Christlike or Pornlike?  A Christian Woman’s Role in Marriage

Christlike or Pornlike?  A Christian Woman’s Role in Marriage by Andrew J. Bauman and Taylor May

(Link): Christlike or Pornlike?  A Christian Woman’s Role in Marriage

Excerpts:

by Andrew J. Bauman

I am proud to be writing this article in partnership with Taylor May, a survivor of emotional and spiritual abuse. She has boldly shared her own story about what it was like to be married to someone who had a Pornographic Style of Relating, (PSR) and what it felt like to be used by him with her Church’s consent.

*Trigger warning for those who have suffered this type of betrayal trauma.


I’ve written about the pornographic style of relating here (PSR), but today we will hear from the perspective of a woman who has lived on the other side of this dynamic.

Many people have been talking about this with the release of this new book [Married Sex: A Christian Couple’s Guide to Reimagining Your Love Life by Gary Thomas] and some of its disturbing implications.

How can we talk about what these women are experiencing, and what can we learn from them?

Taylor May has offered her story and her experience below. My hope is that this can begin to clear up the muddy waters of what it means to live a Christlike marriage in a deeply pornified world.


by Taylor May

I didn’t realize how a pornographic style of relating was so deeply embedded into my first marriage until I was firmly planted into my second marriage.

That’s when I began to see the impact my first husband’s issue with lust had on my new, much healthier relationship.

Let me tell you my story, and how I and countless other women feel when our significant others lust for other women, on-screen or off.

Those of us who grew up in the evangelical Church have been told that we are responsible for men’s lust issues. This lie has been perpetrated by the church for far too long.

Many men are leading our church conversations with 90% of pastors being men, and considering that nearly 50% of those pastors self-report having used pornography, it would make sense that they would try to gaslight women by minimizing the destructive nature of porn use.

One way they do this is by framing it as a women’s issue or a sex issue, rather than the objectification of women/sin issue–one that stems from the person doing the objectifying.

Continue reading “Christlike or Pornlike?  A Christian Woman’s Role in Marriage”

Interview with the Authors of The Great Sex Rescue (book discusses erroneous, sexist Christian views about women and how this hinders sex – among other issues)

Interview with the Authors of The Great Sex Rescue (book discusses erroneous, sexist Christian views about women and how this hinders sex – among other issues)

I’ve read quite a bit about this “Sex Rescue” book, and it covers a lot of the topics I’ve been covering on this blog literally for years now.

Christians – especially the gender complementarians – operate under a faulty assumption that only men like and want sex, while women do not – so most of their sex lectures and sex material gives all sorts of sexist, awful advice, or tells Christians that women only have “emotional needs,” while women’s sexual preferences are never raised. 

Every pastor I’ve ever heard sermonize about the topic just tells men to occasionally cater to their wife’s emotional needs, but they don’t bring up what a woman may want sexually.

The Christian assumption is that all men are sex-crazed horn dogs, and the wives are obligated to have sex with their spouses, even if they are sick or not in the mood, etc.

I’ve discussed all that on this blog for years (and more), and this book apparently also discusses such issues.

(Link): Interview with the Authors of The Great Sex Rescue

Excerpts:

by Rachel Joy Welcher
June 3, 2021

The Great Sex Rescue sets out to correct harmful and unbiblical teachings on sex and marriage—specifically those messages perpetuated by the evangelical church and popular Christian books.

Not only that, it presents a way forward for couples who have suffered from these messages; a path that is guided by scripture and selfless love. 

…Sheila Wray Gregoire, along with her daughter, author and psychology graduate, Rebecca Gregoire Lindenbach, and epidemiologist and statistician, Joanna Sawatsky, bravely tackle these harmful teachings, with a high view of marriage, God’s plan for sex, and for scripture.

You may not agree with every conclusion or piece of advice, but this is a resource we need as we continue to deconstruct unbiblical teachings on sex, purity, and marriage. 

Welcher: It is clear from your writings that you care about female sexual flourishing; that you don’t want women left behind in marriage.
In The Great Sex Rescue, you cite example after example from popular Christian books where male sexual pleasure in marriage is prioritized and women are discussed merely as vehicles to accomplish this, rather than as equal sexual partners.
Why do you think the mutuality of sexual self-giving in marriage in 1 Corinthians 7:4–5 has largely been ignored in Christian writings and teachings on marriage?
Were you able to trace this idea to a specific book, era, or misinterpretation of the passage?

Gregoire: Let’s talk numbers: women buy the books, and men don’t. I’ve read that 74% of nonfiction relationship books are bought and read by women.
Why don’t men buy these books? Men often don’t feel the same societal pressure to fix relationships, while men are also discouraged from thinking about their feelings very much. Continue reading “Interview with the Authors of The Great Sex Rescue (book discusses erroneous, sexist Christian views about women and how this hinders sex – among other issues)”

How Evangelical Teachings Ruin Sex and Marriage For Many Women by L. Blair

How Evangelical Teachings Ruin Sex and Marriage For Many Women by L. Blair

Some of the issues discussed in this article and in her book are ones I’ve brought up on this blog over the years.

There is so much hypocrisy in Christianity, usually hypocrisy that works out in favor of men and to the detriment of women, especially in “gender complementarian” teachings.

Some of these teachings about marital sex, or marriage generally, can be directly or indirectly derogatory towards single, celibate adults (e.g., some Christians teach that having sexual intercourse is “necessary to know God,” while some preachers teach that to fulfill your purpose in life, you must marry.)

Here is the article about the book:

(Link): How Evangelical Teachings Ruin Sex and Marriage For Many Women

Excerpts:

By Leonardo Blair, Christian Post Reporter 

Evangelical blogger Sheila Wray Gregoire doesn’t care if her critics want to brand her a feminist. She wants the Church to know that “sex is for women too,” and ignoring that point can ruin sex, orgasms and marriages for women. 

New research shows that many evangelical women are unsatisfied in the bedroom due to some evangelical beliefs, and that’s the big takeaway Gregoire wants readers to get as she stages a scholarly intervention in her new book, The Great Sex Rescue: The Lies You’ve Been Taught and How to Recover What God Intended. 

Continue reading “How Evangelical Teachings Ruin Sex and Marriage For Many Women by L. Blair”

The Obese, Overly Hairy ‘Erotic Eater’ Guy Should Be The Final Nail in the Coffin of Sexist Complementarian Teachings that Looks Matter Only To Men

The Obese, Overly Hairy ‘Erotic Eater’ Guy Should Be The Final Nail in the Coffin of Sexist Complementarian Teachings that Looks Matter Only To Men & That Women Are Oblivious To, or Don’t Care About, What Men Look Like

I am an ex-complementarian (yes, I am, read more about that (Link): here if you so choose).

I’m very aware of what complementarians teach and believe on many topics.

Many complementarians wrongly believe that women lack sexual drive, an interest in sex, and that women don’t care about what men look like.

Complementarians operate in this very strange worldview that only men are “visual.” The Bible does not teach that God created men to be visual or to have more of a sex drive than women, but Complementarians act as though it does. These views permeate their blogs, pod casts, books, sermons, and so on.

So, under complementarian teachings, women are often shamed and scolded about their physical appearance.

I’ve seldom heard complementarians tell male listeners or male readers to join a gym, work out, and get in shape so that they will be physically and visually appealing to women.

(Edit, Side Note:
Complementarians seem to assume that all single women are only interested in a man’s bank account. No, we’re not.

But there’s nothing wrong with wanting to marry a guy who has a steady job, steady pay check, who is financially responsible.

I was engaged to a man who took financial advantage of me for years. Most women I know were dating or married to men who refused to get jobs, so the women had to earn a pay check.

These women’s husbands would sit about the house all day in their underpants playing Playstation video games or watching sports.

I’ve never personally run across too many female gold diggers in my time, only one – the rest of the gold diggers I’ve met or known personally have been MEN who were leeching off their wives or girlfriends.

At any rate, complementarians wrongly assume that all women are obsessed with  looking for a husband or boyfriend with a very large income or expensive sports car, so they are always telling us women to “stop judging a man by his income or what kind of car he drives, and instead, focus on how much he loves Jesus.”

Well, I hate to break it to you complementarians, but some us ladies are busy checking out if the guy has great abs and muscular arms or not – we aren’t as obsessed with his credit score, car, or savings and investments as you may assume.)

No, the sexist complementarians reserve that rhetoric for women.

But women do notice and care about what men look like, as I’ve blogged about years ago in a series of posts, such as (Link): this one or (Link): this one.

(Even the (Link): Bible mentions women noticing hot looking men and getting turned on by them, but per usual, complementarians ignore or do not mention parts of the Bible that don’t fit their backwards views.)

All of that brings me to this…

The other day, I was scrolling down my Twitter page and saw this headline from The Daily Mail:

(Link): ‘Erotic weight gainer’ who tips the scales at 500lbs reveals he eats 10,000 calories a day to maintain his ‘ball gut’ and keep his OnlyFans followers entertained

Here are some excerpts:

A 500lb OnlyFans influencer who found a lucrative niche within the fat fetish community has revealed he has to eat around 10,000 calories a day to maintain his ‘ball gut’ and keep his followers entertained.

Continue reading “The Obese, Overly Hairy ‘Erotic Eater’ Guy Should Be The Final Nail in the Coffin of Sexist Complementarian Teachings that Looks Matter Only To Men”

Mega Church Preacher Bill Hybels in Trouble Again For More Sexual Harassment

Mega Church Preacher Bill Hybels in Trouble Again For More Sexual Harassment (2018)

I don’t think I ever blogged about this Hybels guy before.

He was first in the news many months ago for sexually harassing several different women in his church years before, who had worked as church staff.

His church first denied that this was true, and they attempted to say the women who stepped forward to discuss their harassment or abuse by this guy were lying.

There are so many of these pervy pastors it’s hard to keep up with them all. If all I ever did was blogged about perverted pastors, it would be a full time job, and I’d never have a break from this blog!

I’m pretty sure that Hybels is a married guy, too. Christians keep teaching that marriage is necessary to make a person a godly, responsible adult, and to keep them out of sexual sin, but as we see (yet once again!) marriage does not necessarily instill character into anyone, nor does it keep anyone from sexual sin or from sexually abusing others.

Let this story also go to show that a person does NOT have to become perfect, godly, or sinless to “earn” a spouse from God.

Yes, there are some Christians out there who teach that if you are single and want to get married, God will with-hold your spouse from you unless you become more godly, mature, or whatever quality. As  you can see from news reports such as this one, that is total bunk.

God did not withhold a spouse from Hybels (again, I’m fairly certain he has a wife), even though God had to know what a pervert the man is.

(Link): He’s a Superstar Pastor. She Worked for Him and Says He Groped Her Repeatedly.

Excerpts:

Bill Hybels built an iconic evangelical church outside Chicago. A former assistant says that in the 1980s, he sexually harassed her.

SOUTH BARRINGTON, Ill. — After the pain of watching her marriage fall apart, Pat Baranowski felt that God was suddenly showering her with blessings.

She had a new job at her Chicago-area megachurch, led by a dynamic young pastor named the Rev. Bill Hybels, who in the 1980s was becoming one of the most influential evangelical leaders in the country.

Continue reading “Mega Church Preacher Bill Hybels in Trouble Again For More Sexual Harassment”

Thoughts on the NRO Essay “Advice For Incels” by Kevin D. Williamson

Thoughts on the NRO Essay “Advice For Incels” by Kevin D. Williamson

About me and this blog:

If you are new to my blog: I have been a conservative my entire life. I’ve never voted Democrat. I was a Republican until a few years ago. I am no longer in any political party.

I sometimes critique secular, left wing feminists on my blog (such as but not limited to (Link): this post and (Link): this one), but there are times when I believe other conservatives get feminists wrong, and feminists are actually correct on some issues.

I was brought up in a traditional values, conservative, Christian family where my parents brought me to Southern Baptist churches as I was growing up, where I was taught to believe in gender complementarianism, which I did for many years, until I finally realized how (Link): wrong and sexist complementarianism is.

Because I grew up as a complementarian, I am quite familiar with what they think and why they think as they do.

My current religious beliefs are somewhat “up in the air,” as I am waffling between being agnostic, (or a deist), and the Christian faith. (Note: I am not an atheist.)

I am by no means anti- Nuclear Family, anti- motherhood, or anti- marriage, though I do posit that many to most conservatives – especially the religious ones – have gone to un-biblical lengths and have turned the Nuclear Family, marriage, natalism, and motherhood and fatherhood into idols which is wrong of them.

— end introduction to me and this blog —

I saw a link to this essay go through my Twitter feed today:

(Link): Advice for Incels by Kevin D. Williamson

On one level, this essay – “Advice for Incels” was okay.

However, I think that while the guy who wrote it has his heart in the right place, I think he gets a lot of things wrong and is naive about how Baptist and conservative Protestant and evangelical churches are for adult singles.

I’ve spent the last several years on this blog covering these topics – I’d encourage Williamson and anyone who read his NRO piece to read the books  (Link): “Singled Out” by Field and Colon and  “Quitting Church” by Christian author Julia Duin for even more information.

Continue reading “Thoughts on the NRO Essay “Advice For Incels” by Kevin D. Williamson”

When Your Husband Doesn’t Care About Your Sexual Desires by S. Gregoire

When Your Husband Doesn’t Care About Your Sexual Desires by S. Gregoire

This belies the usual Christian commentary that if a person just reserves sex for marriage, that the marriage will be great, frequent, etc. The truth is I regularly see letters to editors by married women who are dissatisfied with their husband’s sexual performance in the bedroom. Another example:

(Link): When Your Husband Doesn’t Care About Your Sexual Desires by S. Gregoire

Excerpts:

What do you do if your husband isn’t interested in hearing your sexual fantasies or desires–let alone acting on them?

…In a healthy marriage, spouses care about the other person’s pleasure and desires.

…When we make sex only about one person’s experience, though, then we’re totally erasing what God said sex was for. Sex is not just about meeting a man’s sexual needs; sex is about helping both of you feel super close.

So why do so many people seem to only focus on their own sexual needs?

Some people think that their experience of sex is the only right one
It may not be that they’re entirely selfish. It may honestly be that they don’t understand how their spouse works sexually.

Continue reading “When Your Husband Doesn’t Care About Your Sexual Desires by S. Gregoire”

Go to Counseling to Deal With that Man-Child You Married (Hax Column)

Go to Counseling to Deal With that Man-Child You Married (Hax Column)

(I got a notification from Word Press that today is this blog’s Seventh Year Anniversary. Yay me, I guess.)

My views about divorce have changed over the last two or three years. I still think people should take marriage seriously. I don’t think I want to spend much time in THIS post discussing those changes – I’ll try to keep this short.

I was raised in a Christian tradition that taught that adultery was the only reason a person could divorce and not be in sin. Suffice it to say, I used to sort of buy into that view, too, but that was when I was younger and a little more naive about relationships and people.

Take the letter below as an example. The woman’s husband had an affair, and on those grounds, a lot of Christians (not all, but many) would say she has a “biblical” right to divorce the dude. Other than the adultery, based on what the wife says, the husband sounds like an arrogant, uncaring, selfish jackass.

Continue reading “Go to Counseling to Deal With that Man-Child You Married (Hax Column)”

Actor Supposedly Too Self-Absorbed to Get or Keep a Girlfriend

Actor Supposedly Too Self-Absorbed to Get or Keep a Girlfriend

I’m not sure if this is true or not – it comes via a celebrity site.

While some women can be very self-absorbed, I think this is more of a male tendency, because it is culturally supported.

Most of us American women are taught while still in childhood that it is selfish for us to get our own needs met, that we should only cater to the needs of those around us, and we should be really nurturing and supportive to those around us. Boys do not usually get this same sort of conditioning.

So, these boys grow into men who are accustomed to females catering to them and listening to them chatter away about themselves endlessly.

Most women are not happy with this, by the way.

We women grow to resent and loathe giving men un-reciprocated emotional support more and more the older we get.

A lot of our culture and god knows gender complementarian Christian churches advocate this view that women exist merely to serve, cheer on, and encourage men.

So, a lot of you men just assume a woman should be there for you, listen to you talk about yourself and your problems for hours on end, and offer words of support.

My ex fiance’ was certainly like this – he was very self absorbed and dominated all of our phone and in-person conversations, and never asked about me or how I was doing.

My ex expressed NO interest in me or my life, but he would sure expect me to sit and listen to him gab about him and his hobbies, job, etc, all the time. It was so very annoying.

I grind my teeth just thinking about all the times I sat there for an hour or longer listening to him go on and on about himself in phone calls or over dinner dates.

If you are a man who is dating around and you’re puzzled as to why you cannot get a girlfriend, it may just be because you are too self-absorbed and don’t show an interest in the women you are with.

You may be spending too much time talking about yourself and you don’t ask the woman you’re with about her thoughts or about her life.

This actor they are discussing (who a lot of women find very sexy) played “Superman” in a few movies:

(Link): HENRY CAVILL: TOO FULL OF HIMSELF TO GET A GIRLFRIEND!

Playing Superman has clearly gone to the Brit actor’s head, pals say.

May 3, 2017, by R. Sanchez

Playing Superman has gone to Henry Cavill ’s head: The Brit actor is so full of himself, sources say, he’s having trouble finding a girlfriend.

Continue reading “Actor Supposedly Too Self-Absorbed to Get or Keep a Girlfriend”

Alpha Females Part 4 – From Psychiatrists and Counselors: How and Why Being a Beta Female is Harmful and Damaging to Women

Alpha Females Part 4 – From Psychiatrists and Counselors: How and Why Being a Beta Female is Harmful and Damaging to Women

This commentary will be divided up among a few posts. Here is part 4.

(This post may be edited in the future to re-word things, polish things, add new thoughts or links / For Twitter: #TheAlphaFemalesGuide )

From this series:

Visit Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3

Part 3B: Response to Venker: Re: Personal Experience

Introduction.

For those new to my blog:

I am a right winger. I was a Republican until recently. I am now a conservative Independent.

I was a conservative Christian for many years (I am no longer sure about what my religious views are), and I (Link): Am A Former Gender Complementarian (someone who believed in and lived out traditional gender roles (what Venker would describe as “feminine” or “beta”), views which are based in large measure on incorrect interpretations and applications about gender in the Bible).

I sometimes agree with secular left wing feminists on some topics, but not always. At times, I disagree with secular and religious left wing feminists and have written several blog posts critiquing some of their views.

This series of blog posts is addressing the dating and relationship advice of author Suzanne Venker, who wrote a book called “The Alpha Female’s Guide to Men & Marriage” which she has lately been marketing online and on TV news shows.

Here is one article by Venker about her relationship views:

(Link, off site):  Society is creating a new crop of alpha women who are unable to love by S. Venker


As many books and articles on the subjects of boundaries, codependency, and even domestic violence explain, when or if a woman exhibits codependent behaviors or attitudes (such as being passive, having an unwillingness to say no to others, doesn’t put her own needs first), she will tend to attract abusive, selfish, or exploitative individuals.

Unfortunately, many of these same codependent traits are considered “feminine” by many conservatives and by Christians (under the teaching of gender complementarianism). Author Venker touts such traits under the heading of “Beta” or “being nice” or as “being feminine” or “being soft.”

While I myself do not agree with every last facet of secular (or even Christian) feminism, they are at least correct in fighting against expecting such behavior from girls and women, because they realize it leaves females open to being exploited, or treated unfairly at jobs or in relationships.

As this Christian-authored piece explains, feminism (not even secular feminism) is entirely bad, wrong, or off-base:

(Link): Perhaps Feminism is Not The Enemy

I also explained in (Link): Part 2 how many conservatives (and Venker herself) misunderstand, wrongly explain, or misunderstand feminism.

As I explained in (Link): Part 3 of this series, I was a “Beta” myself for many years (as was my mother), which is what Venker says women should be, if they hope to marry or have a happy, stress-free, marriage once they marry.

However, being “Beta” does not guarantee that a woman will attract more men, get more dates, or have a happy marriage – again, as I already explained in Part 3.

WHAT THE EXPERTS HAVE TO SAY ABOUT WOMEN BEING BETA

Psychiatrists and therapists have written books and articles explaining how and why taking advice such as Venker’s can lead to problems for women, including in the area of dating and marriage.

Below, I will excerpt content from the books The Disease to Please by psychiatrists Harriet B. Braiker, PhD, and counselor Beverly Engel from the book The Nice Girl Syndrome.

First, here are the relevant portions from Venker’s article on Fox News:

(Link):  Society is creating a new crop of alpha women who are unable to love by S. Venker – on the Fox News site

Today they abound. There are several reasons why, but it’s in large part due to women having been groomed to be leaders rather than to be wives. Simply put, women have become too much like men. They’re too competitive. Too masculine. Too alpha.

That may get them ahead at work. But when it comes to love, it will land them in a ditch.

Every relationship requires a masculine and a feminine energy to thrive. If women want to find peace with men, they must find their feminine…

In essence, being feminine means being nice. It means being soft instead of hard…

…What men want most of all is respect, companionship and sex. If you supply these basics, your husband will do anything for you…

—(end excerpt)—

There, Venker is telling women to deny who they truly are and downplay their personalities, desires, and so on (don’t come on “too strong”), because if they stay as-is, they will repel men, but if they change themselves to make a man happy, they can attract men, or the man they have won’t want to divorce them.

Let’s see what Dr. Braiker has to say about that type of reasoning (spoiler alert: Braiker totally disagrees with Venker).

From the book The Disease to Please:

Page 95:

…If you are the people-pleaser [people-pleaser = Venker’s Beta, Nice, or Feminine] in an unbalanced relationship… you will be forced to deny or suppress your own needs. Inevitably, even the nicest people will become frustrated and angry when their emotional and sexual needs are denied indefinitely.

Healthy relationships that endure are balanced and interdependent. Balanced interdependence means that both partners are aware of and sensitive and responsive to the needs of the other.

—(end excerpt)—

From pages 93-94:

Many people-pleasers [people-pleaser = Beta, Codependent, Nice, or Feminine women] who have used this approach [making a man dependent upon them by doing nice things for him all the time, stifling your own needs, etc., and  using other approaches Venker recommends] sadly discover that manipulating a man into an excessively dependent position – no matter how nice and well-intended your motives – may actually push him into doing the thing you most fear: abandoning you.

—(end excerpt)—

From pages 94 to 95, Braiker gives a case study of a patient of hers named Jennifer who utilized Venker-type methods to hold on to her husband [she always was available to him sexually, she sacrificed her needs to meet his at all times, and sought to “spoil” him].

The result? Jennifer’s husband Ron began having an affair on her with another woman, and later, Jennifer came home one day to find a note of good-bye from her husband, Ron, where he said he was divorcing her for the other woman.

A little later in this same chapter, starting on page 95, Braiker discusses how many career women are what Venker would refer to as ‘Alpha’ in the workplace (confident, competent, assertive, and so forth) but think that to attract or retain a man in their romantic life, that they must behave in what Venker would refer to as a “Beta.”

Braiker explains in this book that this is not so – that acting “Beta” (or “nice” or “feminine” – all which amounts to the same thing, regardless of the terminology used: being a codependent with bad boundaries in practice), causes such women to attract abusive or selfish men. Braiker then spends the rest of the chapter cautioning women from being passive in their romantic life to avoid users, abusers, and narcissists.

Here are a few excerpts, by Braiker (pages 95, 96):

… I have treated many highly successful career women who have entrapped themselves in bad relationships with men by their self-imposed people-pleasing [people-pleasing = being Beta, Nice, Feminine, Codependent] subservience.

A large number of these women who are now at the pinnacle of their professions grew up in the 1950s and 1960s, in an era when femininity and sexual attractiveness still carried with them certain gender stereotypes such as submissiveness, dependency, passivity, and sensitivity.

Today, many of these women, and even a significant number of younger women too, fear that the very traits that account for their success in the workplace – assertiveness, mental toughness, aggressiveness, competitive-ness – become liabilities in their romantic relationships with men.

[Here Braiker inserts the case study of one woman patient who is a CEO]

Many women like my [C.E.O.] patient, harbor misgivings about whether their achievements might boomerang when it comes to relationships with men and come back to haunt them.

…. As a consequence of this dangerous combination [fear of success combined with people-pleasing], they may engage in a range of self-defeating behaviors that can sabotage either their careers or their personal relationships, and often both.

… Some people-pleasing women attempt to resolve the dilemma by splitting their personality traits into two discrete “sides.” They may display their competitive, assertive, and aggressive side at work.

In their personal relationships with men, they may adopt an exaggerated “femininity,” displaying passivity, submissiveness, and compliance. This masquerade, of course, is no solution at all. Rather, it is a recipe for inner conflict, anxiety, identity confusion, and lowered self-esteem.

—(end excerpt)—

Braiker then next, on pages 96-97, offers up the case study of one of her women patients, Helene, who was a successful business woman who was living out what Venker suggests in her book for women to do: be assertive at the job, but be the passive, sweet, sex kitten at home with her mate.

The result of this for Helene? Lots of abuse.

…behind closed doors when they are alone, Bob [Helene’s boyfriend] treats Helene abusively. [Helene has a far more successful career than Bob does, which Bob is aware of.]

Helene defends Bob’s behavior by “understanding” how difficult it is for a man to stand in her shadow.

…Helene realized [via therapy] that she needed to correct some of her own gender stereotypes. Helene believed that by demonstrating her people-pleasing [Beta, nice, feminine] behavior in her personal relationships with men, she was being more feminine and, therefore, more sexually attractive.

[At her place of employment, where she was CEO, Helene tolerated no sexual harassment for herself or for any woman]. However, because of her Disease to Please [being codependent, Beta, nice, and feminine], Helene was actually rewarding a man for treating her abusively behind close doors.

—(end excerpt)—

From page 97:

It is imperative that you recognize how dangerous and self-sabotaging your people-pleasing tendencies with men can become so that you can change the unhealthy dynamic of your relationships. Otherwise, the Disease to Please [being codependent, Beta, nice, and feminine] will serve as a veritable mating call to men who have a perverse need and desire to control nearly every aspect of your behavior. Worse yet, you will allow them to do so.

—(end excerpt)—

Page 98:

Unless you repair the damage by curing the Disease to Please [being codependent, Beta, nice, and feminine]  that produced it, you will limp away from the relationship with the brand of “damaged goods” on your ego. [Then the cycle will repeat itself as you attract yet another abusive, selfish, or jerk boyfriend who mistreats you all over again.]

—(end excerpt)—

As you can see from those excerpts (and there are plenty more in the book), Dr. Braiker strongly warns and advises women against the very traits and attitudes that Venker is telling women in articles, books, and TV appearances that she thinks they should have!

While there are plenty of selfish or abusive men who would enjoy being able to thoroughly control a woman, and a woman who, per Venker’s teaching, willingly goes along with it, a lot of men soon tire of this extreme “feminine” type of woman and dump her.

In her book, starting on page 100, Dr. Braiker discusses a male patient she had once who admitted that he loved to date the sort of women Venker advises women to be, because they were so easy to control. But, the guy soon got tired of dating these passive, wimpy, Beta women.

Here’s what he said:

“…One day, I realized I’m sitting in the boat [of life] all alone. I don’t want the kind of woman who will do anything to please me anymore. It’s boring and lonely. I want a partner who can sit on the boat next to me and keep me company. I want us to please each other without losing all boundaries or identity.”

Another male patient said (page 101):

“I do like to be in control, but I really want someone who will push back. I like steak because it gives me something to chew on. I don’t want to eat pre-chewed baby food. That’s how I wind up feeling about a woman who will give up her own substance just because she’s trying to please me. There’s nothing to chew on; there’s no challenge there at all. I just get bored.”

As Dr. Braiker so succinctly puts it (from page 106):

-There’s nothing wrong with wanting to make a man you love happy or wanting to please him. Just be sure that you’re not pleasing him by hurting yourself in the process.

-Any man who is threatened or feels diminished by your intelligence, achievements, success, or talent is NOT someone with whom you are likely to have a gratifying relationship with anyway. Look elsewhere.

—(end excerpt)—

Earlier in the book starting around page 49, Dr. Braiker discusses a single woman patient she had named Miranda who wants badly to get married. Miranda cannot figure out why she can’t seem to hold on to a man.

Miranda wrongly assumes the way to “catch” a man is to take the sort of advice Venker gives in her relationship book – she tries to be very pleasing and agreeable with every man she dates, she molds herself into whatever type of woman she assumes her current boyfriend of the month likes, and so on.

The result is that all these men eventually become bored with Miranda – and break up with her.

As Braiker describes it in the book (page 50), Miranda puts on the “beta” routine that Venker advises:

So, as soon as Miranda finds herself attracted and interested in a man, she puts herself in a subservient, submissive, position. She lavishes men with attention, adoration, and praise. Miranda believes that to be worthy of a man’s love, she must prove she will always put his needs first.

…The truth is that she [Miranda] cannot offer the one thing a healthy man wants and needs the most: the ability to truly share herself because she knows and values who she is.

—(end excerpt)—

Notice that Miranda’s assumptions on how to attract a man are similar to the tactics Venker puts forward in her Fox news article. And, as Braiker goes on to explain, Miranda was her patient because her “beta” femininity was driving men away, and she could not figure out that it was her very beta-femininity-ness that was at fault.

EXCHANGING AGENCY AND INDEPENDENCE FOR BEING OVER-RELIANT ON A MAN

Continuing with my critique of Venker’s views; more from her article at Fox news:

(Link):  Society is creating a new crop of alpha women who are unable to love by S. Venker – on the Fox News site:

And because I had zero interest in my husband adopting a more feminine role, I set about to become the feminine creature our culture insists women not be.

And here’s what I learned: It’s liberating to be a beta!

I’m an alpha all day long, and it gets tiresome. I concede that I thrive on it; but at the end of the day, I’m spent. Self-reliance is exhausting. Making all the decisions is exhausting. Driving the car, literally or figuratively, is exhausting.

—(end excerpt)—

So, Venker is apparently fine ceding normal adult and personal responsibility to her husband because it makes her life easier. What she’s also sacrificing is her independence, dignity, and agency by doing so.

I take it that Venker is a right winger or conservative: right wingers and conservatives support personal responsibility; they don’t recommend that adults neglect it.

As I explain in an older post, I am a FORMER gender complementarian. Sometimes people on other sites have asked me, “Why do you suppose so many Christian women willingly endure the sexism known as complementarianism?”

One of several reasons so many Christian women remain “stuck” in complementarianism and go along with it is precisely to ride the coat-tails of a husband, because it’s easier going through life with someone taking care of you than it is for you to take care of yourself, by getting a job, taking care of your own car, and so forth.

Christian women are willing to trade off their autonomy, dreams, goals in life, and independence in exchange for male-provided financial stability and having a husband who is like a “father figure” who they can rely on.

In the book of Genesis of the Bible, God, by the way, actually predicted this would happen as a result of sin, when He told Adam and Eve that the woman would desire her husband and turn to the husband – rather than to God.

Ever since, yes, many women have indeed traded off God-reliance (or self-reliance) to depend on a husband for emotional and financial stability. And women like Venker (along with hordes of Christian gender complementarians) are prodding women to keep this up. It’s so sick, and rather tragic.

Women depending on men to this degree – and giving up their identity, needs, and self-hood in the process – is a RESULT of the Fall, a RESULT of sin entering humanity – but Venker and complementarians and other conservatives think this is awesome, healthy, or great for marriages and dating. Sick, sick, sick.

Secular feminism seeks to correct this type of sin that impacts women so strongly (and so this is one aspect of feminism that is good!), ironically.

Secular feminists are trying to free women from this very sin God predicted back in Genesis (and secular feminists – and a smaller number of Christian gender egalitarians – see how damaging it is), but many Christians and conservatives keep trying to cram women back into this same “sin box” and tell them it is “good” for them and for their relationships.

So, Venker finds being responsible and making decisions all day tiring. Well, yes, most people do. But the solution is not to hand over all or most of your personal responsibility to another adult.

Counselor Beverly Engels warns women against this very temptation in her book (Link): The Nice Girl Syndrome.

Engel discusses in the book (pages 212 – 214) that during her early 30s, on a month long trip to Europe, she met a European guy named Jacob. By the time she met this guy, she had been in Europe for a few weeks, was exhausted.

She ends up going to his place, they had sex a time or two, though the second time she didn’t really want to. The guy wasn’t exactly overtly abusive, but she felt she “owed” him sex to be nice to him, since he was now taking care of her. He was making her breakfasts, letting her stay at his home, etc.

For a period of time, due to exhaustion, Engel says she let this Jacob man control her, she was tired of making decisions for herself, she was tired of all the responsibility on this trip, so she was willing to turn the steering wheel over to Jacob – as Venker is asking women to do in their own relationships.

Engel says that is a bad move, and she has regret over her interactions with Jacob to this day. Even though she kept turning the guy down sexually, so long as she stayed at his home, he kept repeatedly bugging her for sex and for more sex. He was super persistent.

Venker’s advice to women boils down to that they infantilize themselves to be more attractive to men. This is bad and dangerous advice.

From page 131 by Engel:

You can’t expect anyone else to take responsibility for your welfare. You are the only one who can take care of you.

The price you pay for looking to someone else to take care of you is dependency, the loss of self, and, ultimately, the inability to control your life.

YOU DON’T WANT TO DATE OR MARRY THE SORT OF MEN VENKER’S ADVICE WILL ATTRACT

From page 45 of Engel’s book:

It used to be that the payoff for being sweet and nice was that one was taken care of and protected by the men and authority figures in one’s life.

Girls and women were perceived as weaker and in need of protection from the “big, bad world,” and boys and men took on the responsibility of making sure that nothing bad happened to them. But those days are gone, along with chivalry and manners.

Most boys and men today do not feel responsible for protecting girls; in fact, many view girls and women as objects to be exploited.

…This doesn’t mean that there aren’t men who like taking on the role of provider and protector. But these men are not necessarily throwbacks to an earlier time – unfortunately, they often take on this role as a way of dominating women. In fact, these men often look for women who are passive, who appear naive and innocent, because such women are easier to control.

–(end excerpt)–

Yes, as you can see, Venker’s advice, if followed, will open you up to appearing very attractive to abusive, selfish, cruel, or self-absorbed men who only want to use you, not care for you or about your needs.

The sorts of men you will attract if you follow Venker’s advice are not the sorts of men you want to date or marry. You want to avoid these guys, not marry them.

I also find this, from Engel’s book, highly pertinent (from page 126), where Engle is discussing a patient she had named Nina:

Nina was painting a picture of a storybook family life – the dutiful wife, the hardworking husband, the kids who were seen but not heard. Or was it? Nina was a young woman who was raised in the 1980s – not the fifties. Something just wasn’t adding up.

After several more sessions and some gentle prodding on my part, Nina finally opened up more about how it really was in her family. As it turned out, it wasn’t so perfect after all.

Yes, her mother was a dutiful wife, but her father was quite demanding. He expected his wife to wait on him hand and foot when he was home, and he was extremely hard to please.

There were many nights when he refused to eat what she [his wife, who was Nina’s mother] had cooked and insisted that she cook something else entirely. He complained if the house wasn’t immaculate and the kids weren’t bathed and dressed up when he got home.

As we continued to explore Nina’s childhood, Nina admitted that it really wasn’t by choice that her mother didn’t have any friends or didn’t go out much. It was at her father’s insistence that Nina’s mother not associate with anyone outside the family.

–(end excerpt)–

If you go by Venker’s marital advice, you may find yourself with a similar dynamic in your marriage that Nina’s mother was in. How many of you married women out there want that sort of loveless, emotionally abusive marriage?

Exchanging your decision-making abilities or duties for a life of ease and simplicity, all so more stress and responsibility falls on your husband, is a lazy, stupid, immature, potentially dangerous thing to do, and it’s actually unfair to your husband. I am dumb-founded that a conservative author any where would recommend that other women do this, or that she does this herself.

I hope this post of mine, with excerpts from books by a psychiatrist and a counselor, both of whom have treated many patients over the years (and hence have way more insight and experience in relationship dynamics than Venker does) clarifies just how terrible, sexist, and harmful relationship advice such as Venker’s is.

If you didn’t want to take my word for it, as (Link): based upon my experience and my mother’s, with how awful it was to utilize Venker-like advice in our own relationships, I hope the insights by professionals (one with a PhD) lends more credence.


I intend on writing a Part 5, if or when I get the time and/or inclination. And then, I think I may finally be done with this series. – Thankfully. This was not something I enjoyed writing all too much.


Related Posts:

(Link):  Alpha Females Part 1 – Nothing New Under the Sun. Conservative Women Keep Issuing Same Sexist, Unhelpful Dating And Marital Advice to Women

(Link):  Alpha Females Part 2 – Defining the Terms – How Anti-Feminists and Complementarians Misrepresent Concepts or Terms

(Link): A Response to Venker: Re: Personal Experience

(Link): Author Claims Andrea Tantaros’ Book About How Feminism ‘Made Women Miserable’ Was Ghostwritten by a Man

Jaded, Bitter, Entitled Sam The Single Man Claims that All Women Who Say “They Aren’t That Kind of Girl” Are Liars

Jaded, Bitter, Entitled Sam The Single Man Claims that All Women Who Say “They Aren’t That Kind of Girl” Are Liars

The guy who wrote this letter to ‘Ask Amy’ sounds like a bitter, cynical, entitled sexist ass-hat.

I for one “am not that kind of girl.” Women such as me do in fact exist. If you date me, and I turn down sex on the basis of, “I’m not that kind of girl,” I am speaking the truth.

I am over the age of 40 and still a virgin. Even though now my views on sex have relaxed, and I’d be willing to have sex prior to marriage, but not on a first date, or even a second date, but only within the context of a steady, committed relationship.

So yes, to you assh*le who wrote this letter to Ask Amy, “Sam,” some women are in fact “not that kind of girl” and do not have sex with a man they’ve just met.

I think you don’t want a steady relationship but a one-night stand, in which case, stop using dating sites like eHarmony, Yahoo Personals, or Match and stick with “Booty Call .com” or “Tindr,” which are designed specifically for casual sex, you idiot.

DEAR AMY:

When two people first meet and the guy wants to have sex, why is it that many women say, “I am not that kind of girl, and I need to get to know you better“?

That is actually a big lie that women tell. After all, if the guy who wanted to have sex with them was George Clooney, it’s unthinkable that they would say, “I’m not that kind of girl.”

Every woman is “that kind of girl” with a select few men under the right circumstances.

Continue reading “Jaded, Bitter, Entitled Sam The Single Man Claims that All Women Who Say “They Aren’t That Kind of Girl” Are Liars”

Benevolent Sexism in the Christian Bedroom (Christian Stereotypes About Female Sexuality) by J. Kamps

Benevolent Sexism in the Christian Bedroom (Christian Stereotypes About Female Sexuality) by J. Kamps

Some parts of these posts tackle subjects I’ve mentioned before on my blog in the past.

(Link):  It’s my orgasm, not his [part 1] by J. Kamps

(Link): It’s my orgasm, not his [part 2] by J. Kamps

Excerpts from (Link):  It’s my orgasm, not his [part 1] by J. Kamps

Jasmine’s story is an example of Benevolent Sexism. Hostile Sexism is fairly easy to recognise. Benevolent Sexism is sneaky and far more socially pervasive. It parades around wearing a facade of chivalry, making out women to be weaker, lesser, diminished, objectified, by using what are perceived as good manners, male consideration, and role definition.

Benevolent Sexism operates on the fundamental belief that, whether observed in practice or not, there IS a gender hierarchy.

….Benevolent Sexism even uses compliments and praise to disarm and disempower women. “Women are kinder, gentler, naturally more loving. Women are not as strong as men, so they require protection. Women are not as naturally competitive.”

Continue reading “Benevolent Sexism in the Christian Bedroom (Christian Stereotypes About Female Sexuality) by J. Kamps”