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

Christian Egalitarian Singles Blog – A Blog Worth Bookmarking

You may want to visit and bookmark this blog – I think this blog is worth checking out and re-visiting (so you may want to book mark it):

(Link): Christian Egalitarian Singles

It’s a blog that sometimes addresses the same topics I cover here. But it’s much nicer in tone with no profanity.

Here are a few samples of topics from their blog:

(Link):   Singles are Marginalized in the Church Because the Church is Focused on Marriage and the Family

(Link):   Singles are Marginalized in the Church Because Marriage is Seen as a Cure for Sexual Temptation

(Link): Singles are Marginalized in the Church Because the Church has Placed Too Much Emphasis on Sex

(Link):  Singles are Marginalized in the Church Because Single Women Have No Husband to Submit to.

(Link):  The Church Marginalizes Singles Because Singles are Forced to Develop Skills and Traits Traditionally Associated With the Opposite Gender and Become Independent

(Link):  Singles are Marginalized in the Church Because of the Doctrine of Male Headship

There are other posts on their blog. That is just to give you an idea.

Gender Complementarianism – A General Response – from a Former Gender Complementarian Who Is Still A Conservative

Gender Complementarianism – A General Response – from a Former Gender Complementarian Who Is Still A Conservative

I was once a gender complementarian. ‘Tis true.

My old-fashioned Christian parents were gender complementarians and brought me up to assume that comp (gender complementarianism) is true.

The churches we went to were complementarian; the man was supposed to be “head of the household,” the wife was supposed to be passive and submissive; women were not supposed to hold “authoritative” or leadership positions within a church.

The Christian books and articles we had around the house were written from a comp perspective.

I was thoroughly indoctrinated in complementarianism from the time I was a kid.

I know complementarianism very well. I understand complementarianism.

I do not intend for this post to be an in-depth response, biblical or otherwise, to gender complementarianism. This is just a general response.

If you are a gender complementarian – as I once was – you are likely a conservative who takes the Bible literally, and you want to please God.

Furthermore, you have probably been told or taught…

-in or by complementarian materials, churches, preachers, or family members, that any other way of interpreting the Bible concerning passages about gender, gender roles, headship, submission, and marriage, are all “liberal” or are “playing loose with the Scripture.”

-There is only one “right” way to interpret the Bible, and by golly, it is the gender complementarian way, which is the only true “conservative” method, and hence, it’s the more “godly,” or “God Honoring,” method, and which takes the Scripture at “face value”

-Further, this reasoning goes, if you reject the comp hermeneutical method of the Bible, you will slide into secular, left wing, feminism and begin doing things that would make most any conservative recoil, such as start supporting abortion on demand and stop shaving your armpits; you will burn your bras.
You will join a liberal denomination that ordains openly lesbian lady preachers. You will want to grow a mustache because you want to be “just like a man.”
You may even start punching helpless, weak, defenseless kittens for fun.

Now, as a woman who is more than likely right wing, conservative, and adheres to traditional values, you are horrified or in deep disagreement with left wingers, the Democratic Party, and liberal social values (such as support of LGBT causes, abortion being legal, etc).

I get all that because I used to be just like you. In some ways, I still am very much like you, only minus a belief in complementarianism.

Continue reading “Gender Complementarianism – A General Response – from a Former Gender Complementarian Who Is Still A Conservative”

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”

How Do We Solve a Problem Like the Singles? by R. Kilgore

How Do We Solve a Problem Like the Singles?  by Rachel Kilgore

Before I get to the link to the essay by Kilgore, which is hosted at MOS (Mortificiation of Spin / specifically, Aimee Byrd’s blog, ‘Housewife Theologian’):

For years and years on this blog, here on “Christian Pundit” blog, I have been explaining over and over again that most evangelical, Baptist, Reformed, and Fundamentalist Christian denominations, churches, and groups IGNORE adults singles – the older a single you are, the worse it is – the more ignored you are.

I have also commented on other people’s blogs under the Christian Pundit blog name, and under other names, alerting Christians to how horribly American Christians treat adult singles. I have Tweeted about it.

When Christians aren’t ignoring us older singles, and they do manage to notice our existence, many Christians shame us for being single. They insult us. They try to make us feel like we are losers (seriously, see (Link): this post, (Link): this post, (Link): this post), (Link): this post – I could cite many more examples from my blog of anti-Singles bias by Christians, but that should suffice.)

I used to be what is called a gender complementarian.  I am not interested in spending a lot of time explaining what that means.

I am no longer a gender complementarian.

I am linking you here to a post about adult singleness at a blog (the one by A. Byrd) owned by what I would term “soft gender complementarians.”

Continue reading “How Do We Solve a Problem Like the Singles? by R. Kilgore”

The Conservative, Christian Case for Working Women by J. Merritt

The Conservative, Christian Case for Working Women by J. Merritt 

Some of the few complementarian Christians I follow on social media did not like this article at all. They seem to find any criticism of their position, or any suggestion of other options for women, to be a great affront to complementarianism itself, or to God or the Bible. Why do they feel their movement is so fragile?

Christian women who reject complementarianism – some of them may go by various labels, such as “Jesus feminists,” or “egalitarians,” or “mutualists,” don’t seek to limit women the way complementarians do. Non-complementarian men and women do not mind if a woman chooses to be a stay at home wife and mother.

However, complementarians do not truly afford all women, and especially not non-complementarian, women this same courtesy.

Much complementarian content will pay “lip service” to respect a woman’s right to choose to work outside the home and so on, but often times, from what I’ve seen, that very same site, or authors on some other complementarian site, will cry and clutch their pearls in sorrow or grief that more and more Christian women are choosing to stay single, not have children, and/or to work outside the home.

Notice that in this article, at one point, complementarian Owen Strachan, who is a spokes-head for complementarian group CBMW, comes right out and says egalitarianism, or any departure from complementarianism, is supposedly a sin.

Egalitarians are all about giving women more choices, telling them to go after their dreams, and doing whatever they feel God has led them to do.

Complementarians really chaff at that. Complementarians want women in boxes. I wrote a much older post saying that (Link): this is one reason of several I really have been struggling with holding on to the Christian faith. I was raised in a Christian family that bought into many of these complementarian ideas, and it’s not something that worked out well for me in my life.

(Link): The Conservative, Christian Case for Working Women by J. Merritt

Excerpts:

  • An evangelical Christian and avowed feminist argues that God intends every woman to work.
  • The final episode of Leave it To Beaver aired in June of 1963, but many conservative Christians still promote a vision of womanhood reminiscent of June Cleaver.  When Tobin Grant, political-science professor at Southern Illinois University, analyzed General Social Survey data from 2006, he found that nearly half of evangelical Christians agreed with this statement: “It is much better for everyone involved if the man is the achiever outside the home and the woman takes care of the home and family.”
  • Forty-one percent agreed that “a preschool child is likely to suffer if his or her mother works.” For these evangelicals, a woman’s place in the world is to get married, bear children, and support her breadwinning husband.
  • Katelyn Beaty—the managing editor of Christianity Today,America’s largest evangelical Christian publication—has set out to change this notion of gender. Her new book, A Woman’s Place, claims to reveal “the surprising truth about why God intends every woman to work.”
  • This declaration may surprise many of her magazine’s 80,000 print subscribers and 5 million monthly website visitors. And it may also rouse many of her fellow evangelicals who believe her ideas defy the Bible’s clear teaching, if not qualifying as outright heresy. While Beaty knows criticism may be coming her way, she is making a conservative Christian case for working women.

Continue reading “The Conservative, Christian Case for Working Women by J. Merritt”

Eight Ways to Rethink the Conversation About Singleness by K. Kreminski

Eight Ways to Rethink the Conversation About Singleness by K. Kreminski

  • PREFACE: my blog stalker, John Morgan, is probably going to take this link I spotted today and share it on his own blog, reference it on his own blog, or visit this other blog to leave a comment there.
  • The guy apparently takes content from my blog without giving me credit, which is not only dishonest or unfair, but it’s hypocritical, because in the past he deemed me untrustworthy for not stating my real name on my blog or posts.
  • If you think I am untrustworthy for using a pen name, or for whatever reason, stop taking any links, content, and ideas from my blog to use on your own blog, or to run over to other sites I link to in order to leave comments there. You are being a huge hypocrite.
  • Please see (Link): this post for more on John Morgan or (Link): this post. Thank you.

This blog post by Kreminski about singleness (link and excerpt much farther below) hits on several points I’ve been raising on my own blog for the last 3 or 4 years:

Christians are already too marriage focused, and in their defensive posture of saving culture and marriage from what they perceive as threats (such as homosexual marriage and liberalism), they hype marriage to the exclusion of singleness.

Some conservatives and Christians go so far as to denigrate singleness in order to extol marriage, something the Bible never does. The Bible says in 1 Corinthians 7 it is better to stay single than marry, and that marriage does nothing but bring people problems in life.

I have also noted on my blog many times before that the demographics in our nation (and others) have shifted with more people staying single over their lifetimes, or, if they marry, they are marrying at much older ages than they used to. Most conservative expressions of Christianity, however, continue to cater to married couples.

Out of the Christians who do notice this demographic shift, they shame singles for being singles and promote something called “early marriage.” These Christians shame and scold Christians to get married, rather than just accept them in their single status.

In previous blog posts, I have also discussed what I termed “Married People Privilege.” Married people, especially ones with children, like to think that their lives are ten times more difficult than that of childless singles.

Continue reading “Eight Ways to Rethink the Conversation About Singleness by K. Kreminski”

All The Single Ladies by Rebecca Traister – Various Links to Reviews or Commentary About the Book and Its Issues

All The Single Ladies by Rebecca Traister  – Various Links to Reviews or Commentary About the Book and Its Issues

There are currently a million links about the new book “All the Single Ladies” by Rebecca Traister

Up til now, I have made individual blog posts about that book – reviews, commentaries that reference it, or interviews with its author.

I no longer feel like devoting that much effort into blogging about it, so here is a lone thread crammed with links about it.

This post may be edited in the future to add new links about this book as I find them.

Some of these links might only be tangentially related to the book. I only have one life to live, and I don’t want to spend it blogging about this one book.

It sometimes takes me a long time to put a single blog post together – especially hunting through the “Categories and Tags” area of the blog area, having to skim through a long list of tags. It’s a time consuming pain in the ass.

One thing you will notice in many of these articles is how often Traister points out that men do not usually face as MUCH social stigma or penalties as often in life -or employment- as single women do for being single. Which is true.

As I have written of before, (Link): Men are not hounded, judged, or shamed nearly as much as women are for remaining celibate, single, and/or childless.

The fact that a woman author had to write a book discussing singleness among women speaks to how much singleness is different for women than it is for men – it is far more socially acceptable (and among Christians) for a man to remain single and childless than it is for a woman.

Do some segments of culture harass men over being single or kid-free or question their manliness? Yes.

I am not saying that life or church is a cake-walk for never married or childless or childfree men. But as a matter of comparison, on a scale of one to ten, with one being “awesome and great” and ten being “terrible and hellish” single and childless men get treated to about a, I don’t know, a four on that scale, while women get a nine or a ten.

Because women have vaginas, they are expected to have babies. There is far more stigma attached for a woman to be single and without children than there is a for a man, because church and society do not expect having babies to be necessary for a man to be fully a man socially or biologically. Not near as much as it is for women.

Women get pressured for more often and more severely to marry and have babies than men ever do or ever will.

I am not saying men get ZERO pressure, only that they get a 1 or a 2 in pressure, where-as women get a 9 or 10 in pressure on the scale of marriage and natalism.

It is far easier to drift thru life as a single bachelor dude with no kids than it is for a woman to go through life with no husband or no kids – you won’t get judged as much by family, church, politicians, conservative think tanks, over this stuff as a woman does over it. And it’s sexist bullshit.

Here are the links (more might be added to this post in the future as I find them):

(Link):  The Single American Woman via NY Magazine

(Link):  Review: Rebecca Traister’s All the Single Ladies is a reassuring balm to the rhetoric that surrounds us 

  • Yet in spite of these harsh truths, All the Single Ladies is celebratory, the stories of real women who are single a reassuring balm to the rhetoric that surrounds us. Traister asks, by outlining the ways women can succeed when their societies support their choices, to consider what we really mean when we tell women to marry for better or worse.
  • Her argument – that our public policies are what need to change, not the rate at which we marry or the age we do it – prioritizes equal pay over joint accounts, better health-care provisions over shared plans, comprehensive child care instead of Mommy-and-Me clichés, and other tangible solutions instead of abstract platitudes.

(Link):  Rebecca Traister’s ‘All The Single Ladies’ is a singularly triumphant work

(Link):   Single Women are Quietly Remaking Our World

  • By Emily Simon
  • “Single women are taking up space in a world that was not designed for them.”
  • That sort of statement – at once radical and obvious – is characteristic of Rebecca Traister: a happily married mother of two who is currently encouraging us to recognize the cultural and political power of single women.

Continue reading “All The Single Ladies by Rebecca Traister – Various Links to Reviews or Commentary About the Book and Its Issues”

Don’t Underestimate Single Women Voters by A. Smith

Don’t Underestimate Single Women Voters by A. Smith

The impetus for Smith’s essay is the book “All the Single Ladies,” by Traister, which I have posted about in several posts already such as (Link): this one or (Link): this one.

Much of what this author, Smith, says about single women in regards to the Republican Party -that Republicans need to start paying attention to and validating single women and their concerns- can also be said of conservative Christians.

Conservative Christians continue to either ignore single women or to attack them for being single, in spite of the fact that Paul wrote in 1 Corinthians 7 that it is better for a person to remain single.

There is nothing wrong with a person wanting to get married, BUT, conservative Christians need to stop acting as though marriage is a cure for society, or is the norm or the default. By doing so, they marginalize singleness and single adults.

(Link): Don’t Underestimate Single Women Voters by A. Smith

Excerpts:

  • …Writer Rebecca Traister—author of the new book All the Single Ladies—explains that the rise of single women is “a radical upheaval, a national reckoning with massive social and political implications” as single women outnumber married women for the first time in American history. Marriage has shifted from an expectation in a woman’s early 20s to a life goal saved for someday (if ever).

Continue reading “Don’t Underestimate Single Women Voters by A. Smith”

Stop Assuming Dads With Daughters Must Be Disappointed by R. P. Payne

Stop Assuming Dads With Daughters Must Be Disappointed by R. P. Payne

I’ve never understood men who are obsessed with sons (with having one – with being upset if their wife turns out to be pregnant with a girl rather than a boy). Or mothers who are obsessed with having daughters.

(Link): Stop Assuming Dads With Daughters Must Be Disappointed by R. P. Payne

Excerpts:

  • When my mom gets asked about our family, she’ll say she has “four grown children.” She omits the fact that all four of those children are daughters.
  • “I’m just tired of it,” she said. “The dismayed facial expressions, the pity for your dad. I’d rather just not go down that path.”
  • Fathers of daughters—even one, but especially three, four, or more—know this reaction all too well. Corey Widmer, pastor of Third Church in Richmond, Virginia, is the father to four young girls. He noticed that “90 percent of the time, when I tell people I have four girls, the reaction is negative. If it is positive, it’s usually because they came from a family of all girls.”

  • We assume, on some level, that having so many daughters must be a disappointment for dads. Ask nearly any of these fathers, though, and it’s far from the truth.

(( click here to read the rest ))

Non-Romantic Nearness, The Billy Graham Rule, and Pope John Paul’s Friendship With a Married Woman

Non-Romantic Nearness, The Billy Graham Rule, and Pope John Paul’s Friendship With a Married Woman

Apparently, Pope John Paul II had a long term, platonic friendship with a married woman named Anna-Teresa Tymieniecka.

First, I will list an assortment of news articles summarizing the former Pope’s relationship with this woman –

And then I will link to (much farther down this page) a really good blog post by a Christian, Dan J. Brennan, who criticizes other Christians who sexualize all male-female relationships or who discourage male-female friendship. He is against the BGR (Billy Graham Rule), which teaches Christian men to sexually objectify ALL women, even celibate Christian women and keep single women at arm’s length.

(Link):  Pope John Paul II secret letters: Pontiff’s deep affection for Anna-Teresa Tymieniecka revealed

Feb 15, 2016

  • Letters shown to the BBC by the National Library of Poland have revealed an intense 30-year relationship between former Pope, John Paul II, and philosopher, Anna-Teresa Tymieniecka. There is no suggestion the late pontiff broke his vow of celibacy with Tymieniecka, a married woman.

Continue reading “Non-Romantic Nearness, The Billy Graham Rule, and Pope John Paul’s Friendship With a Married Woman”

Christian Radio Host Busted for Slapping Woman’s ‘Butt Cheek’ Inside Target Restroom – And How This Conflicts With Preacher Doug Wilson’s Propriety of Rape Commentary

Christian Radio Host Busted for Slapping Woman’s ‘Butt Cheek’ Inside Target Restroom – And How This Conflicts With Preacher Doug Wilson’s Propriety of Rape Commentary

First, here is a link to the news story with some excerpts, followed by some observations by me:

(Link): Christian Radio Host Busted for Slapping Woman’s ‘Butt Cheek’ Inside Target Restroom by B P Markus 

Excerpts:

  • Feb 17, 2016
  • A  customer, (Link): The Blade reports.
  • Mark Wayne Howington, 52, was arrested Thursday and charged with assault after a woman said she entered the restroom in the Ohio Target store and had it pulled open by Howington. As he passed her, he allegedly “slapped her butt cheek really hard,” according to a police report obtained by The Blade.
  • The woman, Debra Piechowski, told ABC13 she was at a Target store with her niece in Toledo looking for a birthday and Valentine’s Day gift for her husband.
  • Howington co-hosts a morning show on (Link): Proclaim FM, a Christian radio station.
  • She went to security but the man who slapped her left really quickly.

Before I tie this in with pastor Doug Wilson (much farther below), I wanted to reiterate a few points I normally make about such stories when I post them.

I don’t know if this Howington guy is married or not, or a father. If he is either one or both, I can tell you this is another example of how being married or a parent are not indicators of maturity or godliness, as many Christians say they are. Nor is being married a guarantee a man is not going to pull sexual shenanigans on people who aren’t his wife.

Married people also sexually sin at times. Sexual sin is not the lone province of single adults.

Not only am I, a never married adult not having sex (I have chosen to stay celibate so far into my life), but I don’t go around doing things like slapping other people on their butts.

Continue reading “Christian Radio Host Busted for Slapping Woman’s ‘Butt Cheek’ Inside Target Restroom – And How This Conflicts With Preacher Doug Wilson’s Propriety of Rape Commentary”

Baptizing “Masculinity”: The Real Reason Men are Leaving the Church by Luke T. Harrington

Baptizing “Masculinity”: The Real Reason Men are Leaving the Church

The link to the page by Luke T. Harrington is farther down the page.

Churches sure do invest a lot of time investigating why men are supposedly fed up with church and churches then bend themselves into pretzels trying to cater to men to retain them.

If churches cared as much about women and appealing to them, perhaps more and more women would not be abandoning churches or the faith (I’ve seen studies come out the last few years saying more and more Christian women are either leaving churches, or leaving the faith itself, because they are not being welcomed due to their gender).

Churches need to be just as concerned they may be offending or excluding women as they are men, but they don’t. Most of them remain stubbornly fixated on soothing the egos of injured males, but don’t care how they are hurting or alienating women.

Hyping “masculinity” to appeal to men alienates a lot of women.

One way in which this occurs is that churches think the way to build up the masculine is to mock anything and everything feminine, so by extension, Christian women, who are taught to express so-called (stereotypical) feminine traits in the extreme (be nurturing, passive, quiet, sweet, etc) end up feeling even more like trash.

The very characteristics Christian women are told by pastors to possess (such as be passive, gentle, meek) are the very same ones that the churches denigrate week in and week out, and that they try to stamp out in churches, and at that, in order to attract men.

This is not a winning strategy for keeping women active and involved in a church.

It also turns off “normal” men, the ones who are maybe Non-Christian, secure in their manhood, who find the super “cave man,” manly man antics of some churches totally bizarre and irrelevant.

(Link): Baptizing “Masculinity”: The Real Reason Men are Leaving the Church by Luke T. Harrington

Excerpts:

  • …The dominant narrative at the moment is that, while church attendance is down across the board, men in particular are staying home on Sunday mornings ( (Link): some stats here). And while there has been much hand-wringing over this reality, there has, to my knowledge, been very little serious introspection over it.

Continue reading “Baptizing “Masculinity”: The Real Reason Men are Leaving the Church by Luke T. Harrington”

The Islamic Billy Graham Rule – Unmarried Muslim People Are Punished For Being Alone Together

The Islamic Billy Graham Rule – Unmarried Muslim People Are Punished For Being Alone Together

Just when I think I’m done blogging on this blog for the day (and I do have other stuff to do off-line), I keep seeing pertinent stuff show up all over the internet.

This turned up on my Twitter feed:

(Link): Indonesia: Police Beat Couple with Canes for Sharia Crime of Being Alone Together

  • Islamic sharia law was enforced with canes once again in Indonesia this week, including the cane beatings of a man and woman whose “crime” was being alone together in a guest room.
  • This was no crazed mob action, either, as (Link): CNN reports the sentence was handed down by a judge, and imposed by a special police unit “charged with finding people who violate sharia law.”
  • “The form of Islamic law is enforced in a very strict way in the area, including prohibiting unmarried people of different genders from being alone together,” CNN observes.

This totally reminds me of the insipid, sexist, ineffective, stupid, anti-singles Christian “Billy Graham Rule,” which I have blogged about before here (this view seems to turn up more in Christian gender complementarianism than it does Christian gender egalitarianism):

Except under the Christian BGR (Billy Graham Rule), you will get isolated, “tsk tsked,” or suspected of being a slut, rather than get whipped with a cane.

Also, and this is kind of funny in a sad way, Christians are stricter on this rule than the Muslims, in that they also look askance at single women who are alone with MARRIED men.

Single Christian women are doomed to live and die alone, because Christians who are inappropriately applying the “avoid even the appearance of evil” verse are ostracizing single women from every one, from other singles and from the marrieds. Similar the Islamic sharia rule that prohibits singles from being together.

Another dumb, oblivious, and naive thing about the BGR is that often times, married Christians end up having affairs with other married Christians.

Yet, I don’t usually see the same level of paranoia from Christians about married Christian women hanging out with married Christian men as I do the warnings about men being around un-married (single) women.

Here are some more links about the story (off site):

(Link):  The whipping girl: Screaming in agony, a woman collapses as she and a man are caned under Sharia law in Indonesia merely for being ‘seen in close proximity’ to each other without being married

  • The woman was accused of getting too close to a fellow university student
  • As the pair are unmarried, she had committed an offence under Sharia law
  • She was brought to a mosque where she was caned in front of a crowd
  • The woman received five lashes and at end had to be taken to hospital

(Link):  Crowd cheers as woman is brutally caned for being seen near man who wasn’t her husband

  • Dec 29, 2015
  • by Ruth Halkon
  • Nur Elita, 20, had to be taken away in an ambulance after being beaten in public outside her mosque under Sharia law
  • A crowd cheered as a young woman screamed in agony as she was repeatedly caned in punishment for being in ‘close proximity’ to a man she wasn’t married to.Nur Elita, 20, had to be removed from Baiturrahumim Mosque in Banda Aceh, Indonesia, in an ambulance after she was brutally punished for allegedly showing affection towards another university student.Under Sharia law, men and women who are unmarried and unrelated are not allowed to get too close.
  • Dec 31 2015
  • Officials in Banda Aceh, Indonesia, held a public caning Monday. At the end of the punishment, she collapsed on the floor and was carried off the stage into an ambulance and rushed to hospital. Indonesia enforce strict Islamic laws including prohibiting unmarried people from having sex.
  • Cheers went up as a masked man caned the woman, as a punishment for being “seen in close proximity” to a man she wasn’t married to, under Sharia law.
  • The young Acehnese woman is caned in public, a punishment under the Islamic sharia law.
  • Banda Aceh’s Deputy Mayor Zainal Arifin, who stood among the crowd, explained to bystanders that the punishments were meant to be a lesson for all and not simply entertainment.
  • After her ordeal, 23-year-old Wahyudi Saputra, the man whom she was alleged to have been in close proximity with breached was also striked. “And also, those who have been convicted are reminded not to repeat the same mistakes”, he added.

(Link):  Woman accused of ‘affectionate contact’ with man caned in Indonesia

—————————–

Related Posts:

(Link): Similar Views of Women Between Christian Gender Complmentarians and Islamic Group ISIS

(Link): Extremist Muslims Like Family Values Too – Muslims are joining ISIS / ISIL (extremist Islamic group) because they believe it supports “Family Values” – When Christianity and Islam sound alike

(Link):  Evangelicals are Rethinking Friendship and Sexuality 

(Link):  Non-Romantic Nearness, The Billy Graham Rule, and Pope John Paul’s Friendship With a Married Woman

(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):  Patriarchy tends to sexualize all male / female relationships (article via Junia Project blog)

Link):  Southern Baptists Pushing Early Marriage, Baby Making – Iranians Pushing Mandatory Motherhood – When Christians Sound Like Muslims

(Link): Why Christians Need To Stress Spiritual Family Over the Nuclear Family – People with no flesh and blood relations including Muslims who Convert to Christianity – Also: First World, White, Rich People Problems

(Link): Modesty Teachings – When Mormons Sound like Christians and Gender Complementarians

(Link): Mormons and Christians Make Family, Marriage, Having Children Into Idols

(Link):  Topics: Friendship is Possible / Sexualization By Culture Of All Relationships

(Link):  Relationships Of Welcome, Not Fear (Re: How Sexist Christian Views Marginalize and Isolate Adult, Single Women and Maintain Other Stereotypes About Adult 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):  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):  Why So Much Fornication – Because Christians Have No Expectation of Sexual

(Link):  Pervy Preacher from Seattle who teaches men “to objectify women, by his over emphasis of sexualization of women and subservience” (Re Driscoll) Purity

(Link):  Brotherly Love: Christians and Male-Female Friendships

 

48 Things Men / Women Hear in a Lifetime (That Are Bad For Everyone)

48 Things Men / Women Hear in a Lifetime (That Are Bad For Everyone)

(Link): 48 Things Men Hear In A Lifetime (That Are Bad For Everyone) 

  • Watch 70 years of “be a real man” in under two minutes.

(Link):  48 Things Women Hear In A Lifetime (That Men Just Don’t)

  • Watch 80 years of subtle sexism in under two minutes.
  • Don’t be a slut, but definitely don’t be too prude. Don’t be so emotional, but don’t be a cold-hearted bitch. Prioritize your family over your career, but are you sure you want to be a stay-at-home mom?

Continue reading “48 Things Men / Women Hear in a Lifetime (That Are Bad For Everyone)”

Men Are Attracted to Nonconformist Women (Scientific American article)

Men Are Attracted to Nonconformist Women

(Link):  Men Are Attracted to Nonconformist Women

  • The popular idea that women should try to conform or be submissive around men is outdated
  •  by Matthew Hutson
  • September 1, 2015
  • Men are often advised to stand out from the crowd to attract women—there can be only one alpha male.
  • Women, on the other hand, are told not to be too weird.
  • This advice has sunk in: a 2006 study found that when in a mating mind-set, men become less conformist and women become more so.
  • A paper in the June issue of Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, however, reports that we have it all wrong.

Continue reading “Men Are Attracted to Nonconformist Women (Scientific American article)”

Our Bodies Were Not Made for Sex by T. Swann

Our Bodies Were Not Made for Sex by T. Swann

Very interesting editorial.

(Link): Our Bodies Were Not Made for Sex by T. Swann

Excerpts:

  • The Genesis account of creation reveals that God created only one species of human. He said, “Let us make human,” and not “Let us make humans.” What essentially makes one a human then, is being created in God’s image, in God’s “likeness” (Gen.1:26-27). What defines us then is the ruah (Hebrew word for spirit) of God in our bodies (Gen.2:7).
  • God is a spirit. Therefore, when he said, “Let us make man in our own image,” he wasn’t speaking of bodies, but of essence.
  • God created the human body out of dust, a decomposable substance, but what is really human—the soul—is indecomposable. This is the God-like property that dwells in humans. The body is really the “house” or “clothing” of the soul.
  • So if we are the same underneath the “clothing” of our bodies, in our souls, why are so many arguments for gender hierarchy based on that outer covering?

Continue reading “Our Bodies Were Not Made for Sex by T. Swann”

Patriarchy vs. Single Women in the Bible by B. and T. Jennings

Patriarchy vs. Single Women in the Bible by B. and T. Jennings

(Link): Patriarchy vs. Single Women in the Bible by B. and T. Jennings

This page I am linking to and excerpting below is critiquing one that was arguing that single women should stay at home.

The authors are addressing the author of the other page, a woman who explains she is still living at home and not going to college because she believed she was following biblical teachings for women.

Excerpts:

  • A response to an article regarding the reasons as to why a young Christian girl was not in college, but instead was staying under her father till marriage

Continue reading “Patriarchy vs. Single Women in the Bible by B. and T. Jennings”

One Reason You May Want to Visit My Twitter Account Sometimes

One Reason You May Want to Visit My Twitter Account

(Link): My Twitter Page

I don’t care how many followers I have on Twitter.

This post is not about driving up my Twitter followers.

You can book mark my Twitter page and visit it every so often (that is, you don’t have to follow me, if you bookmark the page and visit it, it will not drive up my follower numbers).

Why would you want to visit my Twitter page?

Because I sometimes come across a lot of news stories there that I do not have the time or interest in blogging about here.

I come across many stories about child abuse by parents, married people who commit crimes, new trends in dating and marriage, why people quit church, articles about sexism (I basically tweet about the same stuff I blog about here), etc, and I simply cannot keep up with it all.

It’s much easier for me to re-tweet news stories I see on twitter than to fire up this blog, and make a post about everything.

One of the annoying things about this blog is I have to not just write up the material, but I have to add categories or tags to each post, which I tire of doing. It’s ten times faster and easier to send a tweet to an article than to write it up here.

So, you may want to consider visiting my Twitter page. The right side of this blog, towards the bottom, shows my latest tweets, but it only goes up to the last 15 or 20 and does not show them all.

You don’t have to join Twitter and “follow” me on there – you can just bookmark the page and visit once in a while. There may be links to articles on there that I do not blog about here.

(Link): My Twitter Page

At some point in the future, I may not be able to Tweet or blog as much as before.