views and thoughts on topics, especially ones pertaining to christianity – with an emphasis on how most christians either ignore or discriminate against unmarried christians – and how christians have turned marriage and parenting into IDOLS and how there is no true support for sexual purity, virginity, or celibacy among christians – this is a blog for me to vent; I seldom permit dissenting views. I don't debate dissenters ————-
According to this article (next one below), most Democrats would be unwilling to date Republicans.
How stupid. You should be able to look past the person’s political views, unless they are obnoxious about them and insult you over yours or something like that.
(I’m a right winger but would feel perfectly fine dating a left wing guy, so long as he’s not a rude jackass towards me over our political differences.
And, by the way, as a right wing woman, I’d like to say, right wing men should NOT be sending insulting messages to left wing women on dating sites over their political views, as this site says some men are – that is so very rude).
If you’re single and actively dating, this year’s Valentine’s Day may have been your crummiest yet. And not for the usual reasons like lack of chemistry or the person being nothing like their profile promised — but because of whom they voted for, and what political positions they support.
Earlier this month, the dating service Coffee Meets Bagel surveyed 1,320 users and found that the majority of singles say politics are impacting their quest for love.
A Song for All the Male ‘Ones’ (the Fat, Balding, Sexist, and/or Ugly Guys) Who Rate Women on Scales of One To Ten
I present to you the song “Numbers,” recorded by Bobby Bare some time in the 1970s or 1980s.
For all the male idiots out there who think they can and should rate what women look like on scales of 1 to 10.
This song is Doubly applicable to males who are fat, balding, and/or look like they fell out of the Ugly Tree and hit every branch on the way down ~AND~ who think they deserve to date or marry women who look like movie stars or models.
Death, Grief, Marriage, Single Again, Soul Sleep, Christianity, Obnoxious Male Fixation on Female Looks
I have several topics I’d like to address here. I’m going to discuss death, grief, dating, how men are too fixated on women’s looks, etc, and so on, all in the same post.
I learned from watching the Christian program “It is Written” today (Feb 2017) that the wife of Christian TV host Mike Tucker, Gayle, died. I’m not sure when the episode was first filmed or first aired.
You can read a transcript of that episode, “From Grief To Hope” (Link, off site): here.
You might be able to watch that very episode or one like it here: (Link, off site): Coping with Grief.
I see from an online obit that Gayle Tucker passed away in April 2016.
Why, after decades of feminism, do we seem to demand that women in the public eye be extraordinarily beautiful but their male counterparts can get away with being ordinary?
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
The art critic John Berger famously said that, in our culture, “men act and women appear”. He didn’t mean that women didn’t actually do anything, or that men never looked pretty. His point was that this was how men and women were depicted.
Men were supposed to be effective, and women were supposed to be attractive. He was right. And it was a travesty. But that was in 1972; it was a long time ago.
Or was it? Four decades of feminism later I am reading the comedian Angela Barnes’ blog. “I am ugly, and I am proud,” she writes. She goes on to say: “The fact is I don’t see people in magazines who look like me. I don’t see people like me playing the romantic lead or having a romantic life.”
At the top of the blog is a picture of Barnes. And the thing is, she isn’t ugly. Neither is she beautiful. She’s normal looking. She’s somewhere in the middle of the spectrum, just like lots of women you see every day in real life.
It made me think of this year’s Wimbledon ladies’ final between Sabine Lisicki and Marion Bartoli. When Bartoli won, the BBC commentator John Inverdale infamously said, “Do you think Bartoli’s dad told her when she was little, ‘You’re never going to be a looker, you’re never going to be a Sharapova, so you have to be scrappy and fight’?”
Controversial columnist Miranda Devine made headlines in early February after writing a piece about working mothers.
In her column, titled ‘Don’t let your career make you a bad mother,’ Ms Devine said ‘motherhood is under threat’ and that ‘young women are coerced into prioritising careers and becoming feminist warriors against the so-called pay gap.’
Since, the column has been slammed by a number of women and furious mothers, including radio host Em Rusciano, who have labelled the piece both ‘offensive and ignorant.’
And now, Australian father-of-two and daddy blogger, Brad Kearns, has lashed out at the piece in defence of both himself and his wife.
‘Hey Miranda Devine, as a dad, I’ve never felt pressure to justify my career decisions to complete strangers,’ he (Link): began.
‘Nobody has ever asked me how having children was going to impact my study or work. To be honest, I barely even entertained the thought that it could hold me back professionally.
‘Do you want to know why? Because I’m a f*****g man and society just assumes it wouldn’t change anything.’
My comments about this subject, before copying some excerpts from the link above:
Another form of Male Entitlement: expecting the women around you to cheer you up, listen empathetically as you tell them about your problems. (Though other women can also be guilty of this at times, as I wrote of (Link): here).
In a (Link):much older post I wrote, where I linked to and excerpted an article from elsewhere, some guy in the article admitted that when he went to a local bar after a day at work, he enjoyed the female bartender more than the male ones, because any time he tried to talk about his problems (and receive empathy for his problems) from the males, the male bartenders would tell him to shut up and get over it.
However, when the lady bartender was on duty, she would listen to him and offer sympathy, he said. He relied on and appreciated her willingness to listen and respond with empathy.
My ex-fiance talked non-stop (as I wrote of (Link): here). He always wanted me to listen to him talk about his life, he never cared about mine, and he never asked about my views on anything. My ex expected me to stroke his ego and cheer him up in his ups and downs in life – but he was unwilling to do this for me.
My ex college friend made my mother’s death (Link): all about himself when I sent him notice of my mother’s passing. He talked about himself in his reply to me, instead of just doing what he should have and said, “I’m sorry for your loss.”. This ex friend making everything about himself was a pattern for him.
Even before my mother died, my ex college friend would e-mail me and talk about himself – he would ask me a question or two about me, but when I would write back commenting on HIS life – as well as responding to his questions about my life – he would never comment on my replies ABOUT ME.
I got the feeling he was asking about me only out of a sense of politeness. I don’t think he really cared about me or what I was up to or what I was thinking.
While some women can be very self absorbed and can be emotional vampires (I’ve been friends with a few and am related to one), I think at least most women are aware that they’re doing this to another women (and women tend to be aware of how it can be draining to be someone’s emotional support), but men seem to have a blind spot in this area.
… There is a reason that liberal Christian movements like those championed by Jim Wallis, Rachel Held Evans, Shane Claiborne and others are so ineffective and unpersuasive in American culture.
Rather than seeking to glorify and build the Kingdom of God, they regularly appropriate the language of Scripture to advocate for earthly, largely political causes that never address the principal need of humanity: redemption from sin.
Jaded, Bitter, Entitled Sam The Single Man Claims that All Women Who Say “They Aren’t That Kind of Girl” Are Liars
The guy who wrote this letter to ‘Ask Amy’ sounds like a bitter, cynical, entitled sexist ass-hat.
I for one “am not that kind of girl.” Women such as me do in fact exist. If you date me, and I turn down sex on the basis of, “I’m not that kind of girl,” I am speaking the truth.
I am over the age of 40 and still a virgin. Even though now my views on sex have relaxed, and I’d be willing to have sex prior to marriage, but not on a first date, or even a second date, but only within the context of a steady, committed relationship.
So yes, to you assh*le who wrote this letter to Ask Amy, “Sam,” some women are in fact “not that kind of girl” and do not have sex with a man they’ve just met.
I think you don’t want a steady relationship but a one-night stand, in which case, stop using dating sites like eHarmony, Yahoo Personals, or Match and stick with “Booty Call .com” or “Tindr,” which are designed specifically for casual sex, you idiot.
When two people first meet and the guy wants to have sex, why is it that many women say, “I am not that kind of girl, and I need to get to know you better“?
That is actually a big lie that women tell. After all, if the guy who wanted to have sex with them was George Clooney, it’s unthinkable that they would say, “I’m not that kind of girl.”
Every woman is “that kind of girl” with a select few men under the right circumstances.
The Non-Stop Trump- Bashing by Liberal Sites Makes Formerly Semi- Useful Liberal Sites Totally Useless To Me Now
I am a right winger who never- the- less started following a lot of left wing news social media accounts, left wing opinion accounts, and left wing individual Twitter accounts over the last couple of years.
I used to find these left wing sites good sources of information for topics such as dating, singleness, marriage, divorce, spiritual abuse by churches, and so forth.
However, as the 2016 American Presidential campaign kicked into high gear in the fall of 2016, and now that Donald Trump is the 45th President of the United States, all the left wing sites I used to follow for stories about dating, divorce, wedding trends, feminism, sexism, the intersection of religion and politics, etc. and so on, have all turned into “Anti Trump All Day Every Day” channels. It is so annoying.
These left wing sites have become useless to me now.
If all these liberal sites are going to do for the next 4 (to 8) years is complain and whine about Trump non-stop and just nit pick at the guy
Too Cool for School: The Ex, Quasi, or Liberal Christians (and Atheists) Who Think Their Snarkiness Against Christians Makes Them Clever (But It Doesn’t)
This post contains some vulgar language.
edited to add: I’ve already been told by two different people that this post is too long. Sorry, being concise has never been a talent of mine.
Someone also informed me that this blog post of mine has been linked to at a sub thread on Reddit (Link): here / on (Link): Reason and Faith on Reddit
Someone in that Reddit thread thinks my title of this post is “an atrocity,” but I feel it pretty much accurately sums up what I’ve seen online the last decade or more
In my faith crisis of the last few years, I’ve visited more sites, blogs, groups, and forums that are critical of Christians or Christianity. I sometimes find myself agreeing with some of their criticisms of evangelical, Protestant Christianity (sometimes not).
One of the recurrent tendencies that crops up in such blogs, forums, and groups that disturbs or annoys me (or has me doing a lot of eye rolls) are that many of the people who post to these types of groups act as though they are Too Cool for School.
In a new study of President Obama’s legacy, the Pew Research Center found that religious affiliation and practice dropped off dramatically during his two terms in the White House.
“When it comes to the nation’s religious identity, the biggest trend during Obama’s presidency is the rise of those who claim no religion at all,” Pew notes in a report released this week titled “How America Changed During Barack Obama’s Presidency.”
When Barack Obama took office, those who identified as atheists or agnostics along with those who said their religion was “nothing in particular” totaled only 16 percent of the U.S. adult population. On leaving office 8 years later, the non-religious in America now make up nearly a quarter of the population.
On the contrary, the percentage of Americans who say they believe in God, consider religion to be very important in their lives, pray daily and attend religious services at least monthly have all dropped during the Obama years, Pew found.
Wondering if you can afford to have a kid? Here’s some sobering news.
Children born in 2015 will cost about $380 more per year to raise than kids born in 2014, according to the Department of Agriculture’s latest report on the cost of raising a child in the United States, released Monday.
Overall, families spend between $12,350 and $13,900 annually on their kids, at least when you’re talking married couples with two kids in the middle third of income bands, the report found.
American Christians, Liberals, Liberal Pet Groups, and Persecution
(This post has been edited and updated, especially towards the bottom, to add more commentary or links)
For about the past year, I have thinking about blogging about this topic but put it off until now.
I have seen liberal Christians, ex-Christians, left wing Non-Christians, and moderately conservative Christians complain or mock American Christians who claim that American Christians are being persecuted in the United States due to being Christian.
In the past, I’ve seen liberal Christian blogger RHE (Rachel Held Evans) comment on this subject on her blog, on her Twitter account, as well as the Liberal, quasi- Christian, Stephanie Drury bring this up on her (Link): “Stuff Christian Culture Likes” Facebook group from time to time.
I’ve also seen moderately conservative Christians I am acquainted with discuss this in Tweets or on their blogs.
To reiterate a point I’ve made before, I do sometimes agree with SCCL’s Drury on some issues, and I even periodically Tweet her links to news stories I think she may want to share on her Twitter account or on her SCCL Facebook group.
However, I totally part ways with Drury on some topics – like this one.
The view of liberal Christians, ex-Christians, liberal Non-Christians, and even some moderately conservative Christians, is that American Christians are not under persecution in the U.S.A. for being Christian, or for practicing Christian beliefs.
I am not sure if the liberal or moderate conservative disagreement on this issue pertains to semantics (the terminology involved), or if they are actually blind and oblivious to the harassment that Christians, especially conservative, or traditional valued, Christians, face in American culture.
It is my position that American Christians do in fact face harassment – especially from the left wing – in the United States for being Christian, for wanting to practice their faith and carry it out in public, and for defending it in public.
If you are a liberal who objects to the term “persecution,” how about, instead, the words or phrases, “harassment,” “bullying,” “picking on,” “hounding,” or other terms?
I do not see American Christians getting a free pass in the United States to hold certain views or to practice their beliefs.
The left (and I’d include severe anti-theist atheists here, on this point, regardless of their political standing) insist that Christians keep their Christian faith walled off, private, and separate from all other areas of their lives.
Some Liberals Call Gatlinburg Fire Punishment for Trump Support
Well this is a switch.
Usually, we find right wing Christians saying that every natural disaster in the United States is due to homosexuality or abandonment of support to Israel, but here we have liberals saying that the wildfires in TN are due to people voting for Trump.
WHO: Single People Who Struggle to Find A Partner To Be Considered “Infertile”
I’m taken aback by some of the cranky comments by people who disagree with this decision. Take for example this (source):
Josephine Quintavalle, from Comment on Reproductive Ethics added: “This absurd nonsense is not simply re-defining infertility but completely side-lining the biological process and significance of natural intercourse between a man and a woman.
Well, excuse the hell out of me, Ms. Quintavalle, but some of us find ourselves single by circumstance – we had hoped to be married in our 20s or 30s but just could not find the right guy. I cannot get pregnant now because I have no husband to have sex with to get pregnant, by, HELLO.
You’re saying women like me shouldn’t be able to get help we need or want in having a kid of our own, if that is what we want (I never cared if I had one myself or not, but some women really want one). There is just no sympathy from some people for the circumstances other people find themselves in in life. I didn’t plan on turning out single well into my 40s, lady.
I don’t think that adult singleness should be thought of in a derogatory fashion as a “disability” (God knows we get enough of that condescending attitude from churches as it is), but I don’t see anything wrong with it pertaining to allowing singles who want to have kid.
I’m also seeing one or two commentators who assume that single adults are more “selfish” than married couples, which is untrue and is (Link): the reverse!
For the WHO’s Dr. David Adamson, one of the authors of the new standards, this move is about creating medical equality. He says, “(Link): The definition of infertility is now written in such a way that it includes the rights of all individuals to have a family, and that includes single men, single women, gay men, gay women.”
62-Year-Old New Mom Encourages Older Women to have Babies
I first saw this story tweeted by Drudge, and lord-a-mercy, the folks leaving Tweets under it are judgmental little jerk-weeds.
Why do people care if women like this want to have a kid over the age of 50?
I find it hypocritical, too. Society puts all this pressure on women to have kids, and so, if a woman does have a kid, they pick apart when she has a kid, how many she has, does she use birth control or not to space them out, and on and on it goes.
Shut the hell up culture! Stop nit-picking apart women’s choices on when, if, how, or where they have a kid.
A 62-year-old woman from Spain has become a new mom. Lina Alvarez of Lugo, in northwest Spain gave birth to a girl she named Lina. She says “it’s impossible to be happier” at having her baby late in life.
Baby Lina was born on October 10th. She was born a month early due to mom’s blood pressure problems and weighed 5 pounds and 2 ounces. Lina is Alvarez’s third child. Her oldest child is 27-years-old and she also has a 10-year-old.
….I’m reminded here of the poignant words of Madeline Southard, one of the leading proponents of women’s rights in the Methodist church in the twentieth century. In her 1927 book, The Attitude of Jesus toward Woman, Southard raised precisely this question.
For centuries, Southard noted, women had been considered “the creature of her sex-relationships and of the resultant blood relationships.” As such, a woman’s status had been determined by her being “the wife, mother, daughter, concubine or mistress of some man,” but not as “a person in herself.”
Standard Christian View About Sex is Actually Creating Controversy: “Major Ministry Will Fire Employees Who Don’t Believe That Sex Is Only For Married Straight Couples”
(I have edited this post a few times to add additional thoughts – there is also a December 2016 update below in regards to the left wing BuzzFeed and ‘Stuff Christian Culture Likes’ witch hunt story about HGTV hosts Chip and Joanna Gaines)
Among some progressive Christians or progressive Christian groups, this news story was quite the controversy about a week ago when it was first published.
I read in another news source that IV (InterVarsity) says that their position on these issues has been misunderstood.
I have some more comments to make under the excerpts here:
A Christian organization that leads student religious groups on more than 600 college campuses will fire any of its 1,300 employees who say they do not agree with the organization’s theological interpretation on sex: that it is only appropriate within a heterosexual marriage.
That means that any InterVarsity Christian Fellowship employees who believe that churches should perform gay weddings, who endorse sex before marriage, who condone pornography or who hold any number of other beliefs might be included in what the evangelical organization calls “involuntary termination.”
Coming from a major evangelical institution, the policy revives debate about how churches should handle questions of sexuality and who can define themselves as evangelicals.
In an interview with The Washington Post on Friday, the ministry’s vice president Greg Jao said that since InterVarsity employees teach college students about biblical views, it is imperative that they share the same beliefs. Four or five people have been fired so far, and he expects more to follow in the next month.