Acceptance (vs. Denial, Anger, or Should-ing) – Helps in Healing and Getting Through Painful Events and Dealing With Things You Cannot Change

Acceptance (vs. Denial, Anger, or Should-ing) – Helps in Healing and Getting Through Painful Events and Dealing With Things You Cannot Change

Disclaimer: All names have been changed in the post below to keep people’s identities anonymous.


One of the things I’ve noticed in the last few years is that when I’ve accepted a situation, whether something current or something from years ago that once bothered me a lot, is that it speeds up the recovery process.

I used to hold on tightly to people or dreams or hopes. In the last few years, I’ve gotten better at Letting Go.

(I’ve not arrived at perfection at this, but I have improved a lot in the last couple of years.)

Instead of constantly regretting, feeling sad or angry about a past incident, or that my life is not where I want it to be now, I’ve learned to accept my past and present, and that has definitely been good for my mental health – and I’m more able to enjoy each day as it is, instead of sitting around angry or upset that things aren’t how I had hoped or planned.

I don’t get as upset by set backs as I once did.

Continue reading “Acceptance (vs. Denial, Anger, or Should-ing) – Helps in Healing and Getting Through Painful Events and Dealing With Things You Cannot Change”

Democrat Vice President Kamala Harris Meets With Female Activist Who Ranted “‘F*ck The White’ Women”

Democrat Vice President Kamala Harris Meets With Female Activist Who Ranted “‘F*ck The White’ Women”

There is no purpose or context in which this is appropriate – the constant shaming, of progressives, of white people and of white women in particular.

I dislike Islam, sexism, and biological men (“transwomen”) being in women’s only spaces (I also dislike the misogyny some of these transwomen utter), but I do recognize that not all Muslims, all men, or all transgender persons are evil rapists, jerks, sexists, and what have you.

I don’t always spell those caveats (of “not all of persons of Group X are terrible”) out in every post I make, where I rant or fume about the latest news item where a complementarian man has done or said something sexist (again), or the latest news story where a transwoman has molested a little girl and so on, but I hope this is understood.

I’ve been really tired of seeing how the left steps on white people in general but how they scapegoat white women in particular.

This scapegoating and demonizing of white women has been going on for years now, and I first began noticing that the left puts white women (or all biological women initially) on the lowest rung of their favorite pet groups.

It took me awhile later to learn about progressive concepts in more detail, like “intersectionalism,” where it was confirmed for me that, yes, the left has a stacking order of Victimhood, where they deem whomever, which ever group, is the most victimized as being at a higher priority of care and concern, than those they deem lowest.

This began, several years ago, with the left demonizing white men quite a bit.

Then a couple or so years later, it jumped to the left vilifying white women. And there they remain. I think (biological, heterosexual) white women now remain the most demonized group, even more so than white men.

At the same time, these same white (hetero, etc) women continue to suffer the slings and arrows of regular, every day sexism from biological, hetero men.

Now white women (now including ones who identity as lesbian) also have to deal with harassment and demonization by transwomen.

The transwomen demonize white (lesbian) women for not wanting to date biological men (ie., transwomen), and many progressive black women and their “allies” like to scream and yell at white women for “centering” themselves, for not doing enough, and love to mock “white women’s tears” and toss the term “white fragility” around.

Democrats overall love to demonize white women if a Republican wins, because they will look at the stats or polling and see that white women, as a voting bloc, tended to vote for one politician or another.

This demonization of white people generally (not just white women particularly) and the shaming of white people (including children!) has, unfortunately, gotten very prevalent in the last few years.

It’s not necessary or acceptable to insult white people as a group to address racism against black people, any more than it’s necessary or acceptable for Baptists and others speaking out against declining marriage rates by insulting all single adults or singleness.

If you want to tell me that you believe that racism (against persons of color by white people) is still an issue today, that is all well and good, but if you’re going to address this racism by constantly using racial putdowns against whites or shaming whites for being white, then I do not agree with that.

(This gets into the weeds, though, when one considers that today’s leftists understand terms differently than most of us. To them, a “white supremacist” can include a dark-skinned individual who votes Republican, doesn’t agree with CRT, or who is a conservative. Most of us understand the term to mean something like a white guy in a white robe burning crosses at night.)

I may have more to say about the following excerpts in another, separate blog post pertaining to these subjects.

This references Kamala Harris, who is currently the Democratic Vice President of the United States:

(Link – this page has an auto-play video with audio):
 VP Harris meets with activist who said ‘f—‘ ‘White women’

Barry also said that her group has “gotta get real serious” about getting Harris in the Oval Office.

by Houston Keene, December 8, 2021

Vice President Harris on Monday met with several Black female activists for a private meeting in her ceremonial office, including an activist who directed an expletive towards “White women” in a public Zoom call just last year.
— end excerpts —

(Link): VP Harris meets with black feminist activist who said ‘f*** the white women’ and accused Trump supporters ‘wearing a white sheet’: Discussed civil rights and voting issues

(Link): Harris Meets With Female Activist Who Ranted ‘F*** The White’ Women

By  Hank Berrien
Dec 8, 2021

On Monday, Vice President Kamala Harris held a meeting with a black feminist activist who had stated publicly, “F*** white women.”

Harris met with Cora Masters Barry and other members of the Black Women Leaders and Allies on Monday.

Barry, the wife of the late Washington, D.C., Mayor Marian Barry, was participating on a Zoom call last November with Rolling Out CEO Munson Steed and fellow activist Melanie Campbell as they discussed white women voting more for Republican candidates, The Daily Mail reported.

Barry ranted, “F*** the white — excuse me — forget the white women. They’re going to do what the white men tell them to do. … They be smiling in [your face]; they want to stay in charge. … I don’t care nothing about them, we gotta do what we gotta do.”

Continue reading “Democrat Vice President Kamala Harris Meets With Female Activist Who Ranted “‘F*ck The White’ Women””

How to Recognize and Respond to Energy Vampires at Home, Work, and More by K. Holland

How to Recognize and Respond to Energy Vampires at Home, Work, and More

(Link): How to Recognize and Respond to Energy Vampires at Home, Work, and More

Excerpts:

by K. Holland

What is an energy vampire?
Energy vampires are people who — sometimes intentionally — drain your emotional energy. They feed on your willingness to listen and care for them, leaving you exhausted and overwhelmed.

Energy vampires can be anywhere and anyone. They can be your spouse or your best friend. They can be your cubicle mate or your neighbor.

Learning how to identify and respond to this toxic behavior can help you preserve your energy and protect yourself from a great deal of emotional — and physical — distress.

Read on to learn more about how an energy vampire acts and what you can do next.

They don’t take accountability
Energy vampires are often charismatic. They may slink out of trouble when problems arise because of this charm.

Continue reading “How to Recognize and Respond to Energy Vampires at Home, Work, and More by K. Holland”

Anti-Porn Activist: ‘Ethically Sourced’ Porn ‘Sounds Like an Oxymoron’

Anti-Porn Activist: ‘Ethically Sourced’ Porn ‘Sounds Like an Oxymoron’

The following is a response to this article (Link): Lutheran Pastor Defends ‘Ethically Sourced Porn,’ Wants to Remove ‘Shame’ From Industry

I have a comment or two to make below these excerpts….

(Link): Anti-Porn Activist: ‘Ethically Sourced’ Porn ‘Sounds Like an Oxymoron’

By Michael Gryboski , Christian Post Reporter | Nov 13, 2018 7:42 AM

An anti-pornography activist has taken issue with an Evangelical Lutheran Church in America pastor’s support for “ethically sourced porn” and the removal of shame from the sex entertainment industry.

“What she is saying about shame sounds to me like a condemnation of shame in general, that there is nothing good about it,” Peggy Cairns, Education chairperson with the Maryland Coalition Against Pornography, told The Christian Post. “I would contend that there is a place for shame in life, it’s part of how our consciences work, and we need more of it rather than less in today’s compass-less world.”

Lutheran pastor and author Nadia Bolz-Weber recently argued that there should be no shame in consuming pornography, especially if it is “ethically sourced.”

Continue reading “Anti-Porn Activist: ‘Ethically Sourced’ Porn ‘Sounds Like an Oxymoron’”

“‘I Kissed Dating Goodbye’ [Book] Told Me to Stay Pure Until Marriage. I Still Have a Stain on My Heart” – Regarding: Dating Book by Author Josh Harris (with other related links about the IKDG book) and Criticizing “Purity Culture”

“‘I Kissed Dating Goodbye’ [Book] Told Me to Stay Pure Until Marriage. I Still Have a Stain on My Heart” – Regarding: Dating Book by Author Josh Harris (with other related links about the IKDG book) and Criticizing “Purity Culture”

August 24, 2016 update: I added a new link at the bottom of this post: people continue to attack the idea of sexual purity by publicizing backlash against the Harris IKDG book.


I myself have never read the IKDB book, which was written by Harris. I have read about the book on other sites in the past, and it is my understanding the book discussed how to date, and other such topics, and is not strictly about sex or virginity.

The author uses this review of the IKDG book to bash “purity culture,” and in so doing, touches on the topic or staying chaste until marriage.

I am in the middle of this debate. I cannot completely agree with all the critics of “purity culture,” depending on what they are criticizing about it and why.

I believe that the Bible teaches both male and females are to sexually abstain until marriage, so I don’t believe in tossing out this teaching all because some young women feel they have been hurt or oppressed by it.

On the other hand, how some Christians have taught about sexual purity has been lop-sided – males are typically not addressed, only females – and Christians could do a better, or more sensitive job, in how they present the concept of remaining a virgin until marriage.

With that introduction, here is the link, with some excerpts (and note, I am not in complete agreement with all views in this piece; however, I’m not a supporter of a lot of Christian dating advice. Christian dating advice tends to act as an obstacle to singles who want to someday marry):

(Link): “‘I Kissed Dating Goodbye’ told me to stay pure until marriage. I still have a stain on my heart

Excerpts:

July 27, 2016

In 1997, Joshua Harris published “I Kissed Dating Goodbye,” a book that was in part a warning about the harm that relationships before marriage could cause. Harris evoked images of men at the altar bringing all their past partners with them into the marriage to reinforce the point that love and sex before marriage took pieces of your heart and made you less.

At the time, Harris was just 21, but he was already a rising star.

…He [Harris] was what we, as young evangelicals, wanted to be. And so we strove passionately to attain the ideal of premarital purity he laid out for us. Now, almost 20 years later, even Harris appears to be questioning whether his advice did more harm than good.

…But Harris’s book was hugely influential.

…On the surface, I am a purity-culture success story: I am a heterosexual woman, a virgin until marriage, now with two small children and a husband I deeply love. We attend church. We believe in God. And yet, for me, the legacy of purity culture is not one of freedom but one of fear.

Viral Virgin Brelyn Bowman Talks Purity Backlash From Christians, New Book ‘No Ring, No Ting’ (Interview)

Viral Virgin Brelyn Bowman Talks Purity Backlash From Christians, New Book ‘No Ring, No Ting’ (Interview) 

I agree that those Christians (or ex Christians) who are opposed to sexual purity (virginity) lifestyles or teachings have gone overboard with it – as have some secular liberals.

Women (or men) who, of their own freewill, choose to abstain sexually are mocked or ridiculed for abstaining. (I have links with examples to this under the “Related Posts” section at the end of this post).

I think it’s very hypocritical for people to champion all sexual behaviors or choices of women EXCEPT FOR staying a virgin until marriage. Celebrity women can yak all day long about their sexual conquests on Twitter or in interviews, and nobody raises a fuss – but the moment a woman makes public that she’s waiting until marriage (or a serious relationship) to have sex, she will be faced with a lot of ridicule and criticism. Even by so-called feminists, who claim to respect all sexual choices of women.

I have blogged about this woman previously (Link): here.

(Link): Viral Virgin Brelyn Bowman Talks Purity Backlash From Christians, New Book ‘No Ring, No Ting’ (Interview) by C. Thomasos – March 8, 2016

  • Brelyn Bowman says she wasn’t surprised that people in the secular world disapproved of her posting a gynecologist’s purity certificate on social media after her wedding day last year. But she was shocked by the backlash that came from Christians.
  • The 23-year-old wife of gospel singer Tim Bowman Jr. says she made the decision to honor God by abstaining from sex until her wedding day. Soon after she proudly announced to the world on Instagram that she had remained a virgin until her wedding day by showing the certificate she presented to her father, a number of Christians responded in anger.
  • Bowman told The Christian Post that she was mostly surprised that many of those who left negative comments about her decision to show her father the results of her gynocological exam that revealed she was still a virgin before her wedding day identified as Christians.
  • “That’s what I couldn’t understand. So it was kind of like, why do we, as Christians, bash one another instead of protect one another and spread the message of God to those who may not understand?” she questioned.
  • “It’s OK for a girl who gets pregnant out of wedlock to say ‘OK, I’m pregnant’ and we celebrate the baby. But it’s not OK to say ‘Hey, I’m a virgin.'” she asserted. “Maybe the certificate wasn’t right, but neither was her getting pregnant. We still celebrate the baby.”

Continue reading “Viral Virgin Brelyn Bowman Talks Purity Backlash From Christians, New Book ‘No Ring, No Ting’ (Interview)”

Salon Author Amanda Marcotte Thinks Media Shouldn’t Judge Women’s Sexuality But She Has Mocked Women Over Their Sexual Choices Before (To Remain Virgins)

Salon Author Amanda Marcotte Thinks Media Shouldn’t Judge Women’s Sexuality But She Has Mocked Women Over Their Sexual Choices Before (To Remain Virgins)

My memory is a bit rusty here, but in a previous, older editorial on Salon, either Marcotte ridiculed women who choose to remain virgins until marriage, or, when she was mocking the concept of virgin- until- marriage, it escaped her notice that some women, of their own volition, choose to abstain until marriage.

I blogged about this before here, on my blog:

Either way it went, Marcotte ended up ridiculing the choice of some women to stay virgins until marriage – and some women do in fact choose to remain virgins until marriage, like this lady, who was in the media about a month ago:

This recent editorial at Salon, by Marcotte, is my reason for writing this blog post today:

(Link):  Now we’re leering at suicide bombers: The grotesque objectification of Hasna Ait Boulahcen by Amanda Marcotte

Here are a few excerpts from that page, about a woman terrorist who was blown up in Paris, France (I have some more comments below these excerpts):

by Amanda Marcotte

November 20, 2105

…But Boulahcen [woman terrorist] was female, and so the forces of sexual objectification are kicking in, creating a grotesque display.

…Both articles obsessively comb over every detail of Boulahcen’s pre-conversion life: Her partying, her drinking, the amount of sex they suspect she had, her clothes and even her “heavy makeup”, which both articles take pains to point out. It’s the same kind of thing you see these right wing rags doing day in and out, simultaneously inviting their audiences to leer at and sit in judgment of young women for their clothes, their sexual choices…

Continue reading “Salon Author Amanda Marcotte Thinks Media Shouldn’t Judge Women’s Sexuality But She Has Mocked Women Over Their Sexual Choices Before (To Remain Virgins)”

Pastors avoid ‘controversy’ to keep tithes up, author says – Confirms What I’ve Been Saying All Along, Re: Churches: Contrary to Progressive Christians, Churches / Christians Do Not Support or Idolize Sexual Purity, Virginity, or Celibacy – they attack these concepts when not ignoring them

Pastors avoid ‘controversy’ to keep tithes up, author says – Confirms What I’ve Been Saying All Along, Re: Churches: Contrary to Progressive Christians, Churches / Christians Do Not Support or Idolize Sexual Purity, Virginity, or Celibacy – they attack these concepts when not ignoring them

Pastors avoid ‘controversy’ to keep tithes up, author says

(Link):  Pastors avoid Biblical positions on today’s issues to keep tithes up

(Link): Barna: Many pastors wary of raising ‘controversy’

(Link): Study: Pastors avoid controversy to keep tithes up

I linked to this same article in my previous post and discussed it from another angle,

This time, I am bringing this story up for another reason.

(Link):  Pastors avoid ‘controversy’ to keep tithes up, author says

I’m not surprised. Every time I see the progressive Christians, the ex Christians, and left wing secular feminists complain that Christians over value a woman’s virginity, I want to laugh. I see the total opposite.

Virginity for men and woman is being attacked by Christians, not upheld, defended, respected or esteemed.

(Usually, the entire subject is ignored FOR MEN. Men are not expected to be virgins by anyone on either side of the debate. Men get a pass, even from progressive Christians and secular feminists; ironic.)

Virginity, celibacy, and sexual purity are being written off even by most conservative Christians as being unrealistic, impossible standards for any man or woman to meet, so they have reversed course and say fornication is really not such a big deal.

Further, Christians have sanctioned phrases such as “born again virgin” or “secondary virginity” to console sexual sinners.

With the exception of a tiny minority of far, far out fringe kook groups, like the weirdos who want to see the USA governed by Old Testament laws and penalties, I am not seeing Christians who are demanding that people stay virgins until marriage, speaking out against pre-marital sex, or making sexual purity an idol that they insist Christian girls pursue.

Here are some excerpts from:

(Link):  Pastors avoid ‘controversy’ to keep tithes up, author says

  • by Tom Fontaine
  • Aug 24,  2014
  • Few pastors preach about today’s most challenging political and social issues because they worry about losing members of their flocks and the money they donate, according to a researcher who focuses on issues of Christianity.
  • “Controversy keeps people from being in the seats. Controversy keeps people from giving money, from attending programs,” California-based researcher George Barna said this month in an American Family Radio interview.

Continue reading “Pastors avoid ‘controversy’ to keep tithes up, author says – Confirms What I’ve Been Saying All Along, Re: Churches: Contrary to Progressive Christians, Churches / Christians Do Not Support or Idolize Sexual Purity, Virginity, or Celibacy – they attack these concepts when not ignoring them”

Theologian Says ‘Love’ Is the New Cultural Apologetic Affirming Immoral Activities – Theology of Hurt Feelings – Why Christians Are Reluctant To Call Out Sexual Sin

Theologian Says ‘Love’ Is the New Cultural Apologetic Affirming Immoral Activities – Theology of Hurt Feelings – Why Christians Are Reluctant To Call Out Sexual Sin

(Before I get to the link proper, here is a long introduction by me.)

I agree with this guy’s editorial (linked to farther below). I’ve written of this phenomenon before on my own blog, going back a year or maybe as long as three years ago (see links at the bottom of this post under the “Related Posts” section).

I do not like legalistic jerks. I don’t think Christians should be rude, mean, hateful jerks to other people, even when condemning certain behaviors as being sinful.

However. HOWEVER.

I can’t say as though I’m a whole-scale supporter of legalism’s opposite characteristics, either – which amounts to extreme leniency and “watering down of standards” in the name of Love and Tolerance.

I have seen some Christians so very afraid of hurting the feelings of Non-Christians (or even that of fellow Christians) who are in sin, or in confronting Christians who are openly supportive of behaviors the Bible condemns, they tip toe around the sin in question to an absurd degree – where they end up practically supporting, condoning, or excusing said sin (whatever it may be).

These Christians are hyper-sensitive to other people’s feelings, and it is a huge annoyance to me.

This tendency to treat other people’s feelings with kid gloves has gotten so bad in Christendom (particularly in regards to sexual sin), that some preachers have admitted they are afraid to speak out against sin in public, in their blogs, TV shows, books, or from the pulpit.

It’s also very common among Christian lay persons, or by ex-Christians or liberal Christians, who confuse God’s propensity to love and forgive with the notion that God (and Jesus Christ) are hunky-dory with behavior the Bible thoroughly condemns, such as hetero pre-marital sex or homosexual sex acts, for example.

(Transgenderism is a sexual state which has become the new liberal Christian, moderate Christian, Theology of Hurt Feelings Christian, ex-Christian, and left wing secular Sacred Cow that you may not criticize at all.)

It’s also intriguing to me that on the spiritual abuse blogs I have visited, whose owners and members champion the downtrodden (i.e., adults who have been mistreated by churches, or victims of sexual abuse whose abuse was swept under the rug by their fellow church members),
have forum or blog participants, who will, on one hand, quite understandably call for the heads of such abusive church members on a platter,
rightly call out Christians as being naive fools about abuse in churches, but – many of these same people are also very dismissive of, or blind to, abuses by Muslim militants and homosexual militants.

They are very naive of abuses by Muslims and homosexuals. They seem to have a huge blind spot in those areas.

How they can so easily spot and repudiate Christian and church bungling of spiritual and child sexual abuse, or of preachers who exploit their church members,
but fail to recognize the dangers of Muslim and homosexual militancy in American society and other regions of the world, I will never understand.

The blindness and naive nature by folks on those sorts of forums and blogs also extends to Roman Catholicism.

I have had a few Roman Catholic friends in the past, and they are fine people, but their church? No.

The Roman Catholic Church used to burn people at the stake, but one Roman Catholic individual recently thanked a (Protestant) blogger for bringing to everyone’s attention the anti-Roman Catholic commentary expressed by yet another blog (a Protestant one which was critical of perceived sinful RC behavior).

I mean, really? Some Protestant writing a critical comment about Roman Catholic behavior in general on a blog is thought somehow worse than the Roman Catholic Church in years past doing things such as:

-Covering up priest sexual abuse of children, or….

-Burning people to death for refusing to convert to Roman Catholicism, or for (Link to Wiki page): translating the Bible into English, or….

-The same Roman Catholic Church that historically has held the position that the Gospel (which includes sola fide) is anathema (to be damned)?

Off site link for more on that:
Roman Catholic Church condemns the Gospel itself

Seriously?

But you can’t easily point these issues of the Roman Catholic Church out at some forums or blogs – the ones who are into The Theology of Hurt Feelings – as it might offend a Roman Catholic somewhere.

The Roman Catholic Church historically persecuted a lot of people (see again: burning people to death at the stake for things like not converting to Catholicism), but criticism on the internet of their church is considered by some of them to be the height of persecution against Roman Catholics.

At any rate, I agree with the gentlemen quoted below.

There is most certainly a Theology of Hurt Feelings, where-in some Christians are so incredibly concerned with not offending various classes of sinners (e.g., hetero fornicators or active homosexuals), they think Christians speaking out publicly (on blogs, radio shows, in church services, etc) is “unloving” and therefore Christ would object to it.

The mind boggles at this. Jesus Christ died on the cross to pay for hetero fornication and homosexual sex acts, among other sins of humanity.

But these “lovey dovey” types want other Christians to pipe down about all this and act as though God is totaly fine with, and accepting of, all manner of sin.

The Bible presents a God who is not only loving, forgiving, and gracious, but also one who is Holy, just, and who does not tolerate sin, he does not like sin, and he won’t put up with sin indefinitely. God is not fine and dandy with sin.
And the Bible does in fact call out hetero pre-marital sex, and all homosexual sex acts, as sin.

I suspect that this well-meaning, yet wrong-headed, tendency to want to be Very Loving, Very Accepting,
and To Spare People’s Feelings, is partially responsible for what gave rise several years ago to the ridiculous,
non-sensical, un-Biblical habit of referring to fornicators as “Born Again Virgins,” “Spiritual Virgins,” and similar monikers (see links below, this post, for more about that).

(Link): Theologian Says ‘Love’ Is the New Cultural Apologetic Affirming Immoral Activities

Excerpts.

    • BY ALEX MURASHKO , CHRISTIAN POST REPORTER
    July 25, 2014|8:33 am

Advocates for behavior considered immoral by Christians who believe the Bible is God’s inerrant word, have successfully used the idea of “love” to affirm homoerotic behavior, to redefine marriage and family, to justify pedophilia, and as theologian and pastor James Emery White recently pointed out, to justify assisted suicide.

The problem, White writes in his blog, Church & Culture, is that the “love” described to normalize these behaviors is “not the biblical idea of love.”

Continue reading “Theologian Says ‘Love’ Is the New Cultural Apologetic Affirming Immoral Activities – Theology of Hurt Feelings – Why Christians Are Reluctant To Call Out Sexual Sin”

Christian Post Columnist And Wife Maintain Stereotype That Men and Women Cannot Be Friends, Should Not Meet Alone for Dinner in Public, and All Women Are Sexual Temptresses

Christian Post Columnist And Wife Maintain Stereotype That Men and Women Cannot Be Friends, Should Not Meet Alone for Dinner in Public, and All Women Are Sexual Temptresses
—————————————–
Notice from Christian Pundit blogger: There is coming a time when I will either not be blogging as frequently or not at all. Please read more about that here in this post (Link): Blog Break – May 2014 – and List of This Blog’s Best or Most Relevant Posts
—————————————-
No, married lady who wrote to the CP advice columnist below, you should not be concerned that your husband is talking to other women including un-married women.

It’s a nasty, stupid steretype held by Christians and Non Christians that single women are easy harlots who go about wanting to bed married men.

Why is the Christian Post even publishing this? It’s only perpetuating the negative biases against single women, or women in general.

Granted, this specific letter does not divulge what the martial states of the women in question are, but it still gets to the notion that ALL relationships have a sexual undercurrrent, or will.

It is possible for men and women to be platonic friends. It is possible for two men to be platonic friends with each other.

Jesus was recorded in the Bible as having spent time alone with women, including women who were known to be “easy” or who literally worked as prostitutes – and Jesus is to be your example if you are a Christian. If Jesus did not avoid alone time with women, what is your excuse?

The Bible also says Christians are not to bear false witness against their neighbors.

Every time Christians repeat the secular lie that women are sexual temptresses (with the logic being that men should avoid them), they are in effect bearing false witness against an entire group of people.

This also shatters a very popular evangelical, Reformed, and Baptist myth about sexual purity and marriage: these types of Christians frequently repeat (or used to, up until a few years ago, when they started jumping on the “bash virginity” band wagon), that if one waited until sex to have marriage, that the sex would be “mind blowing” (their usual word of choice), and it would, they implied, be regular – daily or weekly.

Hand in hand with that nonsense, is the idea that un-married people are having lots of sex outside of marriage. The idea being that married people are supposedly getting their oats sewn in marriage, that married sex is so satisfying, that they will not be the least tempted to boink anyone else.

Well… if Christians are sitting there worried that their husbands are meeting alone with other women on business dinner dates and the like, and these Christian advice columnists are telling them “damn right you should be worried, that is how affairs start” then these ideas of marriage being a magical protective shield from sexual sin is totally bogus, is it not?

This reminds me of the blow back over the post by the Christian lady who shamed other women in her post called “My Husband Doesn’t Need to See Your Boobs.”

If you have not heard of this latest controversy in blog land which broke out last week, or the week before, about a Christian woman who, in her blog post, commanded other women to cover their cleavage adequately during bikini season, you can read about it here (off site link – this is a rebuttal to that woman’s post): My Boobs Are Not A Threat To Your Marriage (By Rachel Kramer Bussel)

The woman who wrote the “boobs” post was treating all other women as her enemies, as though all women are sexual temptresses out to turn her man’s head and make him stumble – she was holding other women accountable for what her husband may say, think, or do, rather than holding him squarely accountable.

I am a hetero lady. One of my movie actor crushes remains Hugh Jackman. I guess Christians don’t care every time I see Mr. Jackman in a movie or a movie poster – particularly in those shirtless shots showing off his fine chiseled features – I sure do come close to stumbling.

Actor Hugh Jackman
Actor Hugh Jackman

Why aren’t Christians engaging on a large scale letter writing campaign to encourage Mr. Jackman to keep fully clothed, for my sake? I guess Christians don’t care about a woman’s sexual purity, or think that men should be held responsible for causing a woman to stumble. Sigh.

Without further ado, here is the link that prompted me to write this post to start with:

(Link): Should I Be Concerned My Husband Spends Time With Other Women?

    BY JOE BEAM,
    CP GUEST COLUMNIST
    July 4, 2014|8:32 am

    QUESTION: Joe, my husband works with several women, and occasionally they will have lunch meetings (usually as a group).
    I was okay with this until a friend told me recently that she saw my husband and one of his co-workers at lunch (in a very trendy lunch spot) and that they looked “too comfortable” for her liking.
    She said they laughed, looked at iPhone photos, and seemed to be socializing more than working. Should I be concerned my husband spends time with other women?

Here is in part how the guy answered this woman’s concerns:

    Second, I personally think that in most situations it is a bad idea for any married person to have lunch with a person of the opposite gender. Groups are one thing; lunch with just one other is another.

    Every month I conduct a workshop for marriages in trouble. While difficulties range from controlling behavior to in-law problems to fighting over money and more, by far the most common marriage problem we work with is infidelity.

    Typically, unfaithfulness does not occur because someone looks for a sexual partner, but stems from two good people crossing boundaries.

    They become friends. Then the friendship deepens as they begin to share their thoughts, histories, frustrations, dreams, and feelings.

    They erect no barriers because they do not intend to do anything wrong. As I said, good people living good lives. However, somewhere along the line their openness and transparency with each other develops emotions much stronger than friendship.

    … In his organization, The Lampo Group, my friend Dave Ramsey refuses to allow one man and one woman to work together without others present. Why? Dave is wise enough to know how many wonderful people wind up in trouble from such seemingly innocent beginnings.

Hmm, so, you mean to say that married people can only hang out in groups? I’m sorry, but I totally disagree with the thinking that to avoid fornication, one should totally avoid the opposite sex at all times, or never, ever be alone with one.

See my other posts on this topic:

(Link): Jesus Christ was not afraid to meet alone with known Prostitutes / Steven Furtick and Elevation Church Perpetuating Anti Singles Bias – ie, Single Women are Supposedly Sexual Temptresses, All Males Can’t Control Their Sex Drives – (but this view conflicts with evangelical propaganda that married sex is great and frequent)

(Link): Hey Ed Stetzer: Opposite Gender Friendships Are Not Sinful – Ed Stetzer’s Advice: “Avoid Any Hint” – More Like: Re Enforce UnBiblical Stereotypes About Men, Women, Sex, and Singles

(Link): How the Sexual Revolution Ruined Friendship – Also: If Christians Truly Believed in Celibacy and Virginity, they would stop adhering to certain sexual and gender stereotypes that work against both

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

(Link): Focus on the Family advice columnist perpetuates stereotypes about single women

Mother Entitlement – Selfish, Self-Centered Mothers Complain that They Are Not Getting ENOUGH Mother Worship from Culture, Church, or Family on Mother’s Day and Some Moms Complain About Churches Showing Compassion to Childless Women

Mother Entitlement – Selfish, Self-Centered Mothers Complain that They Are Not Getting ENOUGH Mother Worship from Culture, Church, or Family on Mother’s Day and Some Moms Complain About Churches Showing Compassion to Childless Women

I remember seeing posts like this (see link below) last year at Mother’s Day – there are actually mothers out there, including Christian and Mormon ones, who feel that their churches do not do ENOUGH to honor them on Mommy’s Day.

Some mothers I’ve seen go further than that and insult or mock childless (or childfree) women in the comments of blogs that ask people to be more sensitive to the feelings of non mothers.

These bitter, hate-filled mothers spit out, on such blogs, comments such as, “Screw the childless women, what about me, I work hard as a mom all year and DESERVE some recognition.”

Yep, they are that blunt and nasty about it in their comments. (I have a real sample below, with a link to said blog, but it’s by a guy, not a lady, but it’s representative of the type of crap angry mothers who whine about being under-appreciated leave on blogs).

No, I am not exaggerating, I have indeed seen a smattering of such vitriolic comments by mothers on various blogs the last two years, even on Christian blogs by women who claim they are Christian!

Even though churches WORSHIP motherhood 24 hours a day, 365 days a year and hype it up on Mother’s Day itself even more so, these selfish mommy dolts think churches should worship mommy-hood EVEN MORE than they already do.

Meanwhile, never-married, childless, divorced, widowed, and childfree adult women get absolutely NO HOLIDAYS in THEIR honor, so why should I care if mommies don’t feel honored enough on Mother’s Day?

Some mothers are the most selfish, hateful people on the face of the planet.

Some mothers expect and demand everyone around them in their families and at church to make a big fuss over them.

I thought motherhood was supposed to be its own reward?

If motherhood is so lofty, so noble, so high and mighty, and it supposedly makes a woman totally content, and you buy into Christian swill about mom-hood being a woman’s only, or most, godly role in life, why do you, little Ms. Entitled Mommy, need or want others to validate the position for you, by throwing you parties and handing you carnations in church services?

I thought Christians said parenthood automatically makes a person more godly and giving than being single and child-free, or it works out that way over a period of years?

That is not so, because I see many mothers online whining like little children that they don’t get enough attention and presents from their spouses or preachers on the holiday.

I cannot believe how self absorbed and self centered some mothers are.

Here is a link to a blog page by a Mormon woman –
Note that while this woman is a Mormon but her points sound about identical to the average Baptist, Reformed, or Evangelical women I see online; just swap out “Mormon” with the word “Christian” and it reads the same:

(Link): Taking Mom Out of Mother’s Day – Have We Gone Too Far?

Excerpts:

    In a desire to be sensitive toward women who are unable to have children I’m concerned that, perhaps, on Mother’s Day, we may be going a bit too far. Not that we can ever be too compassionate in acknowledging the pain that surely accompanies the inability to have children, but at the same time we shouldn’t need to pull back in giving the much needed praise, encouragement and recognition of Moms’, who are actually raising, or have raised, children — and all that that entails.

  • …In order to be politically sensitive, in all circumstances, where the issue of how women fulfill their role as mothers comes into play, it is my observation that we are becoming increasingly comfortable with relegating actual Moms’ to the back of the bus — even on Mother’s Day. And frankly, that kind of bothers me.

Here was the comment I left on her page (but it did not show up last I checked):

    Never-married and childless women such as myself get ZERO holidays for us. None. There are no cards for us. No cakes, no brunches.

  • Churches never have a “recognize and celebrate mature, celibate, never married, childless women” type of service, so I have a very hard time feeling sorry for mothers who feel their churches or communities are not doing enough to honor motherhood.

Continue reading “Mother Entitlement – Selfish, Self-Centered Mothers Complain that They Are Not Getting ENOUGH Mother Worship from Culture, Church, or Family on Mother’s Day and Some Moms Complain About Churches Showing Compassion to Childless Women”

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)”