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”

WashPost Columnist: ‘Ghostbusters’ Haters Are ‘Virgin Losers’ – (via NewsBusters Site); Both the Right and Left Wing Get Some things Wrong About This

WashPost Columnist: ‘Ghostbusters’ Haters Are ‘Virgin Losers’ – (via NewsBusters Site); Both the Right and Left Wing Get Some things Wrong About This

This story comes from NewsBusters, which is discussing a column written for Washington Post newspaper by columnist Kristen Page-Kirby about the new Ghostbusters movie.

The original Ghostbusters movie, released in the 1980s, contained four male leads. The reboot version of the movie, which was released July 15, 2016, contains four women leads instead.

Unfortunately, over a year or more ago, when news came out that there would be four women leads in the film, some of the sexist jerkwads who inhabit the internet started lambasting the movie all over You Tube, Twitter, and where ever else – not because the move was bad (it wasn’t even released yet), but because they were incensed that Hollywood was cramming some form of feminism down their throats.

Interestingly, I didn’t see as much backlash over the main character of the new Star Wars film, “Star Wars: The Force Awakens” being a woman – Rey.

gbLogo
Ghostbusters Logo

At any rate, I will be discussing two or three different topics in this post that are related to this new film, or mentioned by the conservative essayist at the NewsBusters site.

This is another story where I am in the middle. I can’t say as though I’m completely on one side or another in regards to some aspects of this story, depending on what is under discussion.

I am currently a moderate right-winger (I used to be more to the right than I am currently. In the last few years, I’ve been reconsidering if some of my former political and Christian beliefs are wrong.)

I’ve been more open the last few years to hearing the criticisms and views of liberals and Non-Christians – which is not to say I agree with everything I see left wingers and Non-Christians espousing or arguing in favor of.

I sometimes think secular, liberal feminists have good points on some topics, but I normally disagree with them.

As far as the Ghostbusters film reboot is concerned, I do think some of the backlash against the movie does in fact stem from sexism. But then, I do think some people may honestly feel that the movie is genuinely bad due to having a poor story line, or what have you.

I have not seen the movie yet. I don’t go to movie theaters that much anymore.

I usually wait until movies air on cable television; I’m willing to bet that this Ghostbusters reboot will probably be shown on F/X channel, or SyFy, or some other cable network in the next two years, and I have cable television, so I don’t know if I want to invest my time and cash into driving down to a theater to see this, since it will eventually be on television.

I saw the original Ghostbusters in a movie theater when it was in theaters in the 1980s. I was a kid at the time.

The original was okay, it was quite enjoyable and plenty of fun, but it was no movie masterpiece, so to all the men online who were griping about the reboot featuring all women leads: get the hell over it already.

And yes, you were, or are, being sexist douche bags about it. I don’t buy for a moment that ALL male griping about the film is based on non-sexist reasons, like shoddy trailers, or supposed poor CG work.

The vast majority of the professional reviews (and I have read a ton of them) for the new Ghostbusters film have deemed it “okay.” -Not terrible. Not great. But just “meh.” It’s so-so, most reviews have said.

What I don’t appreciate is that the columnist for WaPo who was discussing male backlash about the movie is using virginity as an insult.

Continue reading “WashPost Columnist: ‘Ghostbusters’ Haters Are ‘Virgin Losers’ – (via NewsBusters Site); Both the Right and Left Wing Get Some things Wrong About This”

Women Are More Interested In Sex Than You Think, (2016) Studies Show – Men underestimate their wife’s or girlfriend’s sexual desire; read the signals

Women Are More Interested In Sex Than You Think, (2016) Studies Show – Men underestimate their wife’s or girlfriend’s sexual desire; read the signals

The majority of Christians will disregard this study, because it does not fit their culturally- based gender stereotypes that men are sexual animals and visually oriented while all women are supposedly, basically uninterested in sex and only interested in emotional closeness, weeping at beautiful poetry, and knitting scarves.

It is true: for all their bloviating on how they adhere to “sola scriptura,” many Christians take their secular-cultural based assumptions about women and read them back into the Bible. The Bible no where teaches that “God designed men to be visual” or that “men are more interested in sex than women are.” Christians get those assumptions from their culture or perceived personal experiences – not from the Bible.

(Link): Women Are More Interested In Sex Than You Think, (2016) Studies Show

Excerpts

  • by E. Bernstein
  • Men underestimate their wife’s or girlfriend’s sexual desire; read the signals
  • Rarely are researchers’ findings so satisfying. Women may want more sex than their husbands or partners think.
  • New research by psychologists at the University of Toronto and the University of Western Ontario, (Link): published earlier this month in the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, found that men in long-term relationships often underestimate how often their wives or girlfriends want to be intimate.
  • The research consists of three studies, following a total of 229 long-term couples, most of whom are heterosexual. (The sample of homosexual couples was too small to be statistically significant, the researchers say.) Participants ranged in age from 18 to 68 years old; the couples had been together six years on average, and they reported they had sex an average of one to two times a week.
  • ….All three studies showed the same thing: Men consistently underestimated their female partner’s desire, while the women had an accurate read on whether or not their partner was interested in sex. And on the days when the men thought their partner was less sexually interested than she actually was, the women reported being more satisfied in and committed to the relationship.

Continue reading “Women Are More Interested In Sex Than You Think, (2016) Studies Show – Men underestimate their wife’s or girlfriend’s sexual desire; read the signals”

Christian Publisher: ‘Women are Losing their Salvation Because They Masturbate’

Christian Publisher: ‘Women are Losing their Salvation Because They Masturbate’

The chuckle-head espousing this view specifically cites the use of sex toys in his equation. I’m not sure if he realizes that women do not need to use any sex toys to masturbate.

I can’t figure out if this guy is against all female masturbation per se, or only women using sex toys on themselves, or what.

The Bible doesn’t even discuss masturbation (no, the story about Onan in the Old Testament is not about masturbation – it was about a guy’s failure to fulfill familial duties).

The Bible doesn’t say anything about masturbation forfeiting a person’s salvation. Even if a person wants to consider masturbation a sin, adultery, fornication and other sexual sins do not forfeit a person’s salvation, either. The Bible says God will forgive those sexual sins.

I sometimes wonder what these types of Christians expect randy, unmarried Christians to do – the ones who do experience strong sexual desire.

These types of wacko Christians – the ones who think masturbation is satanic – tell you (adult single) that you should not have sex with another person, but then they also tell you not to masturbate, either.

And so, how are randy Christian singles supposed to get that itch scratched, exactly? People are staying single longer than they were decades ago. Meditating on Jesus or singing a hymn or some Bible reading is not going to work.

The only positive take away I can leave with here is that this guy, as wacked as he is, at least realizes that Christian women experience sexual desire. Most Christians pretend as though most women (especially married ones) totally lack a libido.

In Christian-Land, only men are “visually stimulated” and want sex and experience sexual desire. Meanwhile, women in Christian-Land are mistakenly assumed to only care about emotional needs and only want to pursue non-sexual hobbies, like knitting scarves.

(Link):  Christian Author Mack Major Says Female Masturbation Is ‘Direct Path To Satan’ – Huffington Post

(Link): Christian Publisher: ‘Women are losing their Salvation because they Masturbate’ by D. Edwards

  • Christian author and publisher Mack Major warned over the weekend that “Christian women are losing their salvation” by using dildos, which he called a “direct path to Satan.”

Continue reading “Christian Publisher: ‘Women are Losing their Salvation Because They Masturbate’”

Avoid Dating Divorced Guys Who Are Dating on the Rebound – and Icky May December Relationships

Avoid Dating Divorced Guys Who Are Dating on the Rebound – and Icky May December Relationships

The letter is much farther below. I wanted to comment on it first.

Here is the set up:

A friend of a divorced guy wrote to Hax, an advice columnist.

 I’m not sure if this friend is a man or woman; let’s just assume it’s a man for my post.

My interest in this letter is not in the advice aspect: friend is upset because divorced guy keeps asking him for advice but then gets offended and explodes in anger when Friend gives him advice.

My interest in this letter pertains to two or three other facets:

The letter writing friend says his divorced friend is age mid-40s, while the wife who dumped him was in her early 30s.

I am (Link): not a  believer in “May December” relationships, for starters.

A mid- 40s guy should be dating women who are age early- to- late 40s, not an early- 30s woman.

And what in the hey is the age early- 30s woman doing even considering dating some dude who is 14, 15 years her senior?

This is something I have pondered since thinking about dating again: the rebound issue. There is no way I’d date a guy who was divorced (or widowed) for only two years, or less.

If you date a guy who just divorced (or his wife died) two weeks ago, or six months ago, he is not ready for a serious relationship – he’s not even ready for a healthy, casual, fun one.

Continue reading “Avoid Dating Divorced Guys Who Are Dating on the Rebound – and Icky May December Relationships”

Four Lies the Church Taught Me About Sex (from Relevant)

Four Lies the Church Taught Me About Sex (from Relevant)

This woman’s page is basically a re-hash of points I have already blogged about here on my blog several times over.

I left a few comments in the reader section of the page at the bottom. I also see that the unhinged person John Morgan ((Link): who stalked and pestered me for over a year left a wrong headed comment at the page as well. He was actually disputing points of her post, but what she said was true.)

Here’s the link to the page (with more commentary by me below this excerpt):

(Link): Four Lies the Church Taught Me About Sex (from Relevant) BY LILY DUNN

Excerpts.

    I’ve heard people say that growing up as an evangelical meant they never talked about sex. This wasn’t my experience. I grew up in the thick of evangelical purity culture and we talked about sex A LOT. We just spent all of that time talking about how and why NOT to have it.

As someone who waited until I was married to have sex, I was assured that I would be guaranteed an easy and rewarding sex life. When reality turned out to be different, I was disappointed and disillusioned. Only through gradual conversations with other married friends did I realize I wasn’t alone.

…. Here are four of the biggest lies about sex I believed before marriage

1. Any and all physical contact is like a gateway drug to sex.

[snip commentary under this point of hers – use link above to visit the page to read the entire page]

2. If you wait until you are married to have sex, God will reward you with mind-blowing sex and a magical wedding night. 


[snip]

3. Girls don’t care about sex.

As a teenager and young adult I cannot count the times I heard something to this effect: “Boys are very visual and sexual, so even though you aren’t thinking about sex, you need to be careful because you are responsible for not making them stumble.”

Let’s disregard for now how degrading this is toward men and focus on the underlying assumption that boys are sexual and girls aren’t. For years I was told that “girls don’t care about sex.” Well, as it turns out, I do. This has been a deep source of shame for me. For a long time I felt like a freak, until I started to realize that I wasn’t the only one, not by a longshot. But I never knew it because no one would admit it.

Many girls (yes, even Christian girls) think about sex. Many girls (yes, even Christian girls) like sex. This doesn’t make you a freak. It doesn’t make you unfeminine or unnatural. God created us, both men AND women, as sexual beings. Enjoying sex makes you a human being created by God, in the image of God, with the capacity and desire to love—physically, emotionally, mentally, spiritually and sexually.

Here is the comment by my stalker John Morgan, that he left in the reader comment section below the woman’s post at the Relevant site ((Link): Source):

      1. Hand holding leading to sex being taught by most parents, teachers, church leaders and books? That’s hard to believe.
      2. Discussing your body being locked up on your wedding night was the responsibility of your church?
      I think that would fall to your OB-GYN doctor.
      3. Girls don’t care about sex?
      That sounds like something your culture taught you, not your church.
    4. “Many of us have programmed guilt into ourselves.” That’s not the church’s fault. It’s your fault.

How are churches presenting saving sex until marriage in a “distorted way.” It sounds like what you experienced was due to your own unrealistic expectations, not due to anything the church taught. It’s sort of like running up to a firefighter that just pulled a woman from a burning house and saying: “Excuse me, but you did that all wrong. Could you take her back in the house and do it again?”

My reply to this unglued son of a gun ((Link): Source)

@ John Morgan.

John Morgan said,
“1. Hand holding leading to sex being taught by most parents, teachers, church leaders and books? That’s hard to believe.”

No, dude, it’s really not hard to believe. How dare you feign ignorance of this point, when I’ve been blogging about that topic and the others she mentions on this page on my Word Press Christian Pundit blog for two or three years now, which you know, because you’ve been to that blog and have read It – and even though I had to ban you from that blog, I know you still came by and read it.

Christians sexualize almost everything.

Baptists, fundamentalists, the Reformed, and evangelicals are so paranoid that any and all male-female enter-action will lead to sex, they warn single adults to stay away from each other, or they sternly caution singles not to so much as go out to coffee dates with each other for platonic chit chat, for the fear it will TURN TO SEX.

(Examples of this, with book titles and page numbers can be found in the book “Singled Out” by Field and Colon, if anyone needs documentation. I also have examples, with links, on my Word Press blog.)

Christians do not believe that men and women can be platonic friends.

Christians are especially paranoid that all un-married women are randy little harlots who set their sights on married Christian men, so in their sermons, blogs, and books, they frequently tell married Christian men above all never to meet alone with an un-married woman, don’t give her a lift in a car, keep the office door open if a woman meets you in your office, etc.

I have blogged examples of married Christian saying that kind of trash at my blog, such as…

“Southern Baptists Perpetuate Myths About Genders, Sex, and Adult Singles at 2014 ERLC Summit – All Women Are harlots, men cannot control themselves”
https://christianpundit.wordpress.com/2014/04/22/southern-baptists-perpetuate-myths-about-genders-sex-and-adult-singles-at-2014-erlc-summit/

A quote from one article I linked to on that page:
“A panel led by Bethancourt offered suggestions to help pastors stay sexually pure, including leaning on Jesus and putting a glass door on the office so others can see in.”

John Morgan said,
“2. Discussing your body being locked up on your wedding night was the responsibility of your church? I think that would fall to your OB-GYN doctor.”

She’s saying that the church’s slanted, warped views about sex and sexuality created psychological problems, which manifested themselves as physical issues for her. And that is her church’s responsibility.

Also, given that we are living in a church culture where

1. every other sermon has a title such as, “Ten Tips For Great Married Sex” and where
2. Rev Mark Driscoll tells Christian married couples in his “Real Marriage” book that they should have anal sex, and he advises, even during church services, that women are commanded by the Bible to perform oral sex on their spouses, and where
3. Pastor Ed Young Jr had a “Sexperiment” at church, where he and his wife got into a bed on the church’s roof…

I don’t see it as a stretch for a church to go ahead and discuss her particular problem in this area. They might as well, they are discussing every other sexual topic under the sun already.

John Morgan said,

“3. Girls don’t care about sex? That sounds like something your culture taught you, not your church.”

No, that is in fact something churches, preachers, and Christians do in fact teach – that only men are visually stimulated and enjoy sex, while women (especially married ones) supposedly prefer “emotional bonding” and have to be cajoled into having sex.

(Conversely, un-married Christian women are assumed by most churches to be randy harlots who bed hundreds of men per week.)

I have blogged about that nasty gender stereotype repeatedly at my blog the last two years, which I know you have read, so you cannot feign ignorance.

Many Christians support something called “gender complementarianism” which buys into secular American gender stereotypes, including ones pertaining to sex.

These attitudes and stereotypes are promoted in churches and Christian culture via Christian groups such as CBMW (Council for Biblical Manhood and Womanhood), for example. They publish magazine articles promoting these views, hold conferences, tweet about these views, etc.

The Christian guys who are into full blown patriarchy, such as Doug Phillips and the Vision Forum, and the Home schooling Christian groups, are ten times worse than the run- of- the- mill Christian gender complementarians about these gender stereotypes and sexuality – and they too promote their views in their magazines, conferences, books, etc., which do influence people, especially teenagers, 20 somethings and naïve or insecure adult women (and some men).

Preachers, and other Christian personalities, such as Ed Young Sr., Mark Driscoll, Jimmy Evans, Christian marriage guru M. Gungor and others, teach the belief that “women and girls don’t like sex, don’t want sex, and don’t think about sex” constantly in their books, blogs, and sermons.

Here are some of my posts about these topics:

Christian stereotypes about female sexuality:
https://christianpundit.wordpress.com/2014/01/20/christian-stereotypes-about-female-sexuality-all-unmarried-women-are-supposedly-hyper-sexed-harlots-but-all-married-ones-are-supposedly-frigid-or-totally-uninterested-in-sex/

When Women Wanted Sex Much More Than Men – and how the stereotype flipped:
https://christianpundit.wordpress.com/2014/04/21/when-women-wanted-sex-much-more-than-men-and-how-the-stereotype-flipped/

The reverse to that Christian stereotype about women is that all Christian men are horny horn dogs who are so sexually uncontrolled they are practically raping every woman they meet. I have blogged about that before too.

John Morgan said,
“How are churches presenting saving sex until marriage in a “distorted way.” It sounds like what you experienced was due to your own unrealistic expectations, not due to anything the church taught. “

Wow. You pretend on your own blog as though Christians get singles and celibacy all wrong, but then you come on to this blog and say the exact opposite, which makes it sound as though you are just trolling this lady’s blog post.

Yes, churches are in fact teaching virginity-until-marriage in a distorted way.

I have example after example at my blog of how they are doing so. Churches constantly re-enforce unrealistic expectations, such as telling young Christians if they just wait until their wedding night to have sex, that the sex will be great and wonderful – which is often not the case at all (I have examples at my blog).

Most churches these days are not supporting virginity, but for the ones who bother to do so, they are adding a lot of un-biblical baggage on to the concept that messes people up, or giving men sexist ideas about women and female sexuality.

Here are some examples of how Christians make dating overly sexualized and instill a fear that a kiss on the cheek, meeting for a cup of coffee, or hand holding can lead to sex…

Also, some Christian para-church groups teach a bogus thing called “emotional virginity” where they warn the genders not to talk too much to each other, because that equals fornication, or will lead to it. See these examples:

Independent Fundamentalist Baptist College Kid Friendship Permission Form – Christians lowering marriage rates due to their own stupid teachings about sex, dating, marriage, etc

https://christianpundit.wordpress.com/2014/01/04/independent-fundamentalist-baptist-college-kid-friendship-permission-form-christians-lowering-marriage-rates-due-to-their-own-stupid-teachings-about-sex-dating-marriage-etc/

Sterling Example of How Christians are Keeping Single Christians Single Forever (Re Very Long Courtship List)
https://christianpundit.wordpress.com/2013/06/29/sterling-example-of-how-christians-are-keeping-single-christians-single-forever/

How Christians Keep Christians Single (part 4) – and Emotional Virginity Teaching
https://christianpundit.wordpress.com/2013/04/15/how-christians-keep-christians-single-part-4-and-emotional-virginity-teaching/

Another person, named R.S., left him this comment ((Link): Source)

    The tone of your response is really troubling to me because you seem to distilling her points into the most extreme conclusions and then dismissing them. I don’t think she was trying to say this is EVERYONE’S experience with “The Church” but that this sort of warped view of sex has been damaging to those raised with it, and yet it is still being taught in some churches.

1. Believe it. Some strains of fundamentalist and evangelical Christianity, especially those that subscribe to the purity/courtship movement, DO preach that kissing, holding hands, etc can be a ‘slippery slope’. Some churches are more explicit and strict than others about the boundaries of physical contact between sexes, but it is definitely seen in many Christian circles as being suspect. An example: “‎True love isn’t expressed in passionately whispered words, an intimate kiss, or a embrace; before two people are married, love is expressed in self-control, patience, even words left unsaid.” (Joshua Harris) And this: http://www.amazon.com/Princess-Kiss-Story-Gods-Purity/dp/0871628686 (PS When can we expect the publication of ‘The Price and the Kiss’ or is ‘purity’ only for girls?)

2. No, it’s not. But some churches set up false expectations when they overemphasized the rewards of staying a virgin until marriage and failed to mention the challenges that come with it once married. Like implying that it would be possible to repress all sexual thoughts and actions through puberty and young adulthood, and then suddenly flip the switch and be able to have mind-blowing martial sex that was “worth the wait”. Or the frequent promise that sex or marriage would be ‘blessed’ because you did it “God’s way”. So when those things don’t turn out to be true, it can be devastating to one’s identity (something must be wrong with ME), or one’s faith (God didn’t keep his promises).

3. Um no. This train of thought is alive and well in many churches. Men are from Mars and only want sex sex sex. Women are from Venus and want emotional intimacy. Men are sexual animals, women are frigid prudes. Pick up almost any Christian dating/marriage advice book and it couldn’t be clearer on how narrowly the genders are defined by these sexual stereotypes. This type of thinking is so prevalent in so many churches that I actually wonder if Christians are the ones who propagated these beliefs in our culture at large and not the other way around. Christian purity culture is no different except for the massive double standard it espouses: that “all guys think about and want is sex” (and therefore should be treated with suspicion), that women should dress modestly to “keep their brother from stumbling” (as if they are responsible for controlling their brother’s actions), that women must set the boundaries and hold the reigns on how physical things get because guys just can’t control themselves. But there’s not a word on WOMEN being obsessed with sex, turned on by guy’s bodies, or having trouble controlling sexual urges… in fact it is often implied that young women who desire purity must control themselves AND their ‘brothers’.

4. Churches who overemphasize purity/virginity as being the most valuable thing a young woman can possess and sexual sin as being the worst thing she can possibly do programs a lot of guilt, shame, repression, and confusion into impressionable young minds regarding pretty much any form of sexual expression, and that doesn’t necessarily go away once married. I think churches that preach that are deeply responsible for the twisted sexuality they have promoted and the damaging effects it has had.

Since it sounds like you might be unfamiliar with this ‘purity culture’ strain of teaching that has infested so many churches, here are some blog posts from other women who have lived through it:
http://www.elizabethesther.com/2013/01/virginity-new-improved.html

In which I am damaged goods

http://darcysheartstirrings.blogspot.com/2011/01/how-teachings-of-emotio…
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/permissiontolive/2011/04/courtship-is-not-t…
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/may/09/elizabeth-smart-pur…

Yes, I have been blogging about those very points on this blog the last couple of years, in posts such as:

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

(Link): 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): Groundbreaking News: Women Like Sex (part 1, 2) (articles)

(Link): When Women Wanted Sex Much More Than Men – and how the stereotype flipped

(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): 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): 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): Jason the Christian’s Sexless Marriage – Christians promise hot regular steamy married sex but it isn’t true

(Link): Marriage Doesn’t Necessarily Guarantee Great Sex or Any At All

(Link): Problems Created by Conservative Christian Teachings About Virginity, Sex, and Marriage: Christian Couple Who Were Virgins At Marriage Are Experiencing Sexual Problems – Re: UnVeiled Wife (Marriage does not guarantee great sex)

(Link): Getting Married Does Not Necessarily Guarantee Frequent Hot Satisfying Sexy Sex / (also discussed): Gender and Sex Stereotypes (article)

#MarriedWomen Hashtag Is Full Of (Terrible) Marriage Advice

#MarriedWomen Hashtag Is Full Of (Terrible) Marriage Advice

(Link): #MarriedWomen and Male Entitlement

(Link): #MarriedWomen Hashtag Is Full Of (Terrible) Marriage Advice

    If you’re looking for some relationship advice you should probably steer clear of the #MarriedWomen hashtag.

    Twitter has been mocking Tony Rapu, who calls himself a “Husband, Father, Pastor, Medical Doctor, Mentor, and Reformer” on his Twitter page, for using the #MarriedWomen hashtag to dole out bits of wisdom to women.

    If you want to be treated as a queen then treat your husband like a king. #MarriedWomen

    — Tony Rapu (@drtonyrapu) July 20, 2014

    Consult your husband on all major decisions. #MarriedWomen — Tony Rapu (@drtonyrapu) July 20, 2014

    Submitting to your husband is trusting God. He made the rules. #MarriedWomen

    .. Tony Rapu definitely has a few fans (he has close to 10,000 followers) but the majority of people on Twitter didn’t appreciate Rapu’s advice for #MarriedWomen.

    #marriedwomen! Read @drtonyrapu‘s tweets for excellent advice on how to treat your husband like a moron, toddler and pet.

    — Becs (@sapient_ape) July 20, 2014

——————–
Related posts:

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

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

(Link): To Get Any Attention or Support from a Church These Days you Have To Be A Stripper, Prostitute, or Orphan

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

Relationships Of Welcome, Not Fear (Re: How Sexist Christian Views Marginalize and Isolate Adult, Single Women and Maintain Other Stereotypes About Adult Singles)

Relationships Of Welcome, Not Fear (Re: How Sexist Christian Views Marginalize and Isolate Adult, Single Women and Maintain Other Stereotypes About Adult Singles)

(Link): Relationships Of Welcome, Not Fear

Some male commentator left a reply under this post at Missio Alliance that I had to reply to, so I left a reply for him there. He was basically arguing against everything the author was saying in her page.

It’s amazing how weak and sexist some Christians are that they would rather keep upholding nasty stereotypes and views and practices that stigmatize single women than do what Jesus role modeled, which was talk to women and include them.

Not only are these views insulting towards adult single women, but toward males in general, and they are unbiblical.

These views are premised not just on the insulting assumption of un-married women being easy harlots who are just dying and eager to fall into bed with any and every married man they meet (even a middle aged, balding, fatso who is not good looking), but they assume that all or most men lack sexual self control, even though the Bible teaches that people have sexual self control.

This stereotype also assumes only MEN cheat and have affairs, and that only MEN want and enjoy sex. Wrong! I have many blogs posts with examples of married women who had affairs on their husbands.

Christians also teach out of the other side of their face that getting married makes a person immune from sexual sin, because, supposedly, the married person is getting his (or her) sexual needs met. (This is one reason why a lot of evangelical Christians tend to think of single adults as horny horn dogs who sleep around all over the place.)

Also, that some Christians let their guards down at times and admit, via these dopey, insulting pages warning married men to avoid single women because married men are prone to cheating goes to show that

      1. you don’t have to become perfect and godly before God will send you a spouse (which is sometimes a view taught by some Christians)
      and
    2. that being married does not make a person more godly, mature, or ethical than being single

I’ve blogged on this topic before (see links at the bottom of this post).

(Link): Relationships Of Welcome, Not Fear

Excerpts (if you want to read the entire thing, please use the link above; I am only presenting a few excerpts here):

    JULY 16, 2014 | BY: KARINA KREMINSKI

Sometimes I feel like I live in my own little bubble far far away from certain debates and discussions that plague church circles. When I do read some of those discussions through social media, the effect it often has on me is one of experiencing sheer puzzlement.

This happened again as I randomly came across and read two articles on social media within a short space of each other. One was called (Link): 5 Things Every Married Man should do around Single Women and the other was called (Link): Avoid any Hint.

Granted, the articles could apply to both genders but they were written by men and the implication in the content was more around the matter of how men must deal with that pesky, recurring issue of women in their lives.

According to the articles, in order to avoid potential problems with women, men should for example, ‘keep eye contact simple and short’, ‘Not go to lunch alone with the opposite sex’, and ‘Keep conversation general and professional’. I was utterly bemused.

Is this how most people view the relationship between men and women?

Are we as Christian leaders teaching this kind of thing in our churches? Can’t anyone see the problems around thinking in this way?

And more importantly; is this the direction that the church wants to go regarding our vision for ministry? Is this the kind of attitude which truly embodies the radical values of the kingdom of God for witness to our world?

A Premise Of Fear

It Marginalises Women Further

I am aware that the cautions and rules in the articles mentioned can apply to both genders.

However, many articles like these are written by men and the rules and cautions such as these mentioned are implemented by men who are mostly the ones in positions of power in churches and other institutions.

The effect that this has is that it marginalises women further as men exert their power however unintentionally, to isolate women. If men are being told to practice avoiding eye contact or the implication is to be fearful in connecting with women, then women will continually be viewed as the problem to be pushed to the side and will be further isolated from being fully involved in the life and ministry of the church. Less ministry opportunities are given to women in this kind of atmosphere.

Impedes Building Healthy Male/Female Relationships

Here Are 4 Things That Ministry Leaders Can Do To Help Build Welcoming Relationships Between Men And Women:

If you want to read the author’s suggestiona, and the rest of the page’s content, please click here
————————-
Related posts:

(Link): Reclaiming Stolen Friendships – a blog post criticizing the Sexist, Anti – Singles Christian Billy Graham Rule

(Link):  The Islamic Billy Graham Rule – Unmarried Muslim People Are Punished For Being Alone Together

(Link):  Affairs Don’t Start with Texts – via guest authors at Tim’s blog

(Link):   Discipling Healthy Male/Female Relationships in the Church Part 1 by Wendy Alsup

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

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

(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

Women Judging Male Physical Appearance – Body Fat Percentages

Women Judging Male Physical Appearance – Body Fat Percentages

I’ve posted about this before, so I don’t want to go into detail here (you can see links at the bottom of this post for more posts about it), but women are in fact visual.

Women judge male physical appearance.

Too often, though, secular culture, and Christian culture, maintain the false hood that women are not visually stimulated, and only care about a guy’s bank account or the kind of car he drives. False!

Further, the flip side of the stereotype is that women only care about emotional closeness, romance, rainbows, and knitting mittens. Also false.

I was at a site where a guy – yes, a man – uploaded the photo you see below. He asked women to weigh in on their preferences.

Out of around 35 women who responded, only one chose the 10-12% guy, and every one else chose one, or all, of the 15% – 25% range.

None of the women chose the freaky muscular guys at 3% or 6%, or the 30, 35, 40% tubbos (chubby guys).

Continue reading “Women Judging Male Physical Appearance – Body Fat Percentages”

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

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

I have blogged on this cretin before. Driscoll is sexist, and anti-singles, both anti male singles and anti female singles.

Driscoll, oddly, out of one side of his mouth, will condemn pornography in some of his sermons or books, but then tell his male church members on other occasions, whether in sermons or in books, that their wives are nothing more than sex blow up dolls, there to do their every sexual bidding, even indulging in sex acts most women do not want or enjoy, such as anal sex, or performing a blow job on their husband.

(That’s right men, most women do not like giving blow jobs, which is one of your seemingly biggest fantasies. Over the span of my entire life, all women I’ve met in person, or have read their musings online, only one or two have said they enjoy performing oral sex on a man. Most women get no pleasure out of it, it grosses them out, and many say it makes them feel like a five dollar crack whore.

I also notice that when writing about marital sex, or sermonizing on it, many conservative male preachers never, ever advise the husbands to perform oral sex on their wives, or perform whatever other sex act… it’s always very selfishly framed in how the woman can meet the man’s sexual needs.)

Mark Driscoll is a married father, and he is a sexual pervert… and yet, Christians insist on portraying or thinking of all older (as in over age 30) never-married, childless men as being homosexuals, over sexed Don Juans, or some other type of sexual deviant.

That Driscoll is on record (in his book on marriage, if I am not mistaken, or was it a sermon?) as saying he and his wife’s marriage was sexless for a few years (or unsatisfactory sexually in some other manner) also does not speak well of the conservative Christian propaganda that married sex is super great, so, if you just wait until you’re married to have sex, there will be fire works in the bedroom all the time.

A long excerpt from
(Link): Inside Mars Hill’s massive meltdown

    by By Stacey Solie
    July 2014

    SEX

    It was also around the mid-2000s that members noticed Driscoll’s growing preoccupation with sex.

    Driscoll also started to preach more about male privilege and sexual entitlement. This had a damaging impact on many marriages, said Rob Thain Smith, who, with Merle, was acting as an informal marriage counselor to many young couples.

    “He created enormous abuse of wives,” Smith said. “He helped young men objectify women, by his over emphasis of sexualization of women and subservience.”

    “The way Driscoll talked, you thought that he was getting it every night. All these men are seeing his hot wife, and are thinking he’s got it made.”

    In Real Marriage, Driscoll bitterly describes a largely sexless marriage, and seems to imply that he’s been acting out all these years because he was sexually frustrated at home.

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

Follow Up Part 2 – Reactions by Other Writers to Sexist, Condescending 50 Something Men Who Think They Are Final Arbiters of If Women Are Attractive Past Age of 40 (Re: Esquire Editorial by Junod)

Follow Up Part 2 – Reactions by Other Writers to Sexist, Condescending 50 Something Men Who Think They Are Final Arbiters of If Women Are Attractive Past Age of 40 (Re: Esquire Editorial by Junod)

Original Post:

Follow Up 1:

More backlash:

Note: as to this link below, at the LA Times, the section on the page entitled “It misleads women into thinking they have time” was actually quite sexist. I have chosen to not paste that part of the page in.

That part was written by a Charlotte Allen who argues that all men will always favor 22 year old women over 42 year old women, mostly because most men want to have babies.

I don’t know what rock that woman writer is living under, but women in their 40s still get their periods every month and conceive ((Link): read this page for starters – that is one but several pages I have on this blog noting that lots and lots more women are getting pregnant, some for the first time, over age 40).

I personally never really cared if I had a baby or not, but I think it’s sexist to say that women over 40 are basically unvaluable (to men) because, in the writer’s opinion, they’re all barren (they are not, by the way. A lot of “oops” pregnancies happen to women over 40, because they go off birth control under the mistaken notion “I can no longer get pregnant, or not easily.”)

(Link): What’s so offensive about Esquire’s praise of 42-year-old women?

Excerpts:

    By ALEXANDRA LE TELLIER

    Women don’t need a writer dressed in feminist clothing to define her worth by his own narrow definitions

    Tom Junod set the social web aflame with his article praising 42-year-old women. Never did one think that Esquire, a men’s magazine that’s stayed above the lad mag fray, could enrage so many people. But that it did, with people accusing Junod of sexism.

    “Let’s face it: There used to be something tragic about even the most beautiful forty-two-year-old woman,” Junod begins. Now, he writes, “it may be said that the best thing that forty-two-year-old American men have going for them is forty-two-year-old American women.”

    It might sound like a compliment, but women aren’t buying it.

    … I asked some of our female writers for their thoughts, and here’s what they had to say.

    Where has Junod been?

    … And, men, you now have Esquire’s permission to objectify women in their 40s without being creepy to other men. (But, again, only if the women do Pilates and yoga.) This expands your potential ogling to hundreds, even thousands more women each year.

    Kidding aside, I find the whole premise of the piece to be completely outdated, if it was ever true to begin with. It’s as though Esquire and Junod have been cryogenically frozen for the last 20 to 30 years and woke up to discover this new creature in mass media called the Modern Woman. She’s independent! She’s empowered! She’s still sexy at 40!

    But my biggest complaint is that Junod and Esquire reinforce the sexualization of women in general — the idea that the value of a woman is how much she arouses a man.

    Continue reading “Follow Up Part 2 – Reactions by Other Writers to Sexist, Condescending 50 Something Men Who Think They Are Final Arbiters of If Women Are Attractive Past Age of 40 (Re: Esquire Editorial by Junod)”

Follow Up – Reactions by Other Writers to Sexist, Condescending 50 Something Men Who Think They Are Final Arbiters of If Women Are Attractive Past Age of 40 (Re: Esquire Editorial by Junod)

Follow Up – Reactions by Other Writers to Sexist Condescending 50 Something Men Who Think They Are Final Arbiters of If Women Are Attractive Past Age of 40 (Re: Esquire Editorial by Junod)

This is a follow up to my post from yesterday,
(Link): Obnoxious, Condescending, Sexist, Pervy Esquire Editorial by 50-Something Year Old Man: “In Praise of 42 Year Old Women” – Condescendingly Reassures 40 Something Women He’d Sex Them Up

Here are other people’s reactions to the insufferable, obnoxious, ageist, and sexist Junod editorial on Esquire.

(Link): Older women don’t need mansplaining boner prose in praise of their sexiness

    by Jessica Valenti
    theguardian.com,
    Friday 11 July 2014 07.15

    An homage in a men’s magazine to the ‘carnal appeal’ of 42-year old women is no great win for feminism

    Breaking news! Men’s magazines have determined that it is not abnormal for men to ogle and objectify women over the age of 40! Women of the world, feminism has won! Rejoice!

    Or not.

    To kick off its annual women issue, Esquire magazine on Thursday published an essay called “In Praise of 42-Year Old Women”, assuring the normally-depressed old hags that dudes (or at least the writer Tom Junod) still want to bang them. Junod – who has an “interesting” history writing about women – writes that, while “[t]here used to be something tragic about even the most beautiful forty-two-year-old woman”, they now have “carnal appeal”.

    — start Junod quote
    A few generations ago, a woman turning forty-two was expected to voluntarily accept the shackles of biology and convention; now it seems there is no one in our society quite so determined to be free. Conservatives still attack feminism with the absurd notion that it makes its adherents less attractive to men; in truth, it is feminism that has made forty-two-year-old women so desirable.
    — end Junod quote

    Protip to male writers gorging on self-congratulation as they deem grown woman fuckable: leave feminism out of it.

    Junod, careful to qualify that the 42-year-old women worthy of praise are those who “have armored themselves with yoga and Pilates even as they joke about the spectacle”, seems to believe that he has done women a great kindness with this piece. But when he writes that 42-year-old women are “superior” to men and that “the best thing that that forty-two-year-old American men have going for them is forty-two-year-old American women”, he does so with the same benevolence of a lazy husband praising his wife’s laundry skills. (Or financial skills, in his case.)

    It’s easy for men to call women “superior” in a society that privileges men at nearly every turn: they’re not the ones being grossly objectified under the guise of a compliment.

    Certainly, women over 40 deserve more reverence and respect than they typically get – and I’d love to see women of all ages receive that … outside of women’s magazines and day-time talk shows. We live in a culture, often driven by the media and Hollywood, that paints women over 25 as desperate and pathetic: we’re considered past our prime, never to be “nubile” (a word worth banning from our collective consciousness if there ever was one) again!

    But the validation that women seek is generally not of the erection-producing variety. It’s very nice and all that writers are catching on that women of all ages can be sexy, but framing that as an amazing new discovery makes it more about men than it is about us (which feels about par for the course).

    For example, in a companion piece on Esquire’s website, writer Stephen Marche urges us all – in a slightly less cringe-inducing way than Junod’s overwrought boner-prose – to retire the word MILF. He writes that “there’s another explanation for the rise of 42, one that’s even more revelatory. Maybe it isn’t fashion at all. Maybe it’s what men wanted all along.”

    Right. But maybe, just maybe, what men want isn’t – and doesn’t always have to be – the damn point.

(Link): BREAKING: Esquire Declares 42-Year-Old Women Now F-ckable by Tracy Moore

    Why, used to be, a woman at the age of 42 could hardly be glanced at, much less taken to bed and ravaged shame-free in broad daylight. No longer. Esquire has sent word across all channels that 42-year-old women have been removed from the Do Not Bang list and are no longer off-limits to respectable men. In other news, FIRE SALE AT CHICO’S.

    Forty-two year-old broads everywhere can now pack up their loose but crisp linen shirts, let their slightly graying hair down, and select their finest modest but sexy cocktail dress and get back out there.

    Behold the clarion call courtesy of author Tom Junod:

    —- start Junod quote
    Let’s face it: There used to be something tragic about even the most beautiful forty-two-year-old woman. With half her life still ahead of her, she was deemed to be at the end of something—namely, everything society valued in her, other than her success as a mother. If she remained sexual, she was either predatory or desperate; if she remained beautiful, what gave her beauty force was the fact of its fading. And if she remained alone… well, then God help her.
    — end Junod quote

    We’ve all seen those women — you know, the beautiful aging ones who just seemed so pathetic for existing at all. Also, he is right, I can’t think of more forceful beauty than the fading kind. The not-fading kind is great — don’t get me wrong — but if you think about it, it’s just not quite as potent, all said. However, a hint of beauty once there is just, well, sickening. Really sad, too.

    The only thing more ludicrous than Tom Junod’s feelings about 42-year-olds are the misguided assumptions that lurk beneath them… like a 42-year-old woman clawing at the icy surface above her, desperate to escape the tomb of her old age and fading beauty, trapped in part because she acknowledges that icy cold water could significantly invigorate her appearance.

    Continue reading “Follow Up – Reactions by Other Writers to Sexist, Condescending 50 Something Men Who Think They Are Final Arbiters of If Women Are Attractive Past Age of 40 (Re: Esquire Editorial by Junod)”

When Suits Become a Stumbling Block: A Plea to My Brothers in Christ* by LP

When Suits Become a Stumbling Block: A Plea to My Brothers in Christ* by LP – from the Salt Collective Blog

This site (Salt Collective) is experiencing a lot of traffic, so if you click the link to read the blog page, you might have to try again later.

I am not necessarily opposed to Christian modesty and sexual purity teachings.

However, I do think there is a lot of hypocrisy going on, where Christians stress a man’s sexual desires over that of a woman’s (women also possess sexual libido but Christians deny this fact – at least when it comes to married women, Christians act like all un-married women are sluts), and women are made responsible for a man’s sexual thought life and sexual misbehavior, which is wrong.

(Link): When Suits Become a Stumbling Block: A Plea to My Brothers in Christ* by LP

Excerpts (note that the blog is peppered with lots of photos of very good looking male movie stars and models wearing suits, including one of my all time favorite actors, Mr. Hugh Jackman):

    There has been a lot of talking, debating, and hand-wringing among Christian bloggers lately about modesty; particularly yoga pants, making men uncomfortable by being attractive, and in general, ways in which to combat everyone’s favorite “evil”: lust.

    Well, I’d like to hop on the modesty bandwagon and discuss something that I have personally struggled with for many, many years.

    [deep breath]

    Suits.

    Specifically, men in suits.

    Yes, folks: I struggle with lusting after men in suits.

    I want to be brutally honest about this struggle. As young-ish, heterosexual woman who is trying to keep her thoughts pure and her eyes on Jesus, I have to say… every day, EVERY DAY, is a battle.

    …Don’t these men have any self respect? Do they even understand how their clothing affects me? I wonder what is going through men’s heads when they decide to dress this way. All I know is that when a man wears a nice suit with pants that are juuuust tight enough, I will notice.

    Therefore I am issuing a plea to my brothers in Christ for an understanding of where I’m coming from. When you choose to exist in public looking well-groomed and sharp, you are basically extending an invitation for me to lust after you.

    Listen, as a woman I’m an emotional creature. I want to feel protected and safe, and nothing screams “I am a MAN and I will protect you” like a suit and tie. I can’t help it, that’s just how I’m wired.** It’s science. LOOK IT UP.

    Now I know what you might be saying: “Well, isn’t it YOUR responsibility to control your thoughts around men?”

    Of COURSE. We are all called to rid our thoughts of lust. But again, as my brothers in Christ, is it asking too much of you to simply be more attentive to what you wear?

    If the purpose of our clothes is to glorify God, how are you doing so by wearing something that obviously causes others to sin in their minds? Yes, it is everyone’s job to control their own eyes, but you ALSO have a responsibility to not give them reason to sin.

    …Remember: upholding an impossible standard that will never remain static and is subject to the cultural, religious, or societal context within which it resides must ALWAYS trump your comfort, convenience, and ability to exist in a public space in whatever manner you choose.

    *This is satire. Put your pitchforks down.

    – See more at: http://thesaltcollective.org/modesty-whensuitsbecomestumblingblock/#sthash.W2AzDBt3.dpuf

—————————-
Related posts this blog:

(Link): Funny Satirical Piece: Woman Mocks Demands for Female Modesty By Shaming Males (and their judgy Mothers) For Being Immodest

(Link): Women Judging Male Physical Appearance – Body Fat Percentages

(Link): Modesty: A Female-Only Virtue? – Christian Double Standards – Hypocrisy

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

(Link): The Annoying, Weird, Sexist Preoccupation by Christian Males with Female Looks and Sexuality

(Link): Superman, Man Candy -and- Christian Women Are Visual And Enjoy Looking At Built, Hot, Sexy Men

(Link): When Women Wanted Sex Much More Than Men – and how the stereotype flipped

(Link): Atlantic: “The case for abandoning the myth that ‘women aren’t visual.’”

(Link): Do men really have higher sex drives than women? (article/study)

(Link): When We Sacrifice a Girl’s Innocence from NatePyle.com Re: Modesty and Purity Teachings

(Link): Beauty Redefined Site Discusses Modesty: Modest Is Hottest?

Men Posting Profiles on Dating Sites Could Use Some Tips (from Dear Abby column)

Men Posting Profiles on Dating Sites Could Use Some Tips (from Dear Abby column)

I totally agree with this. I would expect immature 18 or 20 something males to post immature, vulgar or moronic commentary or photos on their dating site profiles, but back in the day when I tried dating sites (in my mid 30s and a bit in my late 30s), I was astounded by the number of males, ages 30 up to 75, who say lewd things on their profiles.

This includes men who identify as CHRISTIAN. That’s right, men who claimed to be Christian would tell me up front or very early in the onlilne dating game what their preferred sexual positions were, or make inappropriate sex related jokes on their profile pages. None of that is attractive to women, especially not to Christian women.

To add to her points on the list below, I’d add:

Men:
-do not send unsolicited penis photos to a woman;
-do send or post anything of a sexual nature on your profile, unless you are specifically on a sex oriented site such as “Adult Friend Finder” or whatever that Whore Hook-up site is (and when I say whore, I’m including men who are looking for casual sex);
-do not make lewd jokes or use filthy language on your profile page
-do not state what your sexual preferences are on your profile or bring this topic up when sending messages back and forth with a woman.
-do not state you are 45 years old when it’s damn obvious from your profile photo you’re more like 75 years old

(Link): MEN POSTING PROFILES ON DATING SITES COULD USE A FEW TIPS

DEAR ABBY:

    May I sit in your chair and give some advice today?

It’s aimed at men who place ads on dating sites and then wonder why they can’t meet “quality” women.

I’m an educated, decent-looking, middle-aged widow who has dated quite a lot through such ads and local social groups.

Yes, it can be a jungle out there, but the Internet is a wonderful tool for bringing people together.

I live in a small town, and the pool of eligible men is smaller here than in metropolitan areas. That said, there are few profiles that attract my attention and that of my divorced/widowed friends.

Gentlemen, some pointers:

1. Smile! A dour expression is unpleasant.

2. We may want to see you with your shirt off after we get to know you, but it’s not the most appealing or refined pose for a first look.

3. Be realistic. If you are Joe Average, we Jane Averages would enjoy meeting you. Are you really going to hold out for a model who is a decade or so younger than you?

4. Be kind to the English language.
You don’t have to be a genius, but it would be nice to know you can competently communicate in writing.

5. Consider a shave.
Some women like men with facial hair; the majority of the ones I know do not. About 75 percent of men over 50 have a mustache, beard or both. What are you hiding under there?

6. If you’re married and miserable, for goodness sake, go for marriage counseling or get a divorce. But please don’t deceive women who want to meet a nice guy to share life with.

In case you think I’m being too harsh, we gals welcome any suggestions from men who scroll through those female profiles looking for love.
— SURFING IN PETERSBURG, ILL.

——————-
Related posts:

(Link): 25 Women Reveal Their Biggest Dating Profile Dealbreakers

(Link): Stop Telling Your Single Friends to Try Dating Sites – Please.

(Link): Beware of Rapists on Christian Dating Sites

(Link): Women Do Care About Male Looks but Don’t Go For Penis Photos

(Link): Various articles about online dating – Online dating leads to marriage / why men fail at online dating – other articles

(Link): Online Dating Fatigue is a Real Thing and It’s Happening to Everyone by Madison Vanderberg

(Link): Police urge caution when using dating websites / Murderers on Dating Sites

(Link): Woman Meets Man on Dating Site, He Steals Her Dog and TV on First Date

(Link): Is it a date? Or hanging out? [2014] Survey reflects confusion (article)

(Link): Why Online Dating Doesn’t Work

(Link): Internet dating firms entice lonely hearts with faked profiles based on real people (article)

(Link): Blogs by Single Women Who Discuss the Weirdos, Perverts and Losers Who Contact Them on Dating Sites

(Link): Creepizoids Weirdos and Perverts on Dating Sites

(Link): Weird Dating Sites, Toilet Dating, Dating Sites and Privacy

(Link): Online Dating: Women Want Younger Men (article)

(Link): Why Online Dating Doesn’t Work (article)

(Link): Facebook Uses Photo of Dead Girl (by suicide) in Dating Site Ad

(Link): Online Dating Vs Meeting in Real Life (copy)

Gender Complementarian book by David Murrow that upholds most every gender stereotype I rail against on this blog

Gender Complementarian book that upholds most every gender stereotype I rail against on this blog
——————————————
Reminder: there is coming a time I will not be blogging here at all, or not nearly as often. Please read more about that situation here: [Blog Break]
——————————————
This other blog discusses Christian gender complementarianism and covers some of the same topics I discuss on this blog. Here is a review the blogger did about a gender comp book by Murrow:

(Link): “What Your Husband Isn’t Telling You”: Is this book telling women the truth about men?

Excerpts:

    In his book entitled, “What Your Husband Isn’t Telling You,” David Murrow makes a number generalizations about men. He seems to believe that his view of what it means to be a man is normative, healthy and Christian. He writes as if men are simply “wired this way” by God.

    Here are some of his assertions, followed by my responses:

    Murrow (makes a number of comments about sex):

    … “Men actually get a cocaine-like shot of pleasure from looking at a beautiful woman. So here’s your assignment: Give your husband as many cocaine shots as possible. Satisfy his addiction by looking your best” (pp. 163-164).

    “And why are looks so important to men?” “Men compare. Men compete. Men size each other up by their spouses” (p. 164). “Having a knockout wife raises your social standing at work, among your relatives, and even a bit at church” (p. 165).

    Response:

    Women are not responsible for their husbands’ behaviour.

    … If he has married his wife because he believes her beauty enhances his social standing at church (or anywhere else), he should seek to understand his worth as a loved child of God and friend of Jesus Christ.

I would encourage you to visit that blog and read the ENTIRE post, click here.

This Murrow guy expends a lot of time and effort blaming women for why their husbands cheat. He puts all responsibility on the woman to stay physically attractive and hot-looking to keep their husbands from looking at porn or from having affairs. First of all, it’s not a woman’s responsibility to keep her man from straying – it’s his own duty.

Secondly, a woman being hot, attractive, sexy, and babelicious does not keep a man from straying, witness all the famous movie star men, sports stars, and male rock singers who get married to stunning model beauties but who have affairs on those wives anyway (see: golfer Tiger Woods).

If you find yourself married to a partner who has let him or herself go, and she/he refuses to get in shape or make an effort at his appearance after you’ve talked to them about it, consider divorce… don’t have an affair or wank off to porn all day.

If a man is that terribly hung up about what his wife looks like, that indicates he is very immature. This disproves the Christian notion, believed and taught by some Christians, that God only grants a spouse to people who are fully deserving of one (e.g., godly, humble, self-less, etc).

Other good posts at that other blog include:

From EQUALITY FOR WOMEN AND MEN IN THE CHRISTIAN FAITH Blog:

(Link): Why Complementarians “See” Male Leadership as God’s Design: The Psychology of Perception (Seeing What We Already Believe)

I like the title of this blog post, because it gets to the heart of the matter – Christians who are into gender complementarianism claim that women are equal to men, but their views and teachings on women totally belie that claim, because they spend their time rationalizing their sexist views (e.g., women cannot or should not lead or teach men, or husbands have authority over wives, etc):
(Link): Rationalizing Inequality

(Link): Is Mutual Submission Really a Myth?
—————————-
Related posts this blog:

(Link): The Annoying, Weird, Sexist Preoccupation by Christian Males with Female Looks and Sexuality

(Link): Gender Complementarian Product for Females: Don’t Base Your Value on Your Looks, but Wait, Yes, You Should

(Link): How Christians Have Failed on Teaching Maturity and Morality Vis A Vis Marriage / Parenthood – Used as Markers of Maturity Or Assumed to be Sanctifiers – Also: More Hypocrisy – Christians Teach You Need A Spouse to Be Purified, But Also Teach God Won’t Send You a Spouse Until You Become Purified

(Link): Atlantic: “The case for abandoning the myth that ‘women aren’t visual.’”

(Link): Christian Gender and Sex Stereotypes Act as Obstacles to Christian Singles Who Want to Get Married (Not All Men Are Obsessed with Sex)

(Link): When Women Wanted Sex Much More Than Men – and how the stereotype flipped

(Link): Following the Usual Advice Won’t Get You Dates or Married – Even Celebrities Have A Hard Time (Good Looks and Lots of Money are NOT guarantees you can get a spouse or even dates) (part 1)

(Link): Part 2 – Following the Usual Advice Won’t Get You Dates or Married – Even CHRISTIAN Celebrities Have A Hard Time

(Link): Modesty: A Female-Only Virtue? – Christian Double Standards – Hypocrisy

(Link): Groundbreaking News: Women Like Sex (part 1, 2) (articles)

(Link): The “Feminization” of the Church by K R Wordgazer

(Link): Pat Robertson to married woman: All men are cheaters and sex crazed horn dogs, but that’s okay because they’re men

(Link): Pat Robertson raises the old canard about females dressing modestly and males supposedly being visually oriented

(Link): Advocate of Family Values Doesn’t Uphold Family Values | Stop Asking Pat Robertson for Advice America!

(Link): Do men really have higher sex drives than women? (article/study)

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

(Link): The Annoying, Weird, Sexist Preoccupation by Christian Males with Female Looks and Sexuality

(Link): Some Christian Women Use Pornography – No Duh. I’ve been saying this all along.

(Link): The Secret Women’s Porn Problem (article about Christian women who use porn)

(Link): Getting Married Does Not Necessarily Guarantee Frequent Hot Satisfying Sexy Sex / (also discussed): Gender and Sex Stereotypes (article)

(Link): Letter to Advice Columnist: Husband Upset That Wife Masturbates – Marriage Doesn’t Guarantee Hot Regular Sex For Both or Either Partner, Contra Usual Christian Claims

(Link): Yes, Some Women Use and Look at Pornography

(Link): New Study Released: Cheaters: More American Married Women Admit to Adultery (links)

(Link): Superman, Man Candy -and- Christian Women Are Visual And Enjoy Looking At Built, Hot, Sexy Men

(Link): Ryan Gosling and Shirtless, Buff Cowboy Photos on Social Media – Yes, Women Are Visually Stimulated and Visually Oriented (Part 2)

(Link): Boy Bands, Rock Singers, and Other High School Crushes – Yes, Women Are Visually Stimulated and Visually Oriented

Why I Cheated On My Husband – Various Women Explain Why They Had Affairs

Why I Cheated On My Husband – Various Women Explain Why They Had Affairs

Some evangelical, Reformed, fundamentalist, or Baptist Christians likes to live in the land of fantasy, where they often teach and believe that marriage and being a parent makes a person more godly, mature, holy and responsible.

And often, those same groups adhere to and spread false hoods about adult singles and the childfree and childless, that we are selfish, weird, losers, or are not fulfilling God’s roles for our lives.

They also erroneously teach that marriage makes people immune from sexual sin, but it does no such thing. Here are some more examples.

(Link) Why I Cheated On My Husband

    By Colleen Oakley

    The first question that comes to mind when a spouse cheats is: Why?

    A recent study by the University of Guelph in Ontario, Canada, attempted to answer that question and found that the reasons behind infidelity differ greatly between the sexes. For men, it’s typically about the sex-the more sexually excitable they are, the more likely they are to cheat.

    For women, it’s more about the level of satisfaction in her relationship; if a woman is unhappy in her marriage, she’s 2.6 times more likely to cheat.

    Regardless of the reason, there’s one thing that’s certain: infidelity is devastating. But there can be a silver lining.

    “In many cases, it forces issues to the surface of a relationship that would have never otherwise been dealt with,” says Kevin Hansen, author of Secret Regrets: What if You Had a Second Chance?

    Read on to discover what life lessons these five women gained through their personal experiences with infidelity-and what you can learn from their stories.

    “My husband was abusive.”
    “From the day I married my husband, I knew it was a mistake,” says 50-year-old Elizabeth Smith.* “He was abusive, controlling and expected me to quit my job to make a home for him.”

    A little over a year into the marriage, she began having an affair with a man that she worked with.

    “I had no illusions that I was in love, but it was eye-opening to be with someone that made me feel good about myself, made me laugh and respected me for who I was-not who he wanted me to be,” she says.

    “The affair helped me find myself and proved to me that I could live a life independent of my husband. It also gave me the courage to ask for a divorce. Twenty-five years later, I’m married to a wonderful man. We love making each other happy, and never try to change who the other person is,” she says.

    “We began to resent each other.”
    When Vanessa Myers*, 28, married her husband six years ago, they both couldn’t wait to have children, but after their wedding day something changed for her.

    “I started to really love my job, and kids didn’t seem to fit into the picture,” she says. Her husband was hurt by her change of heart, and began to resent her.

    Continue reading “Why I Cheated On My Husband – Various Women Explain Why They Had Affairs”

Four myths about sex and women that prop up the new misogyny

Four myths about sex and women that prop up the new misogyny

Some of the the myths the author describes in this are some of the same ones spread by conservative Christians.

(Link): Four myths about sex and women that prop up the new misogyny

    Sorry, would-be pickup artists. There is no such thing as a “friend zone”

    by AMANDA MARCOTTE, ALTERNET

    This article originally appeared on AlterNet.

    Trading in myths and misinformation is the bread and butter of any reactionary movement, as is amply demonstrated by the various myths that prop up everything from gun nuttery to the anti-choice movement.

    Unsurprisingly, then, there’s a great deal of misinformation upholding the troubling trend of new misogyny that festers in everything from “men’s rights” forums to “pick-up artist” communities to the various rape apologists and two-bit woman haters that litter the right wing media landscape

    [Note from this blogger: the left wing also has woman-haters among them. Some of them have done things like made “rape jokes” against conservative, right wing, female politicians, such as Sarah Palin. Funny how liberal writers usually fail to acknowledge the sexism inherent in the LEFT WING].

    The tragic shooting in Isla Vista, which was committed by a young but hardened misogynist named Elliot Rodger, has shown a spotlight on this weird but influential world where ugly myths about gender and sexuality flourish.

    Here are some of those myths, some of which influenced Rodger, and why they are so very, very wrong.

    1. Evoutionary psychology nonsense.
    While the more mainstream conservative movement embraces a religious form of misogyny, the new misogyny often prefers to pretend to have a “scientific” rationale for its negative attitudes towards women.

    Anti-feminist writer James Taranto, who is not a scientist, distilled this theory in the Wall Street Journal, positing that evolution made men and women’s sexual desires complete opposites, with men trying to get away with sex with as many women as possible and women being “hypergamous,” which is the new pseudo-scientific word for “gold digger.”

    His sole evidence for this theory was a long-discredited 1989 study that showed that men were more quick to say yes to sex with a stranger.

    None of them have stopped pushing the belief that women are disinterested in sex itself, (Link): but only use it as a commodity to trade with “high status” men, since pushing this belief allows self-appointed “pick-up artists” to sell dating books and classes to men who want to learn to fake being “high status” to get more sex.

    Nor do they stop pushing the idea that men are more promiscuous than women, a self-serving myth that allows them to demand chastity in female partners while excusing their own sexual dalliance.

    In reality, men and women have roughly the same number of sexual partners over a lifetime.

    Both sexes are interested in casual sex, but men more readily agree because they both feel less likely to be violently assaulted by a stranger and are more likely to expect the encounter to end in orgasm. Nor are women programmed to be gold diggers.

    As women’s ability to make their own money has increased, there has been a decline in women seeking richer husbands. Women aren’t preprogrammed to be gold diggers, because the second they’re freed from having to chase rich men, most are happy to date men more like themselves.

    Continue reading “Four myths about sex and women that prop up the new misogyny”

George Will: Being a victim of sexual assault is a “coveted status that confers privileges” (a rebuttal)

George Will: Being a victim of sexual assault is a “coveted status that confers privileges” (a rebuttal)

I am right wing, a conservative, but sometimes, I realize other conservatives get things wrong, oh so very wrong. This is one of those times.

I do think that, at times, liberals are guilty of hyping certain situations or instilling a ‘victim mentality’ in people, but not in the case of sexual assault, of rape. Will is way off base with his editorial.

The following is from a site that tilts left, but this editorial criticizing Will’s views is right on the money:

(Link): George Will: Being a victim of sexual assault is a “coveted status that confers privileges”

    The Washington Post columnist thinks women are lying about sexual assault in order to get “privileges”

    Washington Post columnist George Will doesn’t believe the statistic that (Link): one in five women is sexually assaulted while in college. Instead he believes that liberals, feminists and other nefarious forces have conspired to turn being a rape survivor into a (Link): “coveted status that confers privileges.”

    As a result of this plot, “victims proliferate,” Will wrote in a weekend editorial that ran in the Washington Post and New York Post.

    Further compounding the crisis of people coming forward about sexual assault to stay de rigueur is the fact that “capacious” definitions of sexual assault include forcible sexual penetration and nonconsensual sexual touching.

    Which is really very outrageous, according to Will. It is really very hard to understand why having your breasts or other parts of your body touched against your will should be frowned upon.

    It’s not very surprising that George Will does not think that sexual assault on campus is a big deal. It’s also not very surprising that he thinks that definitions of sexual violence are somehow overly broad because they factor in forms of sexual contact other than penetration.

    But what is puzzling — about this editorial and the army of nearly identical pieces of rape apologia that find a way into national newspapers with some regularity — is how much one has to ignore in order to argue these points.

    Continue reading “George Will: Being a victim of sexual assault is a “coveted status that confers privileges” (a rebuttal)”

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

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

This post first published in 2014

July 2018, Edit:

The following advice Stetzer dishes out clashes horribly with (Link): his advice in a July 2018 article where he tells married readers of Christianity Today to befriend adult singles.

How can married Christians befriend adult singles – of whatever gender – when Stetzer is basically also telling married couples that single adults are problems, are potential threats to their relationships?

It’s a contradiction to tell Christians to practice the “Billy Graham Rule” but then turn around and instruct them to practice inclusion of adult singles.

Many married Christian women are generally loathe to be-friend adult single women, because they are afraid, and they’ve been taught by Christians such as Ed Stetzer and other Christians, that the single woman may prove enticing to their husbands, or the adult single will try to “hit on” their husband.

So same-sex friendships in the church do not work, because single women are viewed by many Christians as being man-stealing harlots.

I have a few observations below this long excerpt by Stetzer:

(Link): Ed Stetzer’s Advice: Avoid Any Hint

Snip the intro:

    by Ed Stetzer

It might seem silly to you, but let me encourage you not to see it as such. Many of you who read this are young pastors. I know too many pastors who have lost great credibility because of an accusation (let alone an indiscretion).

I am not irresistible. I have a great face for radio. I do not think that anyone will swoon over me. But I do not know the stability, morality and disposition of people that I meet.

When I told my wife, I thought she might slap me. She has been excited about my recent health plans. However, she was the opposite. She felt protected and affirmed. She knew I would not put our family in jeopardy.

I remember Danny Akin once saying that he would not pick up a woman on the side of the road in the rain if her car broke down. He would never be alone with a woman not his wife. It seemed a bit selfish until he told the rest of the story. He would pull over and give her the keys and let her drive to where she needed to be.

Guarding yourself takes work, can be awkward and is often inconvenient. But one problem averted makes it a good stewardship of your life, ministry and family.

At the churches I planted, we always used something like Saddleback’s Ten Commandments:

1. Thou shalt not go to lunch alone with the opposite sex.

2. Thou shalt not have the opposite sex pick you up or drive you places when it is just the two of you.

3. Thou shalt not kiss any attendee of the opposite sex or show affection that could be questioned.

4. Thou shalt not visit the opposite sex alone at home.

5. Thou shalt not counsel the opposite sex alone at the office, and thou shalt not counsel the opposite sex more than once without that person’s mate. Refer them.

6. Thou shalt not discuss detailed sexual problems with the opposite sex in counseling. Refer them.

7. Thou shalt not discuss your marriage problems with an attendee of the opposite sex.

8. Thou shalt be careful in answering e-mails, instant messages, chat rooms, cards or letters from the opposite sex.

9. Thou shalt make your co-worker your protective ally.

10. Thou shalt pray for the integrity of other staff members.
(The first four do not apply to unmarried staff.)

I hope you have a list like this for your own life and ministry.
“But among you there must not be even a hint of sexual immorality…” (Ephesians 5:3)

——- end quotes by Ed Stetzer ——-

Here we have Ed Stetzer maintaining the usual conservative Christian misunderstandings and stereotypes, some that prove to be quite harmful to women and to single ones in particular, and maintaining stereotypes about the genders, sex, marriage, singles and all the rest.

Stetzer’s views on this matter are actually anti-biblical. He is advising men to behave in the exact opposite way that Jesus Christ treated women, that Jesus role modeled for men in the Bible.

I cannot find any biblical examples of God telling men in the Bible to avoid women, nor do I see examples of Jesus running away from women or refusing to meet with prostitutes, to avoid being alone with women, – and no, my dear, “fleeing temptation” does not count, for it has been skewed by Christians to mean something it does not: isolate women and treat all women as temptresses.

A citation of Ephesians 5:3 (the “But among you there must not be even a hint of sexual immorality” verse) has been carried to absurd lengths by Stetzer in his “thou shalt not list.”

As Jesus said of the mis-interpretations and too-rigid interpretation and application of some Old Testament laws of the religious groups of his day,

You blind guides! You strain out a gnat but swallow a camel. (Matthew 23:24)
—(end quotes)—

Jesus had to remind the Pharisees that they followed the letter of the law rather than its spirit, which defeated its purpose and intent on some matters. And that is what guys like Stetzer do with Ephesians 5:3.

Your Bible mentions that you, if you are a Christian, are capable of SELF CONTROL. It is not inevitable that if a Christian man and woman meet alone or become emotionally close that it will always end in SEX.

As I said on a previous post, re-read the account of Joseph and Potiphar’s wife, and you will see that Joe’s FIRST reaction was NOT to “flee.” Nope. After the wife hit on Joe, he reasoned with her several times.

It was not until later in the story that he then fled. Christians often assume that the very first time the wife made a pass at him that Joe fled, but that is incorrect. Read it yourself ((Link): Genesis ch 39):

And though she spoke to Joseph day after day, he refused to go to bed with her or even be with her.
—(end quote)—

Yeah, it says, “day after day” the chick hit on him, and he refused her.

It does not say, “Joe refused to be alone with her in the first place,” or, “the first time she made a pass he fled.”

I think that contemporary American Christian views about men not being around women lest they be tempted to pork them mirrors those of the Pharisees, which Jesus contested.

Here are some examples:

An ancient baraita enumerates seven classes of Pharisees, of which five consist of either eccentric fools or hypocrites:

(1) “the shoulder Pharisee,” who wears, as it were, his good actions. ostentatiously upon his shoulder;

(2) “the wait-a-little Pharisee,” who ever says, “Wait a little, until I have performed the good act awaiting me”;

(3), “the bruised Pharisee,” who in order to avoid looking at a woman runs against the wall so as to bruise himself and bleed…
(Source)

From (Link): Jesus And Women

No rabbi of Jesus’ day that I know about included women among his disciples.

But Luke said that Jesus included women in His circle of followers– even women from questionable backgrounds

…. Jesus then did five things that are astonishing because what He did broke through the cultural mold of that day.

First, He called this woman [the woman bent over in the synagogue in Capernaum] forward from the place of the women (the back of the room) to the place of the men (the front of the room).

He interrupted the teaching of the Word of God–the most sacred time in Jewish life–to minister to a woman.

…. Second, Jesus broke culture by speaking to her [the woman bent over in the synagogue in Capernaum].

The Jewish writer Alfred Eidersheim wrote that there were rabbis who prayed every day: “I thank Thee, God, that I was not born a Gentile, a dog, or a woman.”

Isn’t that a great prayer? (Do you notice the word order?) No wonder everyone was shocked as Jesus spoke to this woman.

Jesus broke culture a third way: He laid hands on her.

Eidersheim explains that in Jesus’ day some Pharisees were called “the black-and-blue Pharisees.”

Why? Because they were so strict in their observance of the Law they would not even look at a woman. If they sensed that a woman was going to cross their path, they would close their eyes tightly and walk straight ahead.

Sometimes they would smack into a wall or fall over an ox cart and receive their bruises. Here, in contrast to the example of the “black-and-blue Pharisees,” Jesus laid His hands on a woman.

Fourth, Jesus affirmed her worth in society. These men in the synagogue were probably thinking, What is she doing in here? What is He doing? He’s touching her. Look at what He’s doing in God’s holy place.

Jesus knew their hearts and said to them, “Don’t you loose your ox or donkey and take it to be watered on the Sabbath?” (Luke 13:15).

They all knew they broke the Sabbath by watering their animals.

Jesus continued, “This woman is worth far more than any animal you have. This woman is not an animal; she is a ‘daughter of Abraham’ ” (Luke 13:16). By saying this, He restored her rightful position.2

This episode is especially important because Jesus willingly risked His life for the sake of a woman. He humiliated His opponents in their own synagogue by ministering sensitivity, kindness, and mercy to a woman. It is for this act of kindness and divine love, and many others like them, that these men sent Him to the Cross.
–(end quotes)—

Of course, if you know anything about Islam, you know that some forms of it require women to wear partial or full head- to- body coverings, otherwise men may look upon them and lust.

Basically, you have some branches of Islam and other world religions teach the same thing about male gaze, female sexuality, etc, that some Christians do, a few similarities include:

-They over-hype that men are visually stimulated (ignoring that women are as well),

-they assume men are rapey rapers who can’t keep their penises in their pants (ie, they assume and teach that men lack sexual self-control),

-they teach and believe that all women are easy tarts and harlots who will bed any man in sight, even fat, balding middle aged evangelical doof wads,

-that women are responsible for men’s sexual behavior by their own or by how they dress (hence puerile Christian modesty teachings or the extreme of Islamic burkas)

By the way, contrary to the sexist crud Christians continue to spew in their marriage sermons and blogs, women are visually oriented, not just men.

Continue reading “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”

When Men Are Raped (article from Slate)

When Men Are Raped

(Link): When Men Are Raped

Excerpts

    A new study reveals that men are often the victims of sexual assault, and women are often the perpetrators.

    By Hanna Rosin

    Last year the National Crime Victimization Survey turned up a remarkable statistic. In asking 40,000 households about rape and sexual violence, the survey uncovered that 38 percent of incidents were against men.

    The number seemed so high that it prompted researcher Lara Stemple to call the Bureau of Justice Statistics to see if it maybe it had made a mistake, or changed its terminology. After all, in years past men had accounted for somewhere between 5 and 14 percent of rape and sexual violence victims.

    But no, it wasn’t a mistake, officials told her, although they couldn’t explain the rise beyond guessing that maybe it had something to do with the publicity surrounding former football coach Jerry Sandusky and the Penn State sex abuse scandal.

    Stemple, who works with the Health and Human Rights Project at UCLA, had often wondered whether incidents of sexual violence against men were under-reported. She had once worked on prison reform and knew that jail is a place where sexual violence against men is routine but not counted in the general national statistics. Stemple began digging through existing surveys and discovered that her hunch was correct.

    The experience of men and women is “a lot closer than any of us would expect,” she says.

    For some kinds of victimization, men and women have roughly equal experiences.

    Stemple concluded that we need to “completely rethink our assumptions about sexual victimization,” and especially our fallback model that men are always the perpetrators and women the victims.

    …. For years, the FBI defined forcible rape, for data collecting purposes, as “the carnal knowledge of a female forcibly and against her will.” Eventually localities began to rebel against that limited gender-bound definition; in 2010 Chicago reported 86,767 cases of rape but used its own broader definition, so the FBI left out the Chicago stats. Finally, in 2012, the FBI revised its definition and focused on penetration, with no mention of female (or force).

    Data hasn’t been calculated under the new FBI definition yet, but Stemple parses several other national surveys in her new paper, (Link): “The Sexual Victimization of Men in America: New Data Challenge Old Assumptions,” co-written with Ilan Meyer and published in the April 17 edition of the American Journal of Public Health.

    One of those surveys is the 2010 National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey, for which the Centers for Disease Control invented a category of sexual violence called “being made to penetrate.”

    This definition includes victims who were forced to penetrate someone else with their own body parts, either by physical force or coercion, or when the victim was drunk or high or otherwise unable to consent.

    Continue reading “When Men Are Raped (article from Slate)”