The Overlooked Emotions of Sperm Donation

(Link): The Overlooked Emotions of Sperm Donation

by Ashley Fetters

July 9, 2018

“My hope is that people think about how this is more than a transaction,” says one family therapist.

Sperm donation offers a tidy solution to an aggravating problem: When a person or a couple wants a baby and needs a different ingredient than what they’ve currently got to make one, a man with viable sperm swoops in to help.

…As simple a transaction as sperm donation can seem to be, though, some find it to be stressful or isolating—and because assisted reproductive technology is a relatively new, rapidly developing field, the social and emotional challenges that can arise between the participants in a sperm donation are, for many, uncharted.

Continue reading “The Overlooked Emotions of Sperm Donation”

Why More Women Are Having Babies at 50 and Beyond

Why More Women Are Having Babies at 50 and Beyond

(Link):  Why More Women Are Having Babies at 50 and Beyond

Excerpts:

….Duckworth [Sen. Tammy Duckworth, D-Ill] is expected to deliver her second child a few weeks after she turns 50, a time when many woman expect the end of fertility and the beginning of menopause to be around the corner.

The Senator said she delayed having children to pursue her career and, by the time she was ready, she had to overcome infertility.”The early part of my career, which was also, [like] for most women, your twenties and early thirties, your prime fertility years,” she told ABC station WLS in Chicago, “were also my career-building years.”

She is not alone. Duckworth is among a growing number of women, including celebrities like Janet Jackson and Sophie B. Hawkins, tackling motherhood in their fifties.

Overall birthrates in the United States have been declining for years, reaching a record low in 2016, according to National Bureau of Health Statistics, and provisional data suggests a new low for 2017.

Continue reading “Why More Women Are Having Babies at 50 and Beyond”

Womb Transplants Could Allow Men to Have Babies ‘Tomorrow’, Claims Expert

Womb Transplants Could Allow Men to Have Babies ‘Tomorrow’, Claims Expert

I wonder, do men get the annoying monthly menstrual period to go along with it, which can come with cramps and backaches? *fingers crossed*

What a strange world we’re living in.

(Link): Womb Transplants Could Allow Men to Have Babies ‘Tomorrow’, Claims Expert

by V Fletcher, November 2017

Blokes would not be able to deliver the baby naturally, but could give birth by cesarean

Continue reading “Womb Transplants Could Allow Men to Have Babies ‘Tomorrow’, Claims Expert”

Single, 54, and a New Dad: Why Some Start Families Late by A. Ellin

Single, 54, and a New Dad: Why Some Start Families Late

(Link):  Single, 54, and a New Dad: Why Some Start Families Late by A. Ellin

Excerpts:

August 5, 2016

SPARKY CAMPANELLA never heard the thrumming of a biological clock. But his “sociological clock” — his sense that he was missing out on something important in life — boomed mightily. At the age of 54, he decided to do something about it. He became a father.

He was single, but so what? “I decided I could either do it myself, or wait for the right partner to come along,” said Mr. Campanella, a Los Angeles fine arts photographer whose son, Rhys, is a little over 1 year old. Over the years he had dated women who had children of their own, but he realized that he didn’t want to be a stepdad.

….It’s a question many childless people over 50 are asking themselves. Of course, dealing with night feedings and rambunctious 2-year-olds are not for the faint of heart. But with their finances in order and their careers in place, with their life spans extended, some older people are concluding: Why not start — or continue — raising children in later life?

Continue reading “Single, 54, and a New Dad: Why Some Start Families Late by A. Ellin”

With Menopause Reversal, Women Could Be Forever Fertile

With Menopause Reversal, Women Could Be Forever Fertile

(Link): With Menopause Reversal, Women Could Be Forever Fertile

The hot flashes, night sweats, and vaginal dryness characteristic of menopause may no longer also signal the end of a woman’s fertility thanks to a blood treatment used to heal wounds.

Presenting their findings at the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology annual meeting in Helsinki, Finland, this month, researchers in Greece said they were able to reverse menopause in roughly 30 women, including one who entered menopause at 40 but five years later menstruated again, reports (Link): New Scientist.

Continue reading “With Menopause Reversal, Women Could Be Forever Fertile”

Why does society still view childless women like me with suspicion? by E. Day

Why does society still view childless women like me with suspicion?

(Link): Why does society still view childless women like me with suspicion? by E. Day

Excerpts:

  • Remarks like Leadsom’s go far beyond the usual cut-and-thrust of the political arena and reveal how (Link): childless women are still viewed with innate suspicion. This, in spite of the fact that women in their mid-40s are now almost twice as likely to be childless as their parents’ generation. One in five women born in 1969 is childless today, compared with one in nine women born in 1942.
  • But there remains a taboo, a retrograde belief that (Link): we are in some way unnatural for not fulfilling our biological destiny. How else to explain the fact that the first question many people ask when I meet them is whether I have children, followed by an uncomfortable pause when I say that I don’t. “But why?” I can see them thinking. “What’s wrong with her?”

Continue reading “Why does society still view childless women like me with suspicion? by E. Day”

Mothers Over 40 in Record Baby Boom: Number of Women Who Give Birth in Their Fifth Decade or Later Trebles

Mothers Over 40 in Record Baby Boom: Number of Women Who Give Birth in Their Fifth Decade or Later Trebles

This article is from 2010. I could have sworn I already did a blog post on this, but I looked around my blog a little bit and don’t see it.

(Link): Mothers over 40 in record baby boom: Number of women who give birth in their fifth decade or later trebles

  • By Steve Doughty for the Daily Mail
  • A baby boom among older women has trebled the number giving birth after their 40th birthday.
  • Almost 27,000 babies were born to mothers over 40 last year, figures revealed yesterday.
  • The unprecedented level is nearly three times the total of 20 years ago and up by 50 per cent over the past decade.
  • Even during the post-war childbirth peak in the Sixties there were fewer children born to women in their fifth decade and beyond.
  • Britain now has one of the highest birth rates for older women in the world, with 3.8 per cent of all babies born to mothers over 40. Only Italy has a higher level in Europe.

Continue reading “Mothers Over 40 in Record Baby Boom: Number of Women Who Give Birth in Their Fifth Decade or Later Trebles”

Woman in Her 70s May Be Oldest Ever to Give Birth

Woman in Her 70s May Be Oldest Ever to Give Birth

(Link): Woman in Her 70s May Be Oldest Ever to Give Birth

Excerpts:

  • By ARSHAD R. ZARGAR & ASHLEY WELCH CBS NEWS
  • May 12, 2016, 3:23 PM
  • A woman in India could make the record books as one of the oldest ever to give birth.
  • Daljinder Kaur, who’s believed to be at least 70 years old, gave birth to a son named Arman (meaning “wish” in Hindi) on April 19. The baby was the first for Kaur and her 79-year-old husband, Mohinder Singh Gill, after nearly five decades of marriage.
  • “I feel blessed to be able to hold my own baby. I had lost hope of becoming a mother ever,” said Kaur, who underwent two years of (Link): IVF treatment and had two failed attempts earlier.

Continue reading “Woman in Her 70s May Be Oldest Ever to Give Birth”

The Not Mom Blog: Childless by Chance Topic and Other Posts

The Not Mom Blog: Childless by Chance Topic

From the (Link): Not Mom Blog,
(Link): Childless by Chance

From their blog:

(Link): 15 DIMENSIONS OF CHILDLESS BY CHOICE OR BY CHANCE

    Remember that niches aren’t walled divisions, just different shades of a shared story. Here’s what you’ve told us so far about our many sub-communities. Don’t see yours? Let us know.

    By Choice and By Chance are like the East and West Sides of our ‘city’. Except, our map includes a Venn diagram where the two sides share land for women who describe themselves as Both. They once wanted kids, very much so in many cases, but at some point they realized the effort to conceive was too taxing, or that the idea of motherhood simply didn’t fit anymore.

    …The big umbrella of Infertility/Age includes women who’ve tried IVF, or experienced miscarriage, or simply waited too long before trying to conceive. A partner’s infertility counts, too. And Age can push a woman to declare herself without children By Chance and By Choice: Both.

    Health-Challenged NotMoms may well be fertile, but conditions such as cardiovascular disorders or kidney and liver disease, make the attempt life-threatening.

    Childless by Marriage is a term I credit to Sue Lick, who wrote a book and more about marrying an older man who was already a father and didn’t want more kids. When he died suddenly, her stepchildren vanished from her life, and her age made childbearing distinctly improbable. That was her ‘by marriage’ story, but there are many more.

    Continue reading “The Not Mom Blog: Childless by Chance Topic and Other Posts”

Looking For Free Sperm, Women May Turn To Online Forums

Looking For Free Sperm, Women May Turn To Online Forums

Thank Dog I never cared one way or another if I ever had a baby or not. I just never hankered for one.

I could not imagine being so desperate to have a kid that you’d go to a site to hook up with a stranger to pork each other and have a kid. No thanks, I’d rather die alone, single, childless, celibate.

(Link): Looking For Free Sperm, Women May Turn To Online Forums

    Commercial sperm banks have operated in the U.S. since the early 1970s. Today, women who can afford to use them tend do so without stigma. But banks are no longer the only source for women hoping to get pregnant.

    There are informal, unregulated websites popping up where men who are willing to donate their sperm for free can meet women who are hoping to have a baby.

    The most established sperm donation website in the U.S., the Known Donor Registry, launched in 2010. Since then, it has grown to more than 16,000 members.

    Membership to this site and others does not necessarily reflect how many people actually conceive this way — in fact, there really aren’t solid statistics on this kind of exchange. But there are anecdotes, and people have come forward saying they’ve tried it.

    Continue reading “Looking For Free Sperm, Women May Turn To Online Forums”

Liberals on Paranoia: Right Wing Concern is Simply Paranoia and Hence Supposed Evidence of Conservative Lunacy but Same Behavior Totally Acceptable and Non-Loony from Liberals

Liberals on Paranoia: Right Wing Concern is Simply Paranoia and Hence Supposed Evidence of Conservative Lunacy but Same Behavior Totally Acceptable and Non Loony from Liberals

According to liberals, it’s downright nutty and loony when Christians, social conservatives or right wingers express concern at over-reach by liberals, courts, or the government, or what have you, but it’s not any of those pejorative things when expressed by a left wing person, group, politician, or organization.

Hmm. Let me give you a couple of recent examples.

Right Wing Watch, which is a left wing site, likes to mock conservatives or Christians over homosexual militants – our nation’s very own Gay Gestapo – by tweeting things such as:

  • Matt Barber: gay rights advocates are like a “horde of locusts” that seeks to “homosexualize” kids http://bit.ly/1o0duWDsource)

Obviously, Right Wing Watch feels that homosexual rights proponents are not the least bit like a “horde of locusts” and that it’s craziness to suggest that they are, dog gone it!

Here’s another liberal example:

  • Right Wing Watch @RightWingWatch · 6h
  • Matt Barber and Mat Staver agree that gay marriage is “the brainchild” of Satan himself & the bidding of the Devil: http://bit.ly/TwyPgA (source)

Here’s another example from July 2014:
(Link): Internet Conservatives Flip Out Over Imaginary Immigrant Invasion

The RWW (Right Wing Watch) url in that second tweet will take you to this page at RWW:

(Link): Barber: Gay Marriage Is ‘The Brainchild’ Of Satan

Here is an excerpt from that RWW page:

  • On today’s “Faith and Freedom” radio broadcast, Mat Staver and Matt Barber cited recent remarks made by Pope Francis about how “the Devil wants to destroy” the family in order to declare that gay marriage is “the brainchild” of Satan himself.
  • “Marriage is the cornerstone institution of any healthy society,” Barber asserted, “and so clearly the Father of Lies, the Enemy of the World hates marriage…

I happen to be right wing, and a social conservative who does not agree with homosexuality, and I have a special loathing for the very homosexual militancy that RWW feels is simply a figment of the right wingers’ imagination, but I don’t know if I’d go so far as to say homosexuality is the “brainchild of Satan.”

The Bible, in the book of Romans (Romans 1:21-27), in regards to homosexuality, lesbianism, and other forms of non-hetero sexuality does not attribute these things to Satan but says:

  • 21 For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened.
  • 22 Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools 23 and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like a mortal human being and birds and animals and reptiles.
  • 24 Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another.
  • 25 They exchanged the truth about God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator—who is forever praised. Amen.
  • 26 Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural sexual relations for unnatural ones.
  • 27 In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed shameful acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their error.

Further, if you’ve read this blog for any time at all, you know that although I am not “anti family” that I never- the- less feel that Christians and my fellow conservatives wrongly place too much emphasis on family, marriage, and natalism.

Another RWW tweet (source):

  • Will corporations soon cite biblical objections to minimum wage, collective bargaining and tax laws? http://bit.ly/1kSpMDI #HobbyLobby

Clearly, some liberals believe in a “slippery slope,” and think today’s ruling means that right wingers, or Christians, will try to tinker with minimum wage laws and other issues on the basis of their religious convictions.

Liberals (Link): banned large sodas in New York at one time, but I guess they think “nanny stating” is nothing to be concerned about – or, they don’t mind secular over-reach but panic only over religious-based motivations.

This is another liberal editorial, this one on the recent ruling involving Hobby Lobby, and shows some panic over what today’s ruling might mean in the future:

(Link): In Hobby Lobby Ruling, a Court So Wrong in So Many Ways by Sally Kohn

Here are a few excerpts:

  • Reliance on junk science, backwards ideas about religious freedom—it’s all there in the conservative majority’s awful Hobby Lobby ruling.
  • … The owners of Hobby Lobby and Conestoga Wood cannot be allowed to impose their religious beliefs on their employees.
  • But it’s the conflation of these points that is truly frightening: the idea that in continuing to give corporations more and more unchecked power and reign, we are giving them the power of religious tyranny — the ability to wantonly and unilaterally impose religion as they see fit on their workers and perhaps more.
  • Under such a ruling, it’s not far-fetched to imagine companies (genuinely or disingenuously) claiming religious exemptions in refusing to serve gay customers or denying health insurance coverage to the multi-racial child of an employee.
  • In fact, what would stop companies from saying that their religion makes them opposed to taxes or obeying pollution regulations or you name it? Just what we need in America, more corporations with more excuses to not play by the same rules that ordinary Americans have to obey.
  • But in its rulings, this Court repeatedly gives more power to the interests of already-powerful corporations than the needs of the American people.

So, there we have some double standards on display.

If right wingers show concern over the homosexual militants and their allies, who are in the nasty habit of abusing or steamrolling over people, in their quest to cram homosexuality down everyone’s throats (ie, harassing people over it, suing people, getting them fired), see, for instance,

(Link): New Mexico Court: Christian Photographer Cannot Refuse Gay Ceremony

(Link): Florida Teacher Suspended for Anti-Gay Marriage Posts on Personal Facebook Page

(Link): Christian B&B owners who refused to let gay couple stay suffer death threats and are forced to sell up because of a lack of business

(Link): Mozilla CEO Brendan Eich Resigns After Protests from Gay Marriage Supporters

– there’s absolutely nothing to be concerned about, but, when the Supreme Court rules that a Christian-owned business does not have to fund all forms of contraception, oh noes, look out, Christians will be sending women into forced labor camps next, or to the electric chair!1111!!!!

But such concern is not loony paranoia when expressed by the left, according to the left against the right, no, it’s only indicative of nuttiness when expressed by the right. See the double standard there?

(Link): The left loses their minds over Hobby Lobby decision BY NOAH ROTHMAN

Excerpts

  • “Just because it was only restricted to women’s health access doesn’t mean that it doesn’t create a devastating precedent which says that women’s health care should be treated differently,” Carmon [journalist with left wing MSNBC.com] added. She added that the Republican Party is the biggest beneficiary of today’s ruling. “So, the context of this is an all-out assault on access to contraception and access to other reproductive health care services.”
  • HotAir’s Karl has accumulated some of the best examples of liberal “schadenfreude,” as he’s dubbed it, in which the left utterly and intentionally misconstrues the scope of this ruling. Incidentally, their reaction also helps to service what appears to be a widely shared victimhood fantasy.
  • We’ve seen indications that the left believes this decision is a prelude to theocracy [what follows are tweets]:

— start Tweets —–
John Fugelsang
✔ @JohnFugelsang (source)
The Supreme Court #HobbyLobby ruling proves once again that Scalia Law is a lot like Sharia Law.

southpaw @nycsouthpaw (source)
“So as not to insult Allah, this accounting firm requires that all female employees wear the hijab.”
—- end Tweets —-

We’ve seen liberal journalists and commentators rending garments over the implications of this ruling which exist only in their own minds:

— start Tweets —-
Brian Beutler ✔ @brianbeutler (source)
This isn’t a win for religious liberty it’s an affirmation of privilege for advocates of conservative sexual morality http://pbs.twimg.com/media/BrYmQ7bCcAAu9K1.png#twimg

Jimmy williams @Jimmyspolitics
What Hobby Lobby means is there are now two separate classes of women in America: those who work for privately-owned corps and everyone else

Jim Acosta ✔ @JimAcostaCNN
Pelosi on Hobby Lobby: “Supreme Court took an outrageous step against the rights of America’s women”

Elizabeth Warren ✔ @elizabethforma
Can’t believe we live in a world where we’d even consider letting big corps deny women access to basic care based on vague moral objections.
— end Tweets—

It’s pretty rich of liberals to depict Christians and conservatives as being paranoid nutters over some issues, when they themselves do the same thing on other issues.

Additional material (off site links):

(Link): Hobby Lobby opponents: Supreme Court probably legalized xenophobia, racism

Excerpt:

  • The left has been… animated in their objections to the Supreme Court’s decision in the Hobby Lobby case which declared the mandate in the Affordable Care Act which forced employers to provide employees with abortifacients drugs over their religious objections to be unconstitutional.
  • In spite of what many have characterized as the narrow and tailored ruling by the Court, some political and legal observers have determined that the ruling is a step toward the legalization of discrimination.
  • One of the more creative arguments in this direction was submitted by NPR’s legal affairs correspondent Nina Totenberg. On Monday, she suggested that the Court has created a legal pathway for employers to discriminate against their employees on the basis of race, sexual orientation, and even national origin.

(Link): 6 Stupid Arguments About Hobby Lobby From Dumb Liberals

(Link): The Hobby Lobby Decision Shows The Culture War Isn’t Over

October 2014 edit. —EBOLA—

Now I would add the ebola outbreak to the list. It seems to me that many left wingers have been saying ebola is not a serious threat to the USA, while it’s mainly been conservatives calling the alarm and asking the Government to halt all commercial flights from ebola stricken nations.

Your U.S. liberals get up in arms about this, and insist that right wingers are being paranoid and over-hyping ebola’s threat to Americans.

Meanwhile, the ebola situation continually gets worse, as I’ve been keeping tracking of in (Link): this post (at the bottom, under the section entitled “UPDATE”), so it’s not unwarranted or nutty or paranoid for American conservatives to express concern at the situation.
————————
Related posts, this blog:

(Link): Celibate Shaming from an Anti- Slut Shaming Secular Feminist Site (Hypocrisy) Feminists Do Not Support All Choices

(Link): If the Family Is Central, Christ Isn’t

(Link): Why So Much Fornication – Because Christians Have No Expectation of Sexual Purity

(Link): So According to Some Feminists Believing in Female Equality Means Supporting All Actions and Behaviors by All Females Ever – Even their Pubic Hair Photos and Bloody Vagina T Shirt Designs? What?

(Link): Hypocrisy of Left Wingers and Atheists and the #NotAll Hash Tag or Rhetoric

(Link): Inconsistency on Feminist Site – Choices Have Consequences

The Crumbling Post-35 Pregnancy Myth (article from The Daily Beast site)

The Crumbling Post-35 Pregnancy Myth

(Link) The Crumbling Post-35 Pregnancy Myth

Excerpts:

    The prevailing myth that women can’t and shouldn’t get pregnant after the age of 35 is finally starting to crumble. Science shows women can safely deliver healthy babies into their 40s.
    ———

A new study finds that women who had their last child when they were 33 or older lived longer than those who had their last child by 29. It doesn’t necessarily mean one causes the other—it’s possible that being healthy enough to get pregnant later also causes longevity—but it’s encouraging news for those of us who waited until our late 30s to have children.

  • That news has been coming more quickly in recent years. As I noted in my book The Impatient Woman’s Guide to Getting Pregnant, the scary statistic that one out of three women over 35 will not be pregnant after a year of trying comes from an analysis of French birth records between 1670 and 1830.
  • Studies of more modern populations find fairly high fertility in a woman’s late 30s.
  • About 80 percent of women 35-39 will get pregnant naturally in a year of trying. That’s barely different from the 85 percent of under 35’s who will succeed.
  • Other recent good news for older women and fertility comes from an unlikely source: statistics from in vitro fertilization (IVF) clinics. Until just a few years ago, IVF success rates for older women were depressingly low.

Continue reading “The Crumbling Post-35 Pregnancy Myth (article from The Daily Beast site)”

Check your ‘cat-lady’ preconceptions about childless women

Check your ‘cat-lady’ preconceptions about childless women

(Link): Check your ‘cat-lady’ preconceptions about childless women

    “49% = Number of women ages 40 – 44 who are voluntarily childless”

    “More women choosing a childfree life”

    Editor’s note: Kelly Wallace is CNN’s digital correspondent and editor-at-large covering family, career and life. She is a mom of two. Read her other columns and follow her reports at CNN Parents and on Twitter.

    (CNN) — Women without children like Patrice Grell Yursik, who just celebrated her 12th wedding anniversary, get the same questions all the time.

    “I can’t even tell you how many cab drivers in Chicago, in New York, in L.A., have asked me, ‘So any kids? No kids, why no kids?’ It’s just the way that people engage with you,” said Grell Yursik, 35, of Chicago, creator of the beauty and lifestyle blog Afrobella.com.

    She and her husband have not decided whether they want to have children.

    Laurie White, a 43-year-old writer and social media manager, who has referred to herself over the years as “accidentally childless,” said people always come up with solutions for what they perceive as her “problem.”

    “Why don’t you just parent by yourself? Why don’t you adopt? There are so many kids who need homes,” White, of Olney, Maryland, said people tell her. “It really discounts whether or not that’s something a) that I want to do and b) whether that’s something that’s really wise for me to do as a single person.”

    Kitty Bradshaw, creator of an online destination covering lifestyle in Los Angeles and New York, said, “More and more guys are saying ‘Oh there must be something wrong with you if you are 35 and you’ve never been married and you’ve never had kids.’ ”

    Bradshaw, White and Grell Yursik are not alone by a long shot; 47% of women between ages 15 and 44 don’t have children, according to 2010 U.S.

    Census Bureau data, an increase from 35% in 1976.

    That’s a massive group comprising nearly half the women of childbearing age, and yet this demographic remains misunderstood, poorly portrayed in the media and nearly invisible to Madison Avenue, many women without children say.

    ‘The Otherhood’

    Best-selling author Melanie Notkin, 45, coined the term “The Otherhood,” the title of her newest book, to refer to women like herself who don’t have children either by choice or based on life’s circumstances.

    In her case, she experienced what she calls “circumstantial infertility … the pain and grief over not having children” because she’s single.

    Too often society perceives women like herself as making a choice between having a career and having love, marriage and children, she said.

    “This implication that we have chosen a career as opposed to falling in love is, as I say in the book, about as preposterous for me as having an elephant as a household pet,” Notkin said at a recent panel discussion hosted by DeVries Global, a public relations and social media agency.

    Continue reading “Check your ‘cat-lady’ preconceptions about childless women”

Duggar Family Visits Fertility Specialist To Have Another Baby

Duggar Family Visits Fertility Specialist To Have Another Baby

The mind boggles. I do believe this is nuclear family and baby worship taken to an insane degree.

The Duggars, if I remember correctly, are part of the “Quiverfull” movement. They already have 19, or 20 kids.

(Link): Duggars visit fertility doctor to explore having 20th kid

(Link): ‘Am I ready to catch another baby?’ Mother-of-19 Michelle Duggar visits ‘high-risk’ fertility doctor in hopes of having MORE children aged 47

    Her chances of conceiving are less than five per cent and her odds of having a child with down syndrome are ‘one in four or five’

    This marks the longest time in 27 years that Mrs Duggar has not been pregnant

    The strictly Christian family does not believe in birth control
    By ANNABEL FENWICK ELLIOTT

    PUBLISHED: 10:34 EST, 20 May 2014 | UPDATED: 12:07 EST, 20 May 2014

    Michelle and Jim Bob Duggar, parents to 19 children already, have visited a fertility doctor in a bid to see whether they are ‘ready’ for another baby.

    ‘We would love more children if God saw fit to give us more, I just want to make sure that I am ready to catch a baby if that would happen’, explains Mrs Duggar, 47, star of 19 Kids and Counting, in a clip on Today.com from tonight’s episode of the TLC show.

    ‘My goal is to find out where I am in my life, hormonally speaking,’ she says of visiting Dr Paul Wendel, an OB-GYN specializing in high-risk pregnancies.

    Michelle and Jim Bob Duggar, parents to 19 children already, have visited a fertility doctor in a bid to see whether they are ‘ready’ for another baby.

    ‘We would love more children if God saw fit to give us more, I just want to make sure that I am ready to catch a baby if that would happen’, explains Mrs Duggar, 47, star of 19 Kids and Counting, in a clip on Today.com from tonight’s episode of the TLC show.

    ‘My goal is to find out where I am in my life, hormonally speaking,’ she says of visiting Dr Paul Wendel, an OB-GYN specializing in high-risk pregnancies.

    Michelle and Jim Bob Duggar, parents to 19 children already, have visited a fertility doctor in a bid to see whether they are ‘ready’ for another baby.

    ‘We would love more children if God saw fit to give us more, I just want to make sure that I am ready to catch a baby if that would happen’, explains Mrs Duggar, 47, star of 19 Kids and Counting, in a clip on Today.com from tonight’s episode of the TLC show.

    ‘My goal is to find out where I am in my life, hormonally speaking,’ she says of visiting Dr Paul Wendel, an OB-GYN specializing in high-risk pregnancies.

—————–
Related posts:

(Link): Population Decline and Bay-bee Obsession – Patriarchy, Quiverfull, Traditional Family, Christian Gender Complementarian Nuts

(Link): Otherhood – An overlooked demographic – the Childless and Childfree Women and Singles Especially Women Who Had Hoped to Marry and Have Kids But Never Met Mr. Right (links)

(Link): Parenthood Does Not Make People More Loving Mature Godly Ethical Caring or Responsible (One Stop Thread)

(Link): Loving the child-free people in your church by S. Burden

(Link): Study: Couples Without Children Have Happier Marriages / Study: Having Kids Ruins Your Life

(Link): Widows and Childless and Childfree Have Better Well Being Than Married Couples and Parents says new study

(Link): Cultural Discrimination Against Childless and Childfree Women – and link to an editorial by a Childless Woman

(Link): Study: Couples Without Children Have Happier Marriages / Study: Having Kids Ruins Your Life

(Link): Christian Patriarchy Group: God Demands You Marry and Have Babies to Defeat Paganism and Satan. Singles and the Childless Worthless (in this worldview).

(Link): Lies The Church Tells Single Women (by Sue Bohlin)

(Link): The Isolating Power of Family-Centered Language (How churches exclude singles and the childless) by E A Dause

(Link): Never Married Christians Over Age 35 who are childless Are More Ignored Than Divorced or Infertile People or Single Parents

(Link): If the Family Is Central, Christ Isn’t

(Link): Misapplication of Biblical Verses About Fertility (also mentions early marriage) – a paper by J. McKeown

(Link): Christian Patriarchy Group: God Demands You Marry and Have Babies to Defeat Paganism and Satan. Singles and the Childless Worthless (in this worldview).

(Link): Married Preacher, Father of Eight Kids (and promoter of “Family Values” and Leader of wacko Quiverfull- and- Patriarchy type groups that promotes idolatry of “the family” and Marriage and of Having Lots of Children), Used Nanny as Sex Object – update on Phillips story

(Link): The Irrelevancy To Single or Childless or Childfree Christian Women of Biblical Gender Complementarian Roles / Biblical Womanhood Teachings

Otherhood – An overlooked demographic – the Childless and Childfree Women and Singles Especially Women Who Had Hoped to Marry and Have Kids But Never Met Mr. Right (links)

Otherhood – An overlooked demographic – the Childless and Childfree Women and Singles (links)
——————————————
The book Otherhood: Modern Women Finding A New Kind of Happiness by Melanie Notkin is available for sale on Barnes and Noble, and other sites.

From a page about the book:

    More American women are childless than ever before—nearly half those of childbearing age don’t have children.

While our society often assumes these women are “childfree by choice,” that’s not always true.

In reality, many of them expected to marry and have children, but it simply hasn’t happened. Wrongly judged as picky or career-obsessed, they make up the “Otherhood,” a growing demographic that has gone without definition or visibility until now.

—————————————-
Disclaimer: I am not anti-motherhood, nor necessarily against people taking their mothers out to brunch on Mother’s Day.

I am, however, against the onslaught of syrupy Mother’s Day hoopla on and before the day, and the church services that honor mothers because:

  • Some people (women included) were abused by their mothers and so find the holiday awkward or painful,
  • some people had or have mothers who are/were cruel or overly-critical,
  • some people’s mothers are dead and they miss them terribly,
  • some women desire to be a mother but cannot because they are infertile, their spouse is infertile, or they are single and cannot find “Mr. Right” (and don’t believe in getting pregnant outside of marriage, or don’t feel they could support a baby alone)
  • some women choose to be child free, but feel excluded or shamed by church and secular staggering emphasis on motherhood on the holiday

Some Christians have turned motherhood (as well as fatherhood and marriage) into idols, which they should repent of.
—————————-
This post discusses “Otherhood” (women who delay motherhood for years, or who are infertile, or ones who were open to having children but who’ve not met “Mr Right,” and for whatever reason, do not want to have a child while single, but would prefer to be married before having kids)

OTHERHOOD

(Link): The Otherhood: Single women face ‘circumstantial infertility’

Excerpt

    Melanie Notkin wanted love, marriage, and then the proverbial baby carriage — in that order.

By the time she reached her early forties, the entrepreneur and author was still single and appreciated the likelihood that, despite wanting desperately to be a mother, she might never give birth to a child on her own.

Like many women her age, Notkin, 44, a Montreal native, expected to reap all the social, economic, and political equality that her mother’s generation didn’t have. At the same time, in addition to her education and her career, she anticipated a traditional family track.

In her new book, released today, “Otherhood: Modern Women Finding A New Kind of Happiness,” Notkin uncovers the personal stories of women like her, who are part of a growing demographic trend and suffer what she calls “circumstantial infertility.”

Often, people presume that when a woman like Notkin is childless, it’s probably by choice. But many of the childless women in their thirties and forties simply want to do it the “old fashioned way,” she says, and find the right relationship before making a lifetime commitment to have kids.

Continue reading “Otherhood – An overlooked demographic – the Childless and Childfree Women and Singles Especially Women Who Had Hoped to Marry and Have Kids But Never Met Mr. Right (links)”

Kook Christian Groups / Individuals and Their Nutty Beliefs on Pro Creation and What Constitutes Being Unequally Yoked

Kook Christian Groups/Individuals and Their Nutty Beliefs on ProCreation and What Constitutes Being Unequally Yoked

Here is another post or two with more quotes by people who claim to be Christian but who teach the thoroughly un-biblical view that God’s kingdom is to be spread by married couples pro-creating (making babies).

The Bible in fact teaches that the kingdom is to be spread and enlarged by Christians- whether married, single, divorced, with children or childless – telling the un-saved about Jesus Christ, not by marrying and having children.

As to this first link. I tend to lump all these categories together myself – patriarchy, quiverfull, complementarianism – because to me, they are all just a bunch of men teaching that men should control females.

The author of this piece below might kind of disagree with me, because he (or she?) seems very keen on people following very specific definitions of each term.

I do not agree with some of the sharp criticisms of this piece. I for one don’t see the problem with someone proclaiming that “Christian patriarchy is two steps away from making women wear a burka.”

Because you know what? It is. Some of the rhetoric and reasoning is very similar in “Christian modesty ” teachings as it is in Islamic teaching on how they feel women should cover their bodies and faces.

I actually think that comment is pretty dang accurate, in that many of these groups do advocate “modesty” teaching, which frowns on Christian women showing so much as an ankle.

Both groups – Muslims and pro-modesty Christians – tell women that they should cover their bodies because men are incapable of controlling their sexual urges and that men get instantly turned on beyond their control at the site of an attractive female. So, responsibility is placed upon women in both schools of thought to “dress modestly.”

Regardless of those issues, note the quote below about how this person believes that Christian women should “out breed” their opponents:

From the page, (Link): WHAT “CHRISTIAN PATRIARCHY” IS NOT , by R.L. Stollar

      Quiverfull is, more or less, a specifically Christian form of natalism — the idea of employing procreation as a tool of sociopolitical dominion and categorizing birth control as rebellion against God.

Michael Pearl gave us a perfect embodiment of Quiverfull’s dominionist streak, when (Link): he recently stated,

“If you can’t out-vote them today, out-breed them for tomorrow.”

That is Quiverfull (albeit a distilled, intense version of it).

… Yes, there are many advocates of Christian Patriarchy who are Quiverfull.

And by all means, speak out against the dehumanizing and toxic idea that your children are your weapons, and a woman’s vagina is a weapons-building factory.

But remember these are distinct, especially considering there are many advocates of Christian Patriarchy who are not Quiverfull.

Take Doug Wilson, for example.

Doug Wilson is considered one of the pillars of Christian Patriarchy but believes birth control can be useful to ensure you’re actually taking care of your current children. That’s outright heresy to the Quiverfull crowd.

From this site:
(Link): Not On Your Side, Debi

Excerpts (emphasis added by me):

    …. Several of the Pearl children’s spouses were raised in Gothard’s ATI program. (I say “spouses”, but Michael Pearl made it clear years ago that his children do not need any such thing as marriage licenses. A ceremony and their parents’ blessing is apparently good enough.*)

… Besides being given to racist and homophobic remarks, the Pearls are somewhat obsessed with sex. It gives Michael [Pearl] hope to envision homeschoolers “outbreeding” progressives.

He counsels the wife of an angry man to “make love” to improve her husband’s mood.

Debi often suggests that being sexually available is a wife’s primary responsibility.

Michael even wrote a book on erotic pleasure for fundamentalist Christian couples.

I can’t remember where I saw it – if on one of the pages above, but some page I read earlier today referenced quotes by Debi Pearl about being “equally yoked.”

Perhaps these comments can be found on her and her husband’s site, No Greater Joy, I am not sure.

Someone on another site quoted Pearl as having said that if you are a Christian, and you marry another Christian in a state that permits homosexual marriage, that your marriage – yes YOUR marriage to another Christian – is “unequally yoked.”

The argument seems to be that if you, a Christian, marry an opposite gender to yourself Christian in a state that also has legalized homosexual marriage, that a marriage performed in such a state taints yours, or makes yours invalid.

To put it yet another way (according to the Pearls): your marriage to another Christian is “unequally yoked” all because your next door neighbors, Fred and Stan the homosexual couple, are legally married by the same state too.

Please let that sink in and roll around in your brain for several moments: two Christians, one a man, one a woman, married to each other in a state where homosexual marriage is legal are said by the Pearls to be “unequally yoked”.

I’ve thought on it for awhile and still cannot make sense of it. What nuts these people are.

I ventured on over to the Pearl NGJ (No Greater Joy) site and see they have a page for singles ((Link): NGJ: Singles), and with pages on advice on how to find a mate, LOL, no thanks, won’t take advice from crackpots like them. The Pearls advise in their books on parenting that parents should beat their infant children with pipes.

There is much more nuttiness by them, but I don’t want to make this a huge post about the Pearls and every crazy thing they’ve ever taught.

On the main page for NGJ Singles is this:

      PreparingToBeAHelpMeet.com
      Shalom (Pearl) Brand
    This is from the Preparing blog site. The girls are discussing Shalom’s article in the Sept/Oct 2012 NGJ magazine, “Where A

This page at NGJ Singles actually recommends that parents allow a brother to pick out husbands for their sisters:

(Link): NGJ site: Need a Spouse…ANYONE? By Debi Pearl

I’m in my 40s now and still not married.

My one brother is married to an atheist heroin addict. Yeah, I don’t think I’ll be going to my big brother for martial partner selection or input, thanks but no, Debi.

By the way, does it never occur to these Christian parents that their daughter may choose to stay single, a choice which God respects (see 1 Corinthians 7)?

Excerpt from Debi’s page:

    Scores of young men asked for Shalom [one of Debi’s daughters].

She was gentle, cute, hard-working, and always cheerful, in addition to being the most compliant girl you have ever met.

But before they ever made it to our door to talk to Daddy Mike, most of them were already discounted as possibilities. Gabe or Nathan had seen to that with their reports.

Big brothers were watching out for their sisters, especially the sweet one.

How skin crawling is that, for so many reasons.

I have said it before, and I will say it again, but some Christian views on gender roles – whether we are talking patriarchy, gender complementarianims, or using the term “biblical womanhood” – is nothing but CODEPENDENCY under religious terminology, and is, therefore, un-biblical.

Codependent women are sweet, gentle, shy, compliant, soft spoken – they have poor- to- no- boundaries. Codependents are afraid or reluctant to be assertive, say no to people, and express anger.

Note too, that these are the same exact characteristics that are held up by Christians as being marks of biblical womanhood, or desirable for a Christian man to look for in a Christian wife: sweet, shy, gentle, compliant, soft spoken, little- to- no- boundaries.

Further note in books by experts on spousal abuse the sorts of traits abusive men intentionally look for in a mate:
sweet, shy, gentle, compliant, soft spoken, little- to- no- boundaries.

Seeing a pattern yet?

Yeah, Debi Pearl is (and I find this sad and chilling) totally thrilled that her daughter is prime pickings for an abusive man.

More excerpts from the page (advice to older brothers with younger single sisters):

      Talk to your guy friends. Say something like this,
    “Hey, you looking for a bride? I got four sisters and would consider it a privilege for you to drop in and take your pick. My parents trust my judgment and I’m giving you high marks. Of course, my sisters are picky, and they have the last word, but I’ll throw in a good word for you with them, too.

Now, the oldest sister is kinda bossy, but she always gives in after a little persuasion. She’s the smartest. So if you think you would enjoy a little challenge but get a good mate for the extra effort…she’s your gal.

My next sister is not so cute, but she is the nicest of the bunch.

…So how about it…wanta check out the fam? I got four other guys coming Sunday for brunch, so you better hurry if you want the pick of the litter.”

That whole excerpt is so horrifying and sexist, I hardly know where to begin.

I would not want my brother approaching his male friends and blurting out, “So, you lookin’ for a bride?” My god, that would scare away every man on the planet.

Not that I object to friends and family setting me up with eligible guys my age, but what Pearl is suggesting sounds almost more like arranged marriage, where the woman is playing a very passive role.

Pearl also makes it sound like the brother is supposed to “market” the sister to men, as though she is not a human being, but a brand of shampoo, a car, or a tube of toothpaste.

She is kind of asking the brother to play the role of a pimp.

This remark: “My next sister is not so cute”

If your own mother is basically advising your brother to tell his pals you are ugly, that is pretty damn insensitive.

At any rate, here we see above yet more examples fringe, wacko groups, or persons, passing themselves off as Christian, but who are teaching some bizarre, un-biblical things about marriage, having children, and re-defining what “equally yoked” means (or has been traditionally understood by most Christians to mean).

It’s bad enough when Christians are telling Christian singles to only marry other Christian singles

    (there are not as many single adult Christian males as therer are females, so you are in effect asking single females to die alone and single)

but the Pearl family is basically telling Christian singles not to even marry another Christian single if they live in a state where homosexual marriage is permitted, as that would make their marriage “unequally yoked” (sorry I do not have a source for that, it is a quote someone pasted in at another blog without a link, I have no reason to believe he or she was lying about it).

I am really creeped out and appalled by these views of marrying, what constitutes being un-equally yoked, and pro-creation these groups are advocating. Their views are totally un-biblical. They have given themselves over to the worship of marriage, parenthood, and family.

Instead of worshipping the God of the Bible, they are worshipping their own peculiar ideas of culture, family, and marriage.

If Moses came down from the mountain today, he’d see most of the contemporary, American “Christian” people bowing down before a statue made of gold, of a figure of a man, woman, and child holding hands (a statue of “nuclear family”), with a “Focus on the Family” broadcast playing on a radio in the background, with a mountain of books with titles such as, “Ten Steps to a Great Marriage” and “How to Raise Godly Children.”
——————————————–
Related posts:

(Link): If the Family Is Central, Christ Isn’t

(Link): Hetero Couple Forced to Divorce Because They Say Homosexuals Are Ruining Their Marriage

(Link): Conservatives and Christians Fretting About U.S. Population Decline – We Must “Out-breed” Opponents Christian Host Says

(Link): Christian Stereotypes About Female Sexuality : All Unmarried Women Are Supposedly Hyper Sexed Harlots – But All Married Ones are Supposedly Frigid or Totally Uninterested in Sex

(Link): Christian Patriarchy Group: God Demands You Marry and Have Babies to Defeat Paganism and Satan. Singles and the Childless Worthless (in this worldview).

(Link): Gender Complementarian Advice to Single Women Who Desire Marriage Will Keep Them Single Forever / Re: Choosing A Spiritual Leader

(Link): Family as “The” Backbone of Society? – It’s Not In The Bible

(Link): Decent Secular Relationship Advice: How to Pick Your Life Partner

(Link): Being Unequally Yoked – should Christians marry Non Christians or only marry Christians

(Link): Married Female Christian Blogger Whose Mate Hunting Criteria is Guaranteed to Keep Marriage Minded Single Christian Men Single Perpetually

(Link): On Christians Marrying Non Christians -and- Unrealistic, Too Rigid Spouse Selection Lists by Christians

(Link): Are Fundamentalists Aiming to Out-Breed Secular America?

(Link): Misapplication of Biblical Verses About Fertility (also mentions early marriage) – a paper by J. McKeown

(Link): Cultural Discrimination Against Childless and Childfree Women – and link to an editorial by a Childless Woman

(Link): The Irrelevancy To Single or Childless or Childfree Christian Women of Biblical Gender Complementarian Roles / Biblical Womanhood Teachings

(Link): Why Unmarried and Childless or Childfree – Single Christians Should Be Concerned about the Gender Role Controversy

(Link): Why all the articles about being Child Free? On Being Childfree or Childless – as a Conservative / Right Wing / Christian

(Link): Males and Females Raped at Christian College, College Doesn’t Care – Equally Yoked is a Joke

(Link): Pastor charged in wife’s murder was headed to Europe to marry boyfriend, prosecutor says – Single Xtian Ladies: Kick that Be Equally Yoked Teaching to the Curb! Also: Marriage and Parenthood do not make people more godly or mature or loving or ethical

(Link): Christian Single Women: Another Example of Why You Should Abandon the “Be Equally Yoked” Teaching: 21-Y-O Christianity Student, Children’s Minister Charged With Murdering Fiancée He Was to Wed in August; Made It Look Like Suicide

(Link): Study: Couples Without Children Have Happier Marriages / Study: Having Kids Ruins Your Life

(Link): Leader of Hyper Family Focused, Fertility Cult (Vision Forum Ministries) Steps Down After Admitting to Having an “Emotional Affair”

(Link): Bay-Bees – Have them, have lots of them and NOW, no matter what say some Christians

(Link): Motherhood Does Not Make Women More Godly or Mature (Mother Suffocates New Born and Shoves It In Toilet)

Are Older Men’s Sperm Really Any Worse? (study) Also: article author assumes men single and/or childless until their late 30s and older are probably autistic, retarded, or drooling simpletons

Are Older Men’s Sperm Really Any Worse? (study) Also: article author assumes men single and/or childless until their late 30s and older are probably autistic, retarded, or drooling simpletons

TL;DR summary of article farther below = Yes, older dude’s sperm (older in this article is divided up in this article as being roughly, dudes ages 30 – 40, 40 – 50, and 50 and older) is not as good. You’re more likely to pop out kid with mental or psychological issues than a dude who fathers a kid while in his 20s.

The author of this seems to assume that the kind of dude who “finally” gets married and cranks out kids “later in life” is probably single for so long because he’s autistic, a drooling basket case, or goodness knows what.

Excerpt from article that implies that older single / first time married men are mentally retarded or socially inept losers:

    The type of men who have children later in life may be different from those who do not, and those differences may be at least partially responsible for the increased autism rates.

How condescending and rude.

If older single / childless men are not suspected of being Totally Ghey, they are assumed of being pedophiles, or now, mentally handicapped.

Okay, so if you are a single man past age 30, 35, 40, 45, you are obviously (sarc tags here) autistic, mentally retarded, or inept.

How do you older single and childless guys so much as tie your own shoes in the morning, or brush your teeth, let alone actually and finally get a woman to procreate with “later in life”?

How do you put a T-shirt on? Can you do it alone, or do you need help with that?

If you do put a T-shirt on alone, do you have to have instructions for that, like a big arrow printed on the shirt, pointing at the hole in the middle that says, ‘head goes here?’

How do you make it through life, since you are so obviously incapable and incompetent of so much as attracting a wife, unlike normal men, who marry in their 20s, you big freako loser???

(Link): Are Older Men’s Sperm Really Any Worse?

Three Parents? FDA Mulls Safety of Embryo Technique

Three Parents? FDA Mulls Safety of Embryo Technique

(Link): Experts: Confirming safety of 3-person embryo technique could take decades

    WASHINGTON — Genetic experts cautioned the federal government Tuesday that it could take decades to confirm the safety of an experimental fertilization technique that would create babies from the DNA of three people, with the aim of preventing children from inheriting some debilitating diseases.

    The Food and Drug Administration heard from supporters and opponents of the provocative technique at a two-day meeting, as the agency considers whether to greenlight testing in women who have defective genes linked to blindness, organ failure and many other inheritable diseases.

    Preliminary testing in animals suggests that combining the DNA of two parents with that of a third female donor could allow prospective mothers to give birth to healthy children. But even experts in the field warned that researchers would have to follow the offspring for many years to see if they are truly healthy.

(Link): Genetically Modified Babies (op ed)

(Link): FDA Considers 3-Person Embryo Fertilization

    Procedure could prevent children from inheriting genetic diseases from mothers

(Link): FDA Weighs Unknowns of 3-Person Embryo Technique

Continue reading “Three Parents? FDA Mulls Safety of Embryo Technique”

Links About Sex Week / Male Modesty & Male Shaming / Online Dating Scammers / Female Sexuality / Rampant Pre Marital Sex Among Christians / Single Christian Women Feel Pressured to Fornicate In Dating / other topics (Link Dump)

Reports About Sex Week / Male Modesty / Online Dating Scammers / Rampant Pre Marital Sex Among Christians / Single Christian Women Feel Pressured to Fornicate In Dating / other topics (Link Dump)

I do not have the patience to make separate posts out of each link / story / topic below, so here is another link dump, with links to lots of different sex, infertility, marriage, online dating, purity, and whatever, editorials and stories.

I’m not necessarily in agreement with any or all of the views expressed in any of these pages. I post them only because they touch on topics I regularly discuss on this blog.

Some of these links from The Christian Post I present below are from the last two to three weeks, but they cover topics I already discussed here on this blog weeks before (CP authors are sometimes weeks or a couple of months behind material I post to this blog first).

Sometimes, The Christian Post quotes people I don’t agree with about everything, such as Mark Regnerus – see this link and this link for more about that.

Regnerus pushes for early marriage and seems to engage in a bit of singles-shaming (blaming singles who want marriage for being single, for not being able to find a partner), which is wrong. You can see the links above for more about that.

About me covering stories before The Christian Post does.

Take this first link of their below as an example – not only did I cover this story first (on Jan 28, 2014 here, this link, but also on Feb 8, 2014, see this link), but also some of the web sites the author references in his series (which makes me wonder if he’s been to my blog and is copying my material):

(Link): Christian Dating Culture (Part 1): Majority of Christian Singles Reject Idea of Waiting Until Marriage to Have Sex

Excerpts:

    • BY MORGAN LEE, CHRISTIAN POST REPORTER

February 12, 2014

Survey Reveals That 61% of Christian Singles Are Willing to Have Casual Sex

A majority of single Christians are rejecting biblical doctrine by choosing to have sex before they are married. Sixty-one percent of self-identified Christian singles who answered a recent ChristianMingle survey said they are willing to have casual sex without being in love, while only 11 percent said they are waiting to have sex until they are married.

…But despite this realization, after Lindsey moved to New York, she did not abide by this new sexual ethic. Instead, she entered and exited relationships frequently, often sleeping with the men she was dating.

“Even though I knew it was wrong, I continued to have sex outside of marriage,” Lindsey told The Christian Post. “Why? Because when you’re single you don’t want to be lonely.”

“I was the girl that broke up with one boyfriend and had another one on speed-dial—that afternoon I’d already be going out with somebody else. I kept a boyfriend because I liked the attention,” she continued.

For Lindsey, her behavior was not simply a result of her conforming to the sexual values of her non-Christian peers. Instead, she had friends from church with similar sexual ethics and even dated and became sexually involved with a man who was serving at the same church that she was.

“We all went to the church. We were hypocrites. We said we loved the Lord but we ignored the scriptures that said that fornication is a sin,” said Lindsey.

Lindsey eventually cut off all people that had been a part of that lifestyle. Several years ago she got married and moved to Atlanta, where, now 31, she is the founder and CEO of Pinky Promise, an organization that encourages single and married women to “rise above cultural pressures and to “stay determined to live for Christ regardless of their circumstances.”

So she’s a fornicator being used as an example of sexual purity now? LOL.

Why do Christians do this? You have actual, honest- to- God virgins who are over 30 and 40 years of age, but Christians rarely if ever seek them out for inspiration or interviews. Instead, they seek out people who engaged in fornication constantly, and ask them to serve as role models about sexual purity.

This odd situation is a topic I have addressed in older posts, including this link (“born again virgins”), this link, this link, or this link, How About Using Celibates as Role Models For Celibacy? (Oddity: Christians Holding Up Non-Virgins [Fornicators] As Being Experts or Positive Examples on Sexual Purity).

(Link): Christian Dating Culture (Part 2): Does Church Attendance Impact How Often You Have Sex?

Excerpts:

    • BY MORGAN LEE, CHRISTIAN POST REPORTER
    February 13, 2014

Christians who attend church and read the Bible at least three times a week are less likely to have sex outside of marriage than those who do not engage in those religious practices.

In a 2012 study of Millenial Christians by the National Association of Evangelicals and Grey Matter Research, only respondents who attended worship services at least once a month were considered. Of the 1,007 polled by NEA and GMR, only 44 percent of unmarried Evangelicals ages 18-29 had had sex.

In contrast, in a ChristianMingle study released in January, only 50 percent of female Christians and 39 percent of Christian males said that they went to church at least once a month. Of the 716 Christians surveyed, 90 percent of them said they would be comfortable with premarital sex and 61 percent without any strings attached.

… Mark Regenerus, an associate professor of sociology at the University of Texas at Austin, concurred with the findings of this research.

“When you see greater religiosity, you’re more apt to have measured at the same time a more pronounced awareness of the sexual norms of Orthodox Christian communities and a person’s willingness to abide by them,” he told The Christian Post in an email.

Regenerus also pointed to the lack of institutions also promoting the church’s ethic of abstinence as one reason for the high numbers.

“It’s certainly true that unmarried Christian adults are more ‘at risk’ on sexual matters (attitudes, behaviors), because there are now few (and maybe no other) institutions that reinforce Christian sexual ideals today. And there are more unmarried Christian adults too. So it’s a recipe for some cultural clash over sex, for sure,” he wrote.

Daniel Weiss, the founder and president of The Brushfires Foundation, whose organization exists to help “people discover and live out God”s design for sexuality and relationships,” said that the Church must wake up to the fact that it is not the primary influencer of many Christian young people’s sexual ethics.

(Link): Christian Dating Culture (Part 3): Women Struggle in Dating Scene That Expects Openness to Premarital Sex

Excerpts:

    • BY MORGAN LEE, CHRISTIAN POST REPORTER
    February 14, 2014

Evidence suggests that Christians are increasingly tolerant of casual sex, but what does the dating scene look like for those who are choosing not to engage in premarital sex?

A ChristianMingle poll released last month suggests that Christians are increasingly open to having sex outside of marriage. Sixty-one percent of the 716 Christians surveyed said they would be willing to have sex without any strings attached. Only 11 percent indicated they would be willing to wait until marriage.

To get a sense of what the dating landscape looks like for Christian women who are unwilling to treat sex casually, The Christian Post talked with three women who shared how they feel their moral convictions are treated by men and the culture at large.

Sexual ethics of Christian men

Several years ago Lisa Anderson signed up for online dating.

Anderson, 42, who heads Boundless, Focus on the Family’s ministry to singles and young adults, and is single herself (“I am the true 40-year-old virgin” she laughs,) decided to be upfront with potential boyfriends about where her sexual ethics lay.

“As I got to know these guys, I think they sensed pretty early on that I was not going to go there, so I think that that probably ended it. It was never a situation where we’re together and that’s going to go too far so I stopped it,” Anderson told CP.

Yet she was surprised that many of the Christian men on online dating sites openly admitted that they expected sex in a relationship.

Continue reading “Links About Sex Week / Male Modesty & Male Shaming / Online Dating Scammers / Female Sexuality / Rampant Pre Marital Sex Among Christians / Single Christian Women Feel Pressured to Fornicate In Dating / other topics (Link Dump)”

Renting a Womb – Women Reduced to Baby Breeders says Professor (editorial from CP)

Renting a Womb – Women Reduced to Baby Breeders (editorial from CP)

I find this bashing of “womb renting” (parental surrogacy) hypocritical on two levels. I have observations below this link and excerpt, where I explain why I find this hypocritical.

I myself don’t know if I support surrogacy or not; that isn’t my point. My point is that I find some of this Christian man’s objections to it hypocritical.

(Link): Renting a Womb (Part 2): Women Reduced to Baby Breeders

    BY ALEX MURASHKO, CHRISTIAN POST REPORTER
    February 11, 2014|12:39 pm

    Editor’s Note: This is the second part in a series on surrogacy, titled “Renting a Womb.”

    Although not specifically mentioned in the Bible, the act of surrogacy in order to produce a baby should be considered unethical, says Scott B. Rae, professor of Philosophy of Religion and Ethics at Biola University.

    Surrogacy, Rae argued, diminishes a woman’s role in procreation. The woman, he said, is reduced to a “baby breeder.”

    Rae, who serves as dean of the faculty at the university’s Talbot School of Theology and chair for the Philosophy of Religion and Ethics board, told The Christian Post that the Bible “looks pretty skeptically at any kind of third party contributor who comes outside the matrix of marriage.”

    CP: What is the current social thought on surrogacy?

    Rae: I think the feminists who object to surrogacy because it reinforces a stereotype, that has some merit. The other thing that troubles me is that it separates procreation and responsibility. Scripture is pretty solid on the connection between marriage, procreation, and parenting. This is what troubles me about sperm donation – that you are involved in procreation but overtly disavowing a responsibility for that. Surrogates do the same.

    “It seems to me that procreation is intended to be done by stable, permanent, monogamous, heterosexual married couples,” he said. “The norm is laid out in Genesis 1 and 2 where you have the creation of Adam and Eve, the institution of marriage, and then the mandate to be fruitful and multiply. It sets procreation within that context.”

One reason I find it hypocritical:

Here you have a community – conservative Christians – who set marriage and having children up as idols that all should obtain, and if you don’t obtain one or either, you’re treated as a failure or weirdo.

So if you take actual steps towards either one (marriage or having a baby), such as using IVF, infertility treatments, or hiring a surrogate, you get told you are in sin or in error for it.

Secondly, conservative Christianity already treats ALL women like “baby breeders,” even the ones who do not pay for a surrogate. Case in point:

Gender complementarian Christians, who are present in what seems large numbers in many Protestant and Baptist churches and other conservative churches and denominations, regularly teach that a woman’s greatest or only role or calling in life is to marry and make babies.

See these links:

Conservative Christians already worship motherhood (see Link), and continually tell women their greatest or only God given or God approved role in life is to be a wife and mother.

Christians say this to each and every woman listening to a church sermon, not just women who are surrogates. So this professor has a lot of nerve referring to only surrogates as “baby breeders” when all women in Christianity are viewed as nothing but “baby breeders” (and ‘help meets’ to their spouses, if they are married).

Women who are infertile, childless, or childfree are not made to feel welcomed or accepted in most evangelical, fundamentalist, Baptist, or Reformed denominations. They are made to feel like outsiders, losers, weirdos, or freaks.

Lastly, and as someone in the comments pointed out, Mary acted as a surrogate mother, to carry the baby Jesus, conceived by the Holy Spirit. Mary was not even married yet at the time. In light of the fact Mary acted as a surrogate, I’m not sure how a Christian university professor can object to other women doing so and not be holding a double standard.
————————————-
Related posts:

(Link): Why all the articles about being Child Free? On Being Childfree or Childless – as a Conservative / Right Wing / Christian

(Link): Is The Church Failing Childless Women? by Diane Paddison

(Link): Don’t Judge Me, I’m Childless (from Today’s Christian Woman)

(Link): Misuse of Terms Such As “Traditional Families” by Christians – Re: Kirk Cameron, Homosexual Marriage, and the 2014 Grammys

(Link): The Fruitful Callings of the Childless By Choice (editorial)

(Link): 23 Responses to 23 Awful Statements Made to Childfree People by TAURIQ MOOSA

(Link): How Not To Be A Dick To Your Childfree Friends (editorial)

(Link): My Secret Grief. Over 35, Single and Childless by Melanie Notkin

(Link): Widows and Childless and Childfree Have Better Well Being Than Married Couples and Parents says new study

(Link): In terms of childlessness, US ranks near the top worldwide

(Link): Are Marriage and Family A Woman’s Highest Calling? by Marcia Wolf – and other links that address the Christian fallacy that a woman’s most godly or only proper role is as wife and mother

(Link): Bearden: Staying childless right decision for many women

(Link): How American Christians Were Influenced by 1950s American Secular Propaganda to Idolize Marriage and Children and Against Singles and the Childless