fight my anxiety disorder to do some things.
Being Attracted To Someone Doesn’t Mean You Have to Have Sex With Someone
Liz also states (so far without citing studies or research) that human beings are hardwired to find many people attractive over our life times.
Even if I grant her that, it doesn’t stand that “being attracted to” someone equates to “I can and must have sexual intercourse with that person.”
Also, as I’ve said on this blog before, I’m a visually oriented woman (which goes against secular and complementarian Christian stereotypes), and I’m picky – I am by and large attracted only to white, brunette guys. I am not attracted to red-haired or blonde white men. I’m not attracted to every, or even most, men I have met or seen on television.
God and Monogamy
Liz states the Christian position as (to paraphrase her), ‘you think God designed humans to be sexually promiscuous but to practice monogamy.’
If one factors into the original intent – going back to Genesis, one man for one woman, and God states “a man shall leave his family and cleave to his wife” – you’ll note that God apparently did not design or approve of the Old Testament practice of polygamy, nor did this God expect marriage and sexual pairings to be more than one man to one woman.
Also factor in “the fall”- you know, Adam and Eve went against God’s directive and ate the fruit, which ushered in sin to the human race.
So, at the fall, it’s possible that if God designed humans to be monogamous previous to the fall, that the presence of sin (introduced by the disobedience of Adam and Eve) then warped the sex drive to make people want to have more than one partner.
This is basic Christianity 101.
Liz says in the video that “Christianity’s oppressive teachings about sex” may be “one reason why it’s difficult to have a lasting relationship.”
Certainly, Christians impart a lot of baggage into teens and adult singles that can make it difficult for them to attract a partner or stay in a relationship – that is true enough (I’ve blogged about this before years ago several times, like (Link): in this post, for example) – but the secular teaching “anything goes” philosophy has not worked any better.
As one example but a few, which I’ve touched on, we now have young women feeling pressured into participating in psychologically or physically damaging sex acts because their boyfriends got ideas about how to have sex from porn.
Normal and Natural
Liz says in the video that Christians make “normal, natural” human behaviors (like having sex) shaming, but secularists and atheists are here assuming that having sex, and having sex prior to marriage, is “normal” and “natural.”
Is it? Says who? As I’ve stated several times, some atheists and many progressives and a lot of liberals shame adult celibates for choosing to be celibate. Why isn’t it normal or natural to be celibate or single as an adult?
Jesus is the Reason and the Solution Too?
Liz depicts this situation as “Jesus being the reason” you feel like used chewing gum, but he’s also the solution to this situation. I think that’s a strange way of framing the argument and rather disingenuous.
There are plenty of secular kids and adults out there who weren’t raised in Christian homes who are tired of, disgusted by, and yes, even feel ashamed and like pieces of chewing gum, after having bought into third wave feminist and secular teachings that any sex at any time even as a teen is a-okay, and so they slept around a lot.
All that Christian-values-free sex didn’t make all of them happy.
Mistakes and Shame
Kirby mentions mistakes, Paul says making mistakes is normal, but he also says that a culture that compounds a mistake with shame is not healthy. Hmm.
Who else, besides the occasional purity culture Christian, is into shaming people for their sexual behavior and sexual choices? Here’s an example, among several, on my blog:
If that is so, if it’s not healthy to shame people for their choices or mistakes in life (if being abstinent can be presented as a “mistake”) please tell other atheists and “sex positive” feminists and other assorted liberals to stop shaming celibate homosexual adults for choosing to remain celibate, and to stop shaming anyone over the age of 20 who is a virgin (for whatever reason) to stop mocking adults for being virgins.
Reproductive Biology Shameful?
Contrary to what Paul of the Paulogia You Tube channel says, starting around the 5 minute mark of the video, no, most Christians do not consider biology, including the sex act, to be “sin” in and of itself.
You may be able to find a small sliver of extremist Christian wackos who do believe that way (I’ve not seen any), but then, there is a tiny fragment of anti-sex, or anti-men feminists, like one who published an article back in the 1990s who argued that even consensual hetero penetrative sex was sexist, because (in her view), a penis in a vagina is in and of itself an act of rape, even if the woman consented to the penis being in her vagina.
(We now actually have some atheists and many liberals and progressives insisting that biological men can be women now, that biologically born males can get pregnant, can nurse babies (yes, this biology denying insanity really exists, I’ve (Link): done blog posts about it before), and in the name of “trans rights,” to disagree with any of this is now a secular sin.)
Christians with normal, mainstream Christian views are all fine and dandy with sex, so long as it’s done within the confines of marriage.
Arguing the point as Paul does here is a strawman argument – I didn’t even hear Kirby state his view in that manner.
You can have a sexual urge but still chose not to act on that urge (whether it’s biologically programmed or not), hello, Paul.
I don’t think it’s shaming or beyond the pale to ask people to reconsider or think again about when they have sex, at what age, under what conditions, and with whom and with how many people.
A lot of people, Christian and no, do end up regretting sexual encounters, maybe because they weren’t emotionally ready for sex, or they were guilt tripped or pressured into sex, or were pressured or coerced into a certain type of sex act they didn’t want to do.
Paul brings up that some young Christian couples marry far too young, in some cases, so they can “legally” (in the Christian moral sense) have sex, and that this can be a problem for that couple.
I agree that early marriage can be problematic for various reasons. But it’s not just in regards to sexual behavior.
There’s a portion of Christians who promote early marriage because they are fixated on everyone getting married.
I’ve been blogging for years how most churches only meet the needs of married couples who have young children at home.
These types of Christians and churches really believe the way to “fix culture” is to have all people married off, preferably by the age of 25.
The same Christians (and secular conservative groups) promoting what I refer to (and what they sometimes refer to as) “early marriage” also seem to just feel that it’s normal and optimal for all people to marry and to marry young – it’s their preference.
Other than the reasons I’ve stated above, I’m not sure what the motive is driving this preference of theirs.
I think to them, it just “feels normal” when most people marry by the age of 25 – 30 and have children, and they think it’s strange when people cannot or do not marry by that age.
If you’re over age 25 – 29, and still single and/or still a virgin, these same churches that prefer “early marriage,” or who hype the Nuclear Family, act as though you are a weirdo, a kook, and that you’ve failed God some how because you’re not having sex, you’ve not married, and/or you’ve not had children.
Some churches have a tendency to ignore any adult over the age of 29 who is still single, or, if they do take note, they either shame and insult singles for being single (examples below), or, they exploit single adults to provide free labor for churches and for married couples.
And have Paul and Liz never heard of notorious pastor Mark Driscoll, who was known for going on semi-regular rants while at Mars Hill Church, where, from the pulpit and sometimes in forum postings years ago, he loudly shamed any and all adult men in the congregation who had not married by their late 20s? In one of these rants, he even referred to women as “penis homes.”
(Go google for more about that or him, if you choose.)
Ageism and Christians
Christians don’t care about older singles. They only care about and “zero in” on the under age 30. If you’re age 30 and older and would like to marry, most churches offer nothing.
Many refuse to help singles get married.
Many Christians and many churches refuse to hold church-sponsored activities, like parties where single adults can meet other single adults, because they are afraid it will turn church into a “meat market.”
This means that older, single adults are left to their own, and some end up on dating sites or dating apps (which are filled with perverts, abusers, or weirdos), or going to bars and night clubs to meet potential mates – which is ironic, because many Christians think that bars are “seedy” places and wouldn’t recommend singles go to bars under any circumstances.
Most singles groups and classes at most churches (Protestant, Baptist, and evangelical) are only focused on the under age 30 set.
If you’re age 30 or older, never married (or divorced), there are no programs or ministries for you.
So, you see, it’s not just that Christians end up promoting early marriage one way or another to the 20 year olds, they are also ageist.
Most churches and Christians do nothing to help anyone age 30 or over get married, but then, they turn around and shame anyone over age 29 who is still single for being single, then they accuse these singles at age 30+ who admit to wanting marriage (which the churches market heavily) as “making marriage into and idol.”
You see what churches do there? They “hyper-market” marriage, and when singles over 29 do state they want to get married, churches then refuse to help them pair up, AND, they then shame them for wanting marriage in the first place.
Churches tell such singles to “be content” in their singleness, and “trust in the Lord” until the Lord magically sends them a spouse.
Christians are known among older single Christians for treating singleness as though it was a defective state, in spite of the fact that the Bible says in 1 Corinthians 7 that it is better to remain single than to marry, and in spite of the fact that Jesus elevated spiritual family above biological family, or placed them at least both on equal footing, which ran afoul of his culture, which placed great importance on spouse and biological family.
This post discusses that a little bit:
(Link): “Who is my mother and who are my brothers?” – one of the most excellent Christian rebuttals I have seen against the Christian idolatry of marriage and natalism, and in support of adult singleness and celibacy – from CBE’s site
Christians are known for giving confusing, counter-productive dating advice (especially to single women) that is sometimes near to impossible to follow, and so they do things like this:
While “early marriage” can be a problem, so too can an easy breezy, no limits at all sexuality (which a lot of Gen Z are rejecting nowadays, if new reports I’ve seen in the last two years are accurate).
I don’t agree in the “test drive” version of sexuality, which says “hop in the sack with another person to see if you’re sexually compatible,” which seems to be what Liz or Paul advocate at points in their video.
That view and practice can lead to problems for people as well.
(Link): Weak Argument Against Celibacy / Virginity / Sexual Purity by the Anti Sexual Purity Gestapo – Sexual Compatibility or Incompatibility – (i.e., Taking Human Beings For Test Spins – Humans As Sexual Commodities) (Part 2)
Secular Culture Cheapening Sex
Continuing on with my observations of the atheist video.
Paul (or Liz?) accuses Christians of elevating sex too highly. Weird. I think secular culture doesn’t respect or elevate sex enough.
Secular culture, progressives especially, cheapen and pervert the sex act.
Pornography is not liberating for women, no matter how much “third wave feminists” try to spin it. There are even secular, liberal, “radical feminists” who point this out, who do not defend or support porn or “sex work.”
Some posts on my blog that discuss this (there are more, these are only a few) – as you can see, secular culture, (especially progressives and some liberals) with their “sex positive” views, also have problems:
Where churches make the mistake of “elevating” sex too much is when they do so to the point they marginalize adult, single celibates, or act as though one must have sex to become an adult.
Most pastors love to offer sermons every other week about marriage, but they rarely discuss singleness (or celibacy).
Paul mentions in the video that some Christians he knew when he was younger were sexually active, but they would hide it, otherwise, if they did not lie about it or hide it, they know they may be open to being judged or held accountable by other Christians.
All righty, then, but, Paul, some of us do in fact, and have in fact, “walked the walk” and have sexually abstained into our 30s, 40s, and older – and we don’t appreciate being shamed by atheists OR by Christians or secular or Christian feminist writers online for choosing to abstain – which does happen.
During the video, Kirby discusses how he had sex prior to marriage while he was still a college student, and during this, he displays an image of a silhouetted human form floating.
Liz then comments on Kirby’s choice of illustration, as she seems to find it strange. I think she may be reading too much into that.
“Losing Your Virginity” Vs. Secular Society Shaming Anyone Who’s Never Dated or Had Sex
Liz doesn’t like the phrase “losing your virginity,” which Kirby uses at one point of the video.
This admission of hers comes shortly after Kirby, the guy she’s reviewing, talks about one reason he gave in and had sex prior to marriage, is that he felt bad or embarrassed to still be single and/or to be a virgin in his late teens or early twenties.
He said at that time in his life, he had wanted to have a relationship “like everyone else.”
This is a point that neither Liz or Paul addresses. And it’s a point that deserves a hearing.
As secular commentator Bella DePaulo has been discussing in her blog posts, articles at Psychology Today, and in her books for years – and I agree with this – American society (and other cultures around the world too) places far too much emphasis upon romantic love, and upon sex and marriage, which can lead to unfair or troubling effects on anyone who cannot pair up, have sex, or who chooses not to.
Our culture so reveres being in romantic relationships and having sex that younger people especially feel shamed not to be having sex or not to have a boyfriend or girlfriend, and singles are not treated fairly – married people get more tax breaks and the like for being married.
Being a virgin in American culture past the age of 25 is regarded as ridicule-worthy, weird, or as a failing, both by secular and much of Christian culture.
Being single or a virgin into one’s late 20s and beyond plays a part in why some men become sexist and join “incel” forums online and end up murdering women – out of shame, embarrassment, and frustration over not meeting the societal norm to be dating and/or having sex.
Posts about that on my blog:
As you can see, American secular culture mistreats single (and celibate) adults, even though singles are now outpacing married couples in number, and adult (and sometimes teen) celibacy and virginity are still unfortunately treated as bizarre, freakish, or as ridicule- worthy as well.
We are living in a sex-, marriage-, and romance- obsessed culture. Anyone who is single or sexless by choice or by circumstance is pitied or ridiculed.
Liz mentions several times through out this video how many Christians, or their teachings, “shame” so-called “natural” feelings or desires about sex or having sex.
There again, this is a problem with some purity-culture-rejecting progressives and atheists as well.
See, if you’re not having what many would define as ultra kinky and weird sex in exotic sex positions with 20 people at a time, you get deemed “dull” or “vanilla” by a lot of Non-Christians.
Case in point:
‘Science and Biology Based Sex Facts’? – Are You Sure You Want to Go There?
Liz also mentions “biological facts” off and on in the video, as though to say the atheist position on sex is superior to that of Christians, because only atheists deal in facts on this topic.
I call hog wash on that.
First of all, knowing biological facts or “science based facts” about sex still leaves out morality and choice, which is the crux of the disagreement in the first place.
Many Christians understand that most of the time, the sex act consists of a penis going into a vagina and can result in pregnancy. They are not dummies about this fact of life. They are not toddlers who have to ask mommy and daddy, “where do babies come from?”
Just because a person can be taught reproductive facts of life, such as, sperm is released by the male at time of orgasm, which can result in pregnancy in the female, does not in and of itself answer moral issues such as, when, at what age, should a person start having sex?
And with whom? And how often? With how many partners? Should each and every person have sex at all?
Secondly, and I am sorry to be repetitive, as I believe I mentioned this earlier in this post, but “woke” atheists, liberals and progressives are actually anti-science, particularly concerning biology and sex, especially these days!
The woke atheists and woke leftists like to say on social media now that there are more than two biological sexes (excluding the intersex and any other esoteric diseases or genetic conditions a woke-ster can point to as exceptions, most humans are born either male or female, which adds up to TWO sexes), that women can have penises and men can menstruate.
The biological facts of life includes, but are not limited to, most natal women, barring diseases or disorders (such as Mayer Rokitansky Küster Hauser syndrome (MRKH)), do menstruate (until reaching menopause), men do not menstruate, (Link): nor can men breastfeed babies.
It’s the leftists, and some woke liberals, who have been arguing the past few years that if a biological man identifies as a woman, then presto, he is a woman, and the rest of society must play along with this delusion and agree with absurd, non-scientific views, such as “women have penises,” and so forth.
This trans business is based in psychological disorders, and in some cases, sexual fetishes, not in biological sex.
So please, kindly spare me this untrue notion that “only Christians deny science based facts about sex” routine.
That depiction of purity supporting Christians is utterly laughable when I see all the woke atheists and woke secularists, liberals, and leftists yelling all over social media the last several years things like “men can get pregnant” and we now have (Link): “pregnant man” emoji symbols.
This Lindsay guy is an atheist and considers himself a classical liberal (he’s not a Christian), but he’s not a wacko about these topics:
Same atheist, liberal guy again:
Same guy (atheist, liberal – not a purity culture Christian):
Secular Sex Education – and Sex and Biological Ignorance
Does all of secular society, including sex ed teachers in secular public schools, always convey accurate information about sex and biology? No, no they do not.
See some examples in this previous post of mine (with some commentary in the mix):
Is Virginity Merely a “Social Construct” or is a Term That is Just So Darn Hard to Pin Down, Nobody Knows What the Term Means? (No.)
Liz loves the old secular feminist chest nut, later adopted by some progressive Christian feminists, that “virginity is a social construct.” Not really, no.
In layman’s terms, most of us understand the word “virginity” to mean someone with no sexual experience, which is generally understood to be “someone who has not experienced penis in vagina sex (sexual intercourse).” Some may or may not include oral sex in the definition.
Don’t denigrate another person’s choice to remain a virgin until marriage, by dismissing it as “repressive” or nothing but a “social construct” because you’re an anti- Christian- purity culture advocate. Those views are insulting to those of us who have deeply held convictions and/or other concerns as to why we abstain.
Sexist Double Standards
Liz does credit Kirby for not being sexist about sexual purity, in that he doesn’t single women out.
It is often true that far too often, sadly and frustratingly, Christians who used to advocate for sexual purity (not many of them do these days!) only seemed to present virginity- until- marriage towards women, but not so much for men.
That was a sexist double standard – but also one secular culture used to practice as well. The teen boys who “scored” would get high-fived by male buddies, while girls decades ago who had sex prior to marriage were thought of as sluts – thought of as such by Non-Christians.
Back to “Can Anyone Understand What Virginity Is”
If you wouldn’t find it acceptable for a, say, 47 year old man to have penis- in- vagina sex with a six year old girl, that in and of itself tells you that you do on some level believe in sexual boundaries, sexual limits, and you would understand that the pedophile “took” the 6 year old child’s virginity, or that virginity is a “thing,” and is not merely a “social construct.”
You’d not limit that act by an adult against a child only to descriptions or categories of “crime,” “rape,” or “unconsensual sex,” even if it includes those terms and concepts as well.
I doubt many atheists or feminist liberals would say the 6 year old girl was not a virgin at the time of her assault, in this hypothetical scenario.
‘Sex Positive’ liberals, progressives, and atheists know good and well what most people mean by the word “virgin” or “virginity.”
All the qualifiers around the topic, with the discussions of stretched hymens, or appearance or lack of blood at the time of first intercourse, is just dancing around the issue to excuse and justify promiscuity or early sex.
By the way, even secular sites promote the idea that first time sex for a woman causes blood loss, etc, as in this horribly virgin-shaming article:
(Link): Ask Men site’s Virgin Shaming Editorial, entitled, ‘Five Reasons Not To Sleep With A Virgin’ (excerpted here on my blog)
From that page at “Ask Men”:
5- It could get messy
There is a possibility that having sex with a virgin could literally make a mess of your sheets. Being penetrated for the first time is likely to hurt her and it could result in some bleeding. If the sight of blood makes you squeamish, devirginizing a girl is not for you. A woman’s first sexual experience can leave a very unsexy mess to clean up.
— end —
Christianity 101 – The Fall (entrance of sin into humanity) Skewed and Perverted Sex, Among Other Things
Again either Liz or Paul mentions that “the creator made us to lust and love.”
I find it hard to believe that either Liz or Paul were ever Christians in the first place, as they repeat this incorrect view of mainstream evangelical, Baptist, and Protestant beliefs about sex, and I think both have claimed they used to be Christian.
Either Paul or Liz never heard typical teachings about sin and sex while they were Christians (they were taught some strange things by their respective faith denominations), or they are being sloppy and dishonest (either purposefully or no) in this video when they describe how Christians view God’s creation of sex.
Most Christians teach and believe that God “invented” sex – but God intended sex to take place only at a certain time and certain situation (i.e., between two consenting adults, sexually mature persons, who are married to one another).
Jesus, in the Gospels, later condemns lust, actually; the Bible as most Christians interpret it, does not say that God “created” lust or approves of “lust.”
For example, from Matthew 5, Jesus of Nazareth speaking:
You have heard that it was said, ‘Do not commit adultery.’
But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman to lust after her has already committed adultery with her in his heart.
If your right eye causes you to sin, gouge it out and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to be thrown into hell.…
Given verses like that one in the Bible, it sure doesn’t sound like “God created lust” or that God or Jesus (with Christians believing that Jesus was God manifested in human form) approved of, or created, lust, so I have no idea how and why Liz and Paul continued to maintain through this video that “God created lust.”
From what I remember of the Bible, it indicates that God created sex, or gave humans sexual desire to possibly prompt them to pro-create, but God gave limits through-out the Bible of improper or forbidden uses of sex, and with whom a person should or should not have sex.
From what I remember of my reading of the Bible, God is all fine and dandy with sex – but within certain parameters.
To present it otherwise is to erect so many strawman arguments in your atheist video about Christian teachings about sex that I’m stunned.
I’ve been having a faith crisis going on close to, what, about seven or eight years now, but even though, in that time, I’ve expressed misgivings about how churches treat single adults, or how I disagree with certain church teachings or how they are presented, I also don’t intentionally, knowingly misrepresent their views, beliefs, or teachings in the process.
Islam, Sex, and Sexism
I seldom see atheists or Christian progressives (or secular ones) tackle Islamic sexism and Islamic attitudes towards sex.
Some Muslims live under and by Sharia Law.
These groups of Muslims think it’s acceptable to stone an Islamic teen aged girl or grown woman to death if she is a rape victim or dates non-Islamic men. They also view non-Muslim women as permissible to rape.
Some Muslim men think that sexually molesting little boys is acceptable.
You can do an internet search for plenty more examples of all that.
Here’s just one or two examples on my blog:
While secular conservatives and some Christians unfortunately continue to maintain harmful or sexist stereotypes and teachings about marriage, sex, and dating, I don’t find what some of the atheists or the left / progressives, pro-sex feminists, or many liberals, have to offer any better, safer, or more liberating on every topic, either.
Neither sides in these discussions, theists or atheist, progressives or conservatives, get all the points correct on all subjects. They all come to the table with their own weird, insulting, or harmful beliefs and teachings.
As Jesus of Nazareth might say to the pro-sex atheists who pick apart Christian teachings about dating and sex: first remove the beam from your own eye before trying to remove a speck from the Christian’s eye.
This essay may or may not be edited post-publication to correct mistakes, formatting, or to add more content.
Related Posts on This Blog:
(Link): American Public School Teachers Seeking Validation For Their Sexuality From Students, Propagandizing LGBT Sexuality – Students Don’t Need To Know Your Sexuality or About Your Romantic Life, or if You Have One
(Link): Marcotte on Anyone Choosing To Be a Virgin Until Marriage: “It’s a Silly Idea” – What Progressive Christians, Conservative Christians, Non Christians, and Salon’s Amanda Marcotte Gets Wrong About Christian Views on Virginity
(Link): Preacher Mark Driscoll Disparages Virgins and Virginity (Again) – The Feelings of Fornicators Always Take Precedence With the Anti-Purity Culture, Anti-Slut- Shaming, and Pro- Cheap Grace Crowd
(Link): I’m a Virgin, So Why Am I Being Slut-Shamed?by Ashley Iaconetti
(Link): This Headline Has My Fellow Conservatives In A Tizzy, but It Should Not: Just 18% of US households are ‘nuclear families’ with a married couple and children, down from 40% since 1970s and the lowest since 1959
(Link): Gonorrhea Super Strain Becoming ‘Untreatable’ (in the UK; may be heading to the USA) – 2015 story
Progressive Sexual Visual Aids – More Examples