Bizarre: Women Who Are Genuinely Fine With Being Single or Childless and Who Publicly Admit It Deeply Disturb or Infuriate Sexist Incel Types and My Fellow Conservatives, Who Want Such Women to Harbor a Victim Mindset

Bizarre: Women Who Are Genuinely Fine With Being Single or Childless and Who Publicly Admit It Deeply Disturb or Infuriate Sexist Incel Types and My Fellow Conservatives, Who Want Such Women to Harbor a Victim Mindset

I have been a conservative person my entire life. I am not liberal, woke, or progressive.

I am not opposed to marriage, motherhood, the nuclear family, or parenthood. I do not support abortion on demand.

For years now, I have noticed the oddest, most disgusting behavior from other conservatives: many of them become unhinged, unsettled, or very angry about women who are truly happy with being single or childless or childfree. It didn’t cross my mind to blog about this observation until now.

The cherry on top of Conservative Outrage on this topic is that the fury seems to be particularly directed at single, childless women who mention on social media or in televised interviews that they’re enjoying life single and childless.

That is, from the angry conservative pro-family types, if you are single, childless (or childfree) and happy about it as a woman, you damn well just better keep it to yourself.

These pro-family conservatives, many of whom even profess to be Christian, further sometimes say things to or about those childless women and tell them personally on social media, how miserable they must be.

They chortle things at them things like, “You will die alone in a house full of cats,” and they say this as though they are filled with glee and happy at the thought of childless women dying alone and unhappy. How perverse.

Some of them, like Catholic Matt Walsh, even like to get ageist, and toss in comments about age at these women, saying to them, “You’re nearing 40…” or, “You’re almost 50….” (See (Link): example Tweet of his here.)

Ditto regarding “incels” or other types of men who are deeply sexist and ageist towards women. They too get very agitated and unglued if a woman publicly admits to being okay, content, or happy with being single or childless.

It’s as though these groups need and desperately want to believe that women who are and remain single or childless (or childfree) are lonely, bitter, miserable, and unhappy, or will become so in the future – and they need to believe that such women are deeply unhappy precisely because those women are single, childless, or childfree.

In the reverse situation, every once in awhile a woman celebrity may publicly say she’s sad that she was never able to have children – and what do the sexist conservatives and d-bag incels do, but immediately take screen captures of the comments, share them all over social media, as if to say,

“See? See?! Feminism has made women miserable. All women obviously want to marry and have babies! They are depressed if they don’t marry and have children, see, see, see!!!
“Women are unable to enjoy life or find contentment if they never marry or never have children, here is your proof, right here, this lady movie star saying she is lonely at 62 and regrets she never had children!!!!”

I’ve never been a feminist, but may I add: if some women are unhappy being childless or single, it may be in part precisely because conservatives and churches are constantly brainwashing women to think their only purpose in life, and their only road to happiness, resides in marrying and becoming pregnant.

If a woman grows up in a family, societal, or religious context that conditions her to think that she can be happy and have meaning only if she marries or has children, well, duh, don’t be surprised if yes, some women may get to adulthood and feel a little down that they’re not married or don’t have kids.

But that would be a result, in part, due to conservative, traditional, old school “family values” brainwashing. That would not be due to “feminism,” of all things

It’s as though many conservatives and sexist lunatics want single and childless women to be unhappy. It’s utterly bizarre to me.

Before I go on further, here is a pertinent article from the WSJ:

(Link): What’s That Ticking Sound? The Male Biological Clock

Men are also at the mercy of age when it comes to having kids

June 25, 2011
By Jennifer Vanderbes

A man’s age when he has children is turning out to be an important factor in that child’s health, according to WSJ contributor Jennifer Vanderbes. Kelsey Hubbard talks to the author about the role a man’s biological clock plays in a child’s risk for diseases and disorders.

Conservatives and the Double Standard Re: Lonely, Single Hetero Men

By the way, I’ve seen more and more articles the last several years that say more and more hetero men are single, and those hetero men either don’t want to date or marry (they’ve lost interest), or, some of them do want to date or marry women, but they can’t seem to get girlfriends and do not know how to go about getting dates or getting a girl friend.

So, I then began seeing news stories such as these about men who are single, some of whom are lonely:

(Link): Guy So Depressed Over Being Single He Cut Off His Own Penis (article)

(Link): ‘Transmaxxing’: Meet The Online Community Encouraging Gender Transitions For Sexually Frustrated (Incel) Men

(Link): Number of ‘Lonely, Single’ Men is on the Rise as Women with Higher Dating Standards Look for Partners Who are ‘Emotionally Available, Good Communicators, and Share Similar Values’, Says Psychologist

(Link): Dear Abby: I (Older, Single Man) Gave Up Dating Women, and 30 Years Later, I’m Lonely

(Link): Bitter, Frustrated 22 Year Old Male Virgin and Member of Men’s Rights / PUA Groups Kills Several Women Because He Couldn’t Get Dates – what an entitled sexist doof

Funny how I seldom see other conservatives mocking such men as the ones mentioned in those news articles for being single and lonely.

If anything, when these topics and news reports of men “falling behind” in culture are brought up, both conservative men and women rush to the men’s defense, to pity them and portray men in culture as being victims.

Often times, such conservatives who paint men as a group as being victims blame women for the men’s victim status, or else, they blame feminism or feminists, for the failings of men – it is so hypocritical and laughable.

By the way, as a conservative, I’ve also noticed that any time a new study or news story is published about men being single and lonely, that conservatives such as (but not limited to) Tucker Carlson will offer very understanding, compassionate, nuanced examinations about these shifts in culture leaving men out in the cold, and how society has supposedly let men down.

Carlson especially likes to invite on conservative women guest speakers on to his television program on Fox News who back Carlson up on this issue, and these women cluck in worry over those poor, poor, single men who are allegedly being kept down and single by a supposedly “feminized” culture of raving, men-hating feminists.

However, if women are under discussion – let’s say there’s a study or news story about women finding it difficult finding suitable marriage partners to marry, or what have you – those very same conservatives who pity men will revoke deep, thoughtful, compassionate analysis to instead snigger in contempt that, “feminism has made you women miserable, ha ha ha, look how  you’ve traded the bliss of family and marriage to being chained to a corporate desk! Ha ha, it’s so wonderful to see single and childless women suffering!”

The culture-wide problems that men face and the ones that women face are treated completely differently by such conservatives, with pity and empathy (and lots of excuses and justifications) being made for the failings or sadness of men,
while women, on the other hand, get roasted, demonized, mocked, and criticized, often for things and problems that they actually did not bring about, but are blamed for anyhow.

I see this phenomenon come up quite often by Tucker Carlson, Matt Walsh, sometimes Ben Shapiro, Candace Owens, and so on.

The men always get a pass, and always get rationalizations and lots of hugs, kisses, and reassurances, and the men’s failings get blamed on women, or on feminism, while the women, on the other hand, usually (wrongly), get blamed for problems they did not create, and they get ridiculed or criticized, too.

20th Century Irish Roman Catholics Actually Shamed Single Women For Being Single – Gross

20th Century Irish Roman Catholics Actually Shamed Single Women For Being Single – Gross

This reminds me of how present-day Protestant and Baptist conservative Christians, and secular American conservatives, still shame women for being single and/or for being childless.

It’s disgusting that people do this. It’s not your place to question a woman’s marital or childed status. A woman isn’t less a woman because she is single or childless  (whether by choice or by circumstance).

(Link): Chalk Sunday: Women marked with an X for being single 

Feb. 26, 2023

By Nuala McCann
BBC News NI

Today – the first Sunday in Lent – was once known as Chalk Sunday in Ireland.

“It was a custom dating back to the 1900s,” said Fiona Byrne, curator of History at the Ulster Folk Museum.

“Young boys would have drawn Xs on the backs of single women’s coats and dresses as they walked to and from Mass. They might have dusted them with chalk or touched them on the shoulder.

“It meant you didn’t manage to get married and was a bit mean really.

Lent is an old English word meaning ‘lengthen’. Lent is observed in spring, when the days begin to get longer. It allows Christians to remember Jesus’s fasting in the desert. It is a time of giving things up and a test of self-discipline.

No sex

The old Irish tradition of Chalk Sunday ties in with the feast of Shrove or Pancake Tuesday -the last day before Lent began – when people celebrated and had weddings, in preparation for the period stretching over six weeks of fasting, penitence and denial.

Meat, eggs, dairy, alcohol and even sex were off limits for strict Catholics in Ireland over Lent. Music and merrymaking was not enjoyed. There was a tradition of musical instruments being put away for the six weeks of Lent.

“Shrove Tuesday was traditionally the last day to get married before Lent,” said Ms Byrne. “There would have been a big rush for priests running up to Shrove Tuesday.”

People who were single were considered to have disregarded their social duty to marry and enjoyed a lesser social status.

It followed that Chalk Sunday was a focus on the single.

“Women’s role at that time was about getting married, having children and keeping a house,” said Ms Byrne.

“Women did so much more than that … but as for marriage, for some women it just may not have worked out. The word ‘spinster’ is a horrible term.”

The Chelsea Handler Childless Woman Upset: Other Conservatives Wrongly Conflating Married Motherhood with Womanhood or Happiness, Meaning, Purpose

The Chelsea Handler Childless Woman Upset: Other Conservatives Wrongly Conflating Married Motherhood with Womanhood or with Happiness, Meaning, or Purpose

After entertainer Chelsea Handler uploaded (Link): a Tweet with a video of herself listing the numerous ways she enjoys life due to being childless – I didn’t see anything in the video mentioning abortion – a lot of other conservatives jumped to shame and scold Handler for being happy about being childless and publicly expressing that happiness.

Others have said that Handler had two or three abortions in the past. The fact that Handler previously had abortions does not change the substance of my problems with conservative reaction to Handler’s video.

I am pro-life, not pro-choice, so I don’t agree with Handler’s actions to terminate her pregnancies.

However, again, I don’t recall Handler’s “happy to be childless” video advocating abortion or mentioning anything about abortion.

I don’t think her video criticized or shamed women for being mothers or for wanting to be mothers.

The only possible, even remotely “anti motherhood” take away one can get from her video is that mothers – assuming they are good, non-abusive mothers – invest a lot of time in child-rearing, but Handler doesn’t frame it in an anti-motherhood way.

It’s Okay For Women to Be Childless at Any Age and to be Happy About Being Childless, Just Like It’s Okay For Mothers to Be Happy About Being Mothers

Handler was just showing ways she has more free time because she doesn’t have to participate in childcare – which is not the same thing as being “anti-motherhood,” or telling other women they are wrong to be mothers.

It’s perfectly fine for a woman to be single and childless and to be happy about it.

Women can and should find meaning and purpose apart from marriage and motherhood. It’s unhealthy for any person to wrap up all their happiness, meaning, or purpose into one identity, station of life, or role.

If you are a married mother, your children will grow up, move out, and seldom visit you once they’re gone. Your husband may develop dementia, abuse you, or cheat on you, so that you will be without emotional support or you will have to divorce him.
In all these situations, you will be left with yourself, by yourself, and god help you if you never forged purpose, identity, happiness, or meaning apart from a spouse and children.

There’s no reason to criticize or shame an adult, man or woman, for being single and childless and for being happy about it and posting about it.

My fellow conservatives often push motherhood (via podcasts, tweets, magazine articles, church sermons, blog posts, etc) to a loopy, creepy, fevered pitch, about how super awesome, fulfilling, and wonderful motherhood supposedly is – but goodness forbid a childless woman lists or publicizes the ways she’s happy with being childless – and do so without criticizing motherhood or mothers. That’s a huge double standard.

I also didn’t agree with Handler’s mockery of single women who choose to remain virgins until marriage or to remain chaste (I blogged about that (Link): here a few years ago).

Unfortunately, in the midst of criticizing Handler, a lot of conservatives today were conflating “womanhood” to married motherhood. 

However, a woman remains a woman regardless if she has a child or is infertile, childless, or childfree, or whether she wants to have children or not.

Liberal Author Says the Family Unit is ‘A Terrible Way to Satisfy … Love and Care,’ Calls to Abolish It – The Pros and Cons of Her View

Liberal Author Says the Family Unit is ‘A Terrible Way to Satisfy … Love and Care,’ Calls to Abolish It – The Pros and Cons of Her View

Well, I am a conservative, and I am not “anti Nuclear Family,” so I cannot say I agree with the idea of abolishing The Nuclear Family.

On the other hand, as I’ve stated numerous times on this blog, married couples have been shown in studies to be too self-absorbed (they meet all the needs of their spouse and kids while not extending help or care to those outside their nuclear family, and the Bible itself notes in 1 Corinthians 7 that married people are more concerned with meeting the needs of their spouse than in doing God’s work).

Too many conservatives place too much emphasis on the Nuclear Family, especially religious persons. The Bible simply does not command people to marry – sorry, but the one call to widows to re-marry does not establish that marriage for the never-married is a requirement, or that the command is timeless for all people – and the Bible does not say that marriage or The Family Unit will save or rescue a society.

The Bible says the problem with a nation is that each individual is a sinner before God, and the only solution to that is for the individual to put saving faith in Jesus. The Bible does not prescribe marriage and establishing the Nuclear Family as a solution.

An un-due emphasis on the “family” unnecessarily marginalizes single adults, widows, the divorced, the infertile among us – the Bible says the purest religion is to help the widow and the orphan (see James 1:27), not to minister to The Nuclear Family.

There are problems with the Nuclear Family, with conservatives turning it into a deity that they worship and place an unhealthy fixation upon (among other issues), but I also do not support communism, marxism, or eliminating the Nuclear Family.

I do not support abortion – that topic is raised below. The woman discussed below who is arguing against the Nuclear Family supports abortion; I do not.

(Link): Author Sophie Lewis’ forthcoming book is titled ‘Abolish the Family’

In a forthcoming book titled “Abolish the Family,” the author “makes the case for family abolition,” according to a book description that calls author Sophie Lewis a “leading feminist critic.”

I have additional commentary and resources below this link and report:

(Link): Liberal author says the family unit is ‘a terrible way to satisfy… love & care,’ calls to abolish it

Excerpts:

Sophie Lewis previously called for women to embrace abortion as justified killing

Sept 25, 2022
By Lindsay Kornick | Fox News

Feminist theorist and author Sophie Lewis was the subject of an article on Friday in the UK’s The New Statesman website publication following her new book “Abolish the Family.”

Historian Erin Magalaque discussed Lewis’ book which described the family unit as “a terrible way to satisfy all of our desires for love, care, nourishment” and was highly critical of suggestions otherwise.

“The family isn’t actually any good at creating intimacy, Lewis argues; the family creates, in fact, a dearth of care, with shreds and scraps of intimacy fought out between overworked parents and totally dependent kids, hidden behind the locked doors of private property,” Magalaque wrote.

Magalaque complimented Lewis’ efforts to mock what she called “inevitable knee-jerk” reactions to calls to abolish the family unit.

Ending Priestly Celibacy Would Not Stop Abuse by E. Condon – Celibates Are Not Pedophiles

Ending Priestly Celibacy Would Not Stop Abuse by E. Condon – Celibates Are Not Pedophiles

Celibacy is not engaging in sexual activity.

Not having sex does not cause sex or sexual abuse. Celibacy does not cause pedophilia.

It’s highly insulting to adult celibates, such as myself (and no, I do not molest children or have any desire to) to suggest or plainly state, that celibacy leads to pedophilia.

Celibates are not pedophiles. Pedophilia is one type of sexual attraction or sexual behavior, and celibates do not engage in sexual behavior.

I am not a Roman Catholic, by the way.

I was raised Baptist and believed – and still believe – that the Bible teaches that sex outside of marriage is sin, which is one reason of several I did not engage in sexual behavior.

Studies have shown that a percentage of male pedophiles are married (and having regular sex with a wife) when they are molesting children. I have blog posts on this blog with links to news articles about married men (some Christian pastors) who were arrested for molesting children or using child porn.

Being married (in a hetero marriage and having regular sex with one’s spouse) does not make a person less capable of, or unwilling to engage in, sexual sin. When they’re not fondling children, hetero married persons sometimes hire and use prostitutes, have affairs with other married people, or view pornography.

(Link): Ending Priestly Celibacy Would Not Stop Abuse by E. Condon

Excerpts:

Trotting out the canard that married priests would mean less abuse isn’t just ignorant. It’s a shocking disservice to victim-survivors.

by Ed Condon
July 31, 2022

The Economist recently ran a lead article arguing that if the Catholics “want to reduce the scourge of sexual abuse by priests, they should demand an end to the rule requiring priestly celibacy.” I found myself checking the year of publication. Surely this must have been an article from 20 years ago.

But no: In the same week in which the Catholic bishops of the United States published their annual report on the (still falling) number of abuse claims made in American dioceses, the Economist was running with a tired, discredited argument.

[The author goes on to explain that the Roman Catholic Church has horribly dealt with child sex abuse, and he acknowledges that fact.]

… But the suggestion that abuse is caused, amplified, or sustained by the unmarried state of clergy isn’t just without evidence: It flies in the face of the experiences of so many survivors of abuse in other settings.

No one who has followed the terrible reckoning the Southern Baptist Convention has had with its own institutional failure to protect children could cite the “successful” example of Protestant clergy as proof that married pastors mitigate the risk of abuse.

Likewise, consider the heartbreaking experiences of survivors of abuse in families, schools, youth organizations, the Boy Scouts, and the child-welfare system.

Atheist Video About Being a Virgin or Sexually Abstinent – My Critique of the Atheist’s Critique

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.

American Romance Standards Are Changing as People Have Less Sex and Marriage Rates Drop

American Romance Standards Are Changing as People Have Less Sex and Marriage Rates Drop 

(Link): American Romance Standards Are Changing as People Have Less Sex and Marriage Rates Drop 

Priorities for couples on Valentine’s Day have also shifted, while some people who are single say the holiday brings too much pressure

By Maria Pasquini
February 14, 2022

Although American adults are having less sex and exchanging less rings than they once did, romance isn’t dead — and neither is relationship satisfaction.

In 2021 findings reported by (Link): CNN, nearly 26% of adults said they (Link): didn’t have sex once over the past 12 months, according to the General Social Survey.

The results were up from 23.3% in 2018 and 22.5% in 2016, which were the last two times the recurring survey had been completed.

In contrast, when the survey was conducted 20 years earlier, only 18.7% of adults reported not having any sex.

The Washington Post previously reported that the change has been most pronounced in younger adults. Between 2008 and 2018, the percentage of Americans between the ages of 18 to 29 not having sex doubled. (Meanwhile, numbers for adults over the age of 50 have (Link): stayed largely consistent since 1989.)

As a possible explanation behind the data, Jean Twenge, a professor of psychology at San Diego State University, told the newspaper at the time that “there are more people in their twenties who don’t have a live-in partner…so under those circumstances I think less sex is going to happen.”

In their most recent survey, GSS also reported that the number of adults with a live-in partner has continued to decrease.

Although 70% of respondents said they were living in the same house as their spouse in 1989, only 48% of American adults reported being in the same situation in 2021.

The number of adults who said they did not have a steady partner has also increased in that time period, reaching 30% last year.

However, the good news is that the majority of adults who are in relationships report feeling romantically satisfied with their partner.

….However, whether you’re single or in a relationship, recent surveys all show that people are less into celebrating Valentine’s Day the traditional way.  

Authors at The Federalist Keep Bashing Singleness in the Service of Promoting Marriage – Which Is Not Okay

---

Authors at The Federalist Keep Bashing Singleness in the Service of Promoting Marriage – Which Is Not Okay

In the last two months, I’ve seen two different editorials from conservative site The Federalist in support of marriage (or parenthood).

I’m a conservative. I am not in opposition to marriage or people choosing to have children.

My issue with other conservatives is that they are so paranoid of liberals and assume all liberals are anti-marriage and anti-parenthood to the degree that they leave no room for nuance, meaning, that unfortunately, many pro-marriage and pro-parenthood conservatives end up “trash talking” singleness and the state of being childless (or being childfree).

I’m a conservative woman who has never married, and I’ve never had children, yet I do not hate marriage or married people having children, and I am so tired of these conservative authors or pundits feeling it necessary to put down single or childless adults like myself in their quest to defend marriage and natalism – conservative single adults like myself get caught in the cross-fire.

If you are a conservative who believes too many liberals are anti-marriage or anti-parenthood, and you want to speak out in favor of either station, that’s fine with me, but as a single, childless, conservative woman, I do get very hacked off and offended to read these conservative articles and editorials whose authors assume that any and all single and childless (or childfree) adults are awful, selfish, anti-family, weird, under-developed, or jerks.

Not every one in the United States today who is single past the age of 30, or who is childless or is childfree, is a feminist, a liberal, a progressive, pro-abortion, Democrat, or anti-family.

So, to my fellow conservatives, stop assuming that all single adults who remain single by choice OR by circumstance, or who are childless or childfree, are terrible, selfish, or are baby-hating progressives.

There is ZERO NEED to defend or promote marriage by talking in a derogatory manner about singleness or the state of being childless or childfree.

Make your case in favor of marriage or natalism without resorting to insulting all single adults, or assuming and making the false case that all single adults hate marriage, hate babies, or vote Democrat.

Here is the first of two recent pro-marriage or pro-natalism editorials at conservative site The Federalist  that manage to work in insults and slams against single adults or singleness itself – which is totally shameful and unnecessary!

(Link):  Joy Behar Accidentally Admits Social Conservatives Were Right About Sex

Pertinent Excerpts:

BY: NATHANAEL BLAKE
December 10, 2021

… In particular, large numbers of unattached men are bad for society; having a family encourages men to be productive and protective, rather than idle drones or predators.
— end excerpts —

I mean, really? It’s not necessary or fair to refer to or describe men who remain single as being “idle drones or predators.”

I have a long-running list of news headlines at my blog (in this post) of married men (some who even work as church pastors) who were arrested for wife abuse, making child porn, or raping children.

Serial killer John Wayne Gacy was married to a woman, had two biological children by her, but he went on to rape and murder over two dozen young men. Did marriage and fatherhood make Gacy more “loving” and “giving?” No, no it did not.

Marriage does not stop a man from being “a predator.”

Pope Francis Says ‘Sins of the Flesh’ Aren’t that ‘Serious’ – Joins His Baptist and Protestant Counterparts in Downplaying Sexual Sin

Pope Francis Says ‘Sins of the Flesh’ Aren’t that ‘Serious’ – Joins His Baptist and Protestant Counterparts in Downplaying Sexual Sin

This Roman Catholic Pope now joins the many Baptists, Protestants, evangelicals, and social conservatives who have given up on upholding celibacy and sexual abstinence until marriage in the last several years.

(Link): Pope Francis Says ‘Sins of the Flesh’ Aren’t that ‘Serious’

By Hannah Frishberg
December 8, 2021

Lust is not the worst of the seven deadly sins, according to Pope Francis.

There are worse indiscretions than sex outside of marriage, the leader of the Catholic Church told reporters on the papal plane while en route from Greece to Italy on Monday, Reuters reported.

“Sins of the flesh are not the most serious,” the 84-year-old religious leader said regarding sex outside of marriage. Top transgressions instead include pride and hatred, according to Reuters.

Singleness Lessons I Learned from the Early Church – The history of Christian celibacy is more complicated than we’d like to think by Dani Treweek

Singleness Lessons I Learned from the Early Church – The history of Christian celibacy is more complicated than we’d like to think by Dani Treweek

(Link): Singleness Lessons I Learned from the Early Church – The history of Christian celibacy is more complicated than we’d like to think by Dani Treweek

Excerpts:

by Dani Treweek
December 2, 2021

Lately, Christians have cast their minds and social media musings back to the early church on the topics of singleness and sexuality. Much of the conversation centers on past spiritual practices of celibacy and claims about what early church leaders taught about singleness.

Some suggest that early church leaders enthusiastically ‘tore down’ the centrality of marriage within the church. Others argue that the way we understand the (so-called) “gift of singleness” today is a direct inheritance from apostles and the church’s earliest centuries.

As a history nerd, practical theologian, and never-married Christian woman, I may not agree with every supposition, but I’m delighted by the revitalized discussion about how we can see ancient ideas about singleness in a new light.

After all, church history is our history, and this ancient era is ripe with fascinating insights (and quite a few conundrums) about singleness—many of which are still relevant to discussions on faith and church life today.

The lessons we can learn from the ancient church about singleness are many and mighty, but they are neither simple nor straightforward.

In fact, early church leaders do not offer us a singular narrative about being single. …

The Pro-Porn and the Pro-Sex Workers are Inaccurately Depicting Standard Christian Views about Sex to be “Anti-Sex” (re: “OnlyFans” Headlines)

The Pro-Porn and the Pro-Sex Workers are Inaccurately Depicting Standard Christian Views about Sex to be “Anti-Sex” (re: “OnlyFans” Headlines)

In light of the fact that “OnlyFans” is no longer allowing its members to post pornography on it site (which may have something to do with MasterCard credit card company refusing to accept payments on any site that may involve human/sex trafficking), some porn supporters, “sex workers,” or free speech advocates, are, unfortunately, inaccurately depicting any and all Christian sexual ethics as being “anti sex.”

Believing that sex is a sin outside the confines of marriage is a pretty typical Christian position going back decades to hundreds of years; believing that sexual behavior should have some kind of limits is not inherently “anti sex,” and as an adult celibate, I very much resent the portrayal of sexual abstinence outside of marriage as being “anti sex” or “sexual repression.”

As a celibate myself – and my preference would still be to wait until I marry to have sex, and I am now middle-aged – I am not opposed to sex.

However, I do believe that pornography and prostitution devalues the act of sex itself, and yes, both objectifies women, and women are already objectified in non-porn culture as it is.

Abstinence and ‘Purity Culture’ Are Often Conflated but Aren’t The Same, Tim Keller Explains, by B. Showalter

Abstinence and ‘Purity Culture’ Are Often Conflated but Aren’t The Same, Tim Keller Explains 

I’m not totally in agreement on Keller (Link) on everything, but he is correct that too many believers (Link): falsely conflate the concepts of being sexually abstinent outside of marriage with the faults in purity culture and unfortunately ditch the concept altogether.

Yet other Christians (Link): falsely believe and teach that the Bible does not support the practice of remaining a virgin until marriage.

The progressive Christians (and (Link): occasionally, doofus conservatives) try to ease the guilty consciences of fornicators (Link): by downplaying fornication.

(Link): Abstinence and ‘Purity Culture’ Are Often Conflated but Aren’t The Same, Tim Keller Explains 

April 17, 2021

by Brandon Showalter

What’s often referred to as “purity culture” is not the same thing as remaining sexually abstinent outside of marriage, though many conflate the two, according to Tim Keller, founder and former pastor of Redeemer Church in New York City.

Keller explained in a Facebook post that in the early church, the Christian sexual ethic — that “sex was only for within a mutual, whole-self-giving, super-consensual life-long covenant” — was “revolutionary,” given the prevailing Greco-Roman ethic of the day.