Middle-Aged Women Face a Crisis of Discipleship by M. VanLoon

Middle-Aged Women Face a Crisis of Discipleship by M. VanLoon

IMHO, this situation is ten times worse if you’re a never married, childless (or child-free) woman over the age of 30. I started noticing by around my mid-30s that most evangelical or Baptist churches cater to “married with couples kids.” They ignore anyone who is not a young married couple with kids still living at home.

The lady who wrote the following, M. VanLoon, is married with 2 or 3 kids and is either in her 40s or 50s.

I’ve read her material before. She said that she didn’t notice how horrible churches ignore all non-Nuclear Family demographics until her last kid grew up and moved out, leaving her and her spouse as “empty nesters.”

But it’s true. Most American churches don’t pay attention to anyone who is single (never married), or widowed, divorced, or childless.

I did a post similar to this one over a year ago.

(Link): Middle-Aged Women Face a Crisis of Discipleship

Excerpts:

(Link): George Barna presents sobering data reflecting the quiet exodus from the church among boomers and gen x-ers. The data indicates it isn’t just millennials leaving the church but sizeable numbers of those at midlife and beyond.

In their recent book Church Refugees, sociologists Josh Packard and Ashleigh Hope also bring hard science to explore the reasons driving this exodus among those who say they’re (Link): done with the institution but not done with Jesus.

Though the study includes people across all age groups, their work affirms and expands upon what I’d been hearing anecdotally: In local churches, there’s often a discipleship gap for older members.

Continue reading “Middle-Aged Women Face a Crisis of Discipleship by M. VanLoon”

Woman’s Identity Way Too Tied Up In Motherhood (Penny on 700 Club)

Woman’s Identity Way Too Tied Up In Motherhood

The woman who wrote to Pat Robertson’s Christian show “700 Club,” Penny, did not specify if she is a Christian, and one who is a complementarian, but I wouldn’t be surprised if she was one or both.

She wrote:

Four years ago, I was going through an extremely difficult time. My 16 year old daughter left home and moved 2,000 miles away.

Not only was my daughter gone but it seemed like 16 and a half years of my life were gone too. Being an at home mom made it that much more difficult for me.

I dealt with extreme rejection, loss, and sense of purpose. I felt like a failure. I lost my daughter, I lost friends and financially we struggled.

We lost our home and we lived in poverty. I grieved going through so much loss. If my own child didn’t even need me, then what is my purpose in life?

[signed]

PENNY

I think it’s unfortunate that some women think their only value is in child-rearing, that they base their entire identity on being a wife and mother, which is what Penny has done.

Continue reading “Woman’s Identity Way Too Tied Up In Motherhood (Penny on 700 Club)”

Single, Virgin Women Do Not Have Another Standard by Which to Be Saved, Contra Complementarian Group CBMW

Single, Virgin Women Do Not Have Another Standard by Which to Be Saved, Contra Complementarian Group CBMW

The Bible does teach that people should remain virgins until marriage, but oddly, some Christians do things like omit men from this teaching (as though virginity applies only to women).

In this case, they seem to be conflating being single, and a virgin, with receiving salvation, as though there’s some other standard by which others are saved. Christians also frequently make much too much out of the marriage analogy, in which they pretty much seem to suggest that a person has to be married (and having sex) to truly know God or be in relationship with God.

Via the Biblical Personhood blog:

(Link): Is “Biblical” manhood and womanhood compatible with the gospel of Christ?

The Biblical Personhood blog reproduces this quote from a Council for Biblical Manhood and Womanhood resource:

[from complementarian, CBMW, material:]

48. How can a Christian single woman enter into the mystery of Christ and the Church if she never experiences marriage?
[Their answer promotes offering your virginity to God. Nothing about becoming a Christian.] – CBMW, “Fifty Crucial Questions, Question 48

… The mystery of Christ and the church, likewise, is not about marriage or celibacy. Jesus loved you – male or female, single or married or divorced or widowed – first. Know you are loved by God, love God back, experience God’s love, and see how it never ends, and how it changes you to live for Him.

Continue reading “Single, Virgin Women Do Not Have Another Standard by Which to Be Saved, Contra Complementarian Group CBMW”

Being ‘Selfish’ in My Dating Was the Best Decision I Could Have Made by Zachary Zane

Being ‘Selfish’ in My Dating Was the Best Decision I Could Have Made by Z. Zane

Here is the link:

(Link): Being ‘Selfish’ in My Dating Was the Best Decision I Could Have Made by Zachary Zane (excerpts farther below)

This piece was written by a man, and he might be a homosexual, based on the stock photo illustrating it, which shows a man walking down the street and laughing with another man – after skimming more of the article, yes, he appears to be homosexual (he talks about dating men).

If this guy is homosexual, I can say as a hetero woman, I related to most of what he wrote.

I am a recovering codependent – and it sounds to me as though the guy who wrote this page, Zane, is also a codependent, or was one at one time.

Codependency usually seems to affect women, but some men can be codependent also.

A lot of stereotypes women are expected to live out and uphold by churches, Christians (under “gender complementarian” or “biblical womanhood” teachings), and secular culture, are actually facets of codependency, and some examples of that are: being passive, compliant, thinking it’s selfish to put yourself first and get your own needs met, and so forth.

If you continually put the needs of another person ahead of your own, you will grow resentful of it eventually, and either explode in anger at the other person or break things off (such as seeking a divorce).

Continue reading “Being ‘Selfish’ in My Dating Was the Best Decision I Could Have Made by Zachary Zane”

Women Who Stay Single or Get Divorced Are Healthiest by B DePaulo

Women Who Stay Single or Get Divorced Are Healthiest

I can tell you that my fellow conservatives won’t like this news at all. Neither will the Christians who are into complementarianism and who like to shame singles for being single, who like to promote the studies that say that staying single will cause a person to be miserable or die younger.

(Southern Baptist Al Mohler loves to push those views (Link): on his blog. It’s sickening.)

Anyway, here is this from B. DePaulo:

(Link): Women Who Stay Single or Get Divorced Are Healthiest by B. DePaulo

Excerpts:

A (Link): new study, soon to be published in the Journal of Women’s (Link): Health, provides fresh evidence that people who stay single instead of getting married, or who get divorced instead of staying married, are especially likely to be healthy.

….Here’s what changed when unmarried women (whether divorced, separated, or always single) got married:

  • After they got married, their BMI (body mass index) increased.
  • After they got married, they drank more.
  • After they got married, their systolic blood pressure increased.
  • Diastolic blood pressure decreased over the three-year period for those who stayed single and those who married, but it decreased less in those who got married.

Here’s what changed when married women got divorced or separated, compared to the women who stayed married:

  • BMI (body mass index) decreased for the women who got divorced.
  • Waist size decreased for the women who got divorced.

(( click here to read the rest ))


Related Posts:

(Link):  More Anti-Singleness Bias From Southern Baptist Al Mohler – Despite the Bible Says It Is Better Not To Marry 

(Link):   Please Stop Shaming Me for Being Single by J. Vadnal

(Link):   Preacher Says in Sermon that Single Men Who Play Video Games Are Losers Who Have Retarded Spirits and This Creates Dating Problems for Women

(Link): Conservative Christians Are Now Blaming Homosexual Marriage on Heterosexual Single Adults

(Link): There is No Such Thing as a Gift of Singleness or Gift of Celibacy or A Calling To Either One

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

(Link): The Myth of the Gift – Regarding Christian Teachings on Gift of Singleness and Gift of Celibacy

(Link): The Netherworld of Singleness for Some Singles – You Want Marriage But Don’t Want to Be Disrespected or Ignored for Being Single While You’re Single

(Link): Preachers and Christian Media Personalities: Re: Marriage – You’re missing the point stop trying to argue or shame singles into getting married

(Link): Christian Teachings on Relationships: One Reason Singles Are Remaining Single (even if they want to get married)

(Link): Salvation By Marriage Alone – The Over Emphasis Upon Marriage by Conservative Christians Evangelicals Southern Baptists

(Link): Want To But Can’t – The One Christian Demographic Being Continually Ignored by Christians Re: Marriage

(Link): Theme Park Bans Single Adults For Fear They Are All Pedophiles

(Link):  Stigmas and Stereotypes of Single Unmarried Men Over 25 or 30 Years of Age – They’re Supposedly All Homosexual or Pedophiles

(Link):  Christian Blogger About Divorce, Pastor Andrew Webb, Thinks All To Most Mid-Life Never – Married or Single – Again Adults Are Mal-Adjusted, Ugly Losers Who Have Too Much Baggage

(Link): Church Allows Pedophile To Lead Bible Studies, Hails Pedo as a “Hero” – Meanwhile, Many Churches  Refuse to Allow Celibate, Single Adults to Hold Any Sort of Leadership Positions

Complementarian and Pro Family Values Christians Claim to be Pro Woman and Pro Family But By Their Actions Show They Are Not

Complementarian and Pro Family Values Christians Claim to be Pro Woman and Pro Family But By Their Actions Show They Are Not

Complementarians claim to be respectful of women, but their theological views help to enable mistreatment of women and bar women from taking positions and roles that should go to them, if they have the skills, talents, and education.

Many Christians claim to be pro “Family Values” but in reality treat children and women (you know, who tend to be parts of families) like dirt.

Here are some posts explaining in detail or giving examples:

First post:

(Link):  When I Became a Single Mother, Patriarchy Let Me Down by Bridget Jack Jeffries (excerpts from this first link farther below)

Second post:

And by way of WW – that is (Link): Wartburg Watch – (from a February 2017 post entitled, “Ignite: Remove Alleged Rapist, Ben Roethlisberger, and Joe White, Who Is Being Sued for Child Sex Abuse Cover Up, From the Speaker Lineup!”)

Christian Liberty University is holding something called “Ignite,” which pertains to advocating godly manhood or family values, or some such. One of Ignite’s scheduled speakers is a guy named Ben Roethlisberger, who is accused of rape by at least three different women. The guy is, or was, a football player.

A sub-heading on the WW page reads: “The troubling history of rape allegations against Ben Roethlisberger”

The WW blog owners in turn link to this page in  their post about this guy here:

(Link):   Without Consequence: When Professional Athletes Are Violent Off the Field

So, a Christian university is allowing an accused rapist to speak at an event that is purportedly about encouraging men to lead godly lives.

Continue reading “Complementarian and Pro Family Values Christians Claim to be Pro Woman and Pro Family But By Their Actions Show They Are Not”

Why Women Are Tired: The Price of Unpaid Emotional Labor by C. Hutchison

Why Women Are Tired: The Price of Unpaid Emotional Labor by C. Hutchison 

(Link): Why Women Are Tired: The Price of Unpaid Emotional Labor by C. Hutchison

My comments about this subject, before copying some excerpts from the link above:

Another form of Male Entitlement: expecting the women around you to cheer you up, listen empathetically as you tell them about your problems. (Though other women can also be guilty of this at times, as I wrote of (Link): here).

In a (Link): much older post I wrote, where I linked to and excerpted an article from elsewhere, some guy in the article admitted that when he went to a local bar after a day at work, he enjoyed the female bartender more than the male ones, because any time he tried to talk about his problems (and receive empathy for his problems) from the males, the male bartenders would tell him to shut up and get over it.

However, when the lady bartender was on duty, she would listen to him and offer sympathy, he said. He relied on and appreciated her willingness to listen and respond with empathy.

My ex-fiance talked non-stop (as I wrote of (Link): here). He always wanted me to listen to him talk about his life, he never cared about mine, and he never asked about my views on anything. My ex expected me to stroke his ego and cheer him up in his ups and downs in life – but he was unwilling to do this for me.

My ex college friend made my mother’s death (Link): all about himself when I sent him notice of my mother’s passing. He talked about himself in his reply to me, instead of just doing what he should have and said, “I’m sorry for your loss.”. This ex friend making everything about himself was a pattern for him.

Even before my mother died, my ex college friend would e-mail me and talk about himself – he would ask me a question or two about me, but when I would write back commenting on HIS life – as well as responding to his questions about my life – he would never comment on my replies ABOUT ME.

I got the feeling he was asking about me only out of a sense of politeness. I don’t think he really cared about me or what I was up to or what I was thinking.

While some women can be very self absorbed and can be emotional vampires (I’ve been friends with a few and am related to one), I think at least most women are aware that they’re doing this to another women (and women tend to be aware of how it can be draining to be someone’s emotional support), but men seem to have a blind spot in this area.

Continue reading “Why Women Are Tired: The Price of Unpaid Emotional Labor by C. Hutchison”

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

Alpha Females Part 3 – Being a Beta Female Does Not Work, It Won’t Get You Dates, Or Keep Your Marriage in Good Shape

Alpha Females Part 3 – Being a Beta Female Does Not Work, It Won’t Get You Dates Or Keep Your Marriage in Good Shape

This commentary will be divided up among a few posts. Here is part 3.

(This post may be edited in the future to re-word things, polish things, add new thoughts or links)

Visit Part 1. | Part 2 | A Response to Venker: Re: Personal Experience

Part 4

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, 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


Venker, the author of “Society is creating a new crop of alpha women who are unable to love,” relies on a lot of anecdotal commentary to bolster her arguments in her article on “Fox News” site – I can only assume her book is filled with much of the same nonsense…

BEING A TRADITIONAL FEMALE, WHICH VENKER AND OTHERS BASICALLY EQUATE WITH BEING A DOORMAT, DOES NOT WORK FOR RELATIONSHIPS

I have anecdotal commentary in the other direction based on my own life, that of my mother’s and that of other women, to counter Venker’s arguments.

(Update: Please see (Link): my response to Venker here: she is fine with using her personal life experience in articles or books to sell other women on the notion they should be “Beta.”

However, when I produce examples in this post on MY experience – of how being Beta did not make my relationships better – she dismissed this approach on Twitter. Her using her personal experience to back up her view is acceptable to her, but not when others do the same thing to back up their views.

That is inconsistent. If she can appeal to her personal experience to make a point, so can I).

Here is an excerpt from the page by Venker:

….Indeed, my mother was the quintessential alpha wife. An alpha wife micromanages, delegates and makes most or even all of the decisions. She is, quite simply, the Boss.

— end excerpt–

Yes, I grew up quite the opposite from Venker. My mother was the total opposite of Venker’s.

MY MOTHER

My mother was the very sort of woman Venker advises other women to be. My mother in turn raised me to be like herself, which I was, up until my late 30s or early 40s.

My mother was the sweet, docile, doormat who catered to my father’s every need. My mother was definitely the opposite of “The Boss.”

My mother made home-cooked meals for my father most nights. She did not have a job outside the home.

My mother was the stereotypical womanly woman, passive, non-confrontational, soft-spoken woman that conservatives are forever applauding and pressuring other women to be like.

Continue reading “Alpha Females Part 3 – Being a Beta Female Does Not Work, It Won’t Get You Dates, Or Keep Your Marriage in Good Shape”

Half of Americans Think Women Should Be Required by Law to Take Husband’s Name

Half of Americans Think Women Should Be Required by Law to Take Husband’s Name

Talk about sexist and backwards.

When I was engaged to be married in my early 30s, I told my then-fiance when this topic came up that I was keeping my last name after we married, which out-raged him or greatly annoyed him. He became very argumentative and insisted I take on his last name (which was a tacky and stupid sounding surname).

And for some reason, my then-fiance told his family about this a few days later, and they laughed at him.

I don’t have a problem with women who willingly change their last name to their husband’s surname of their own free will and accord, but I do not agree with women doing this based on social convention, sexism, or pressure from their husband- to- be.

I find it sexist.  For every reason such men (or women who support it) reel off, it comes down to control. People today still think a man should be able to control the women he is married to.

For me, I am in my mid 40s. I’ve had this same last name my whole life – I’m not going to change it to placate some insecure man’s ego. He can get bent.

(Link):  Half of Americans Think Women Should Be Required by Law to Take Husband’s Name by K. Lawson,  Jan 2017

A new study published this month in “Gender Issues” seeks to understand why 70 percent of US adults reported in previous research that they believe a married woman should change her name and half said it should be required by law.


 … Shafer was interested in understanding how people perceived women based on their last name choice, and whether keeping one’s maiden name could cause backlash.

Continue reading “Half of Americans Think Women Should Be Required by Law to Take Husband’s Name”

Cheating Christian Man Tells Wife He is Not Built for Marriage – Take Carrie’s Advice On Cheating Jerks – Equally Yoked Is A Stupid Teaching

Cheating Christian Man Tells Wife He is Not Built for Marriage – Take Carrie’s Advice On Cheating Jerks – Equally Yoked Is A Stupid Teaching

A Christian woman wrote to Pat Robertson, host of the Christian show ‘The 700 Club,’ with the following letter (you can view the video segment with this letter, as well as listen to Pat Roberson’s reply to her (Link): here (You Tube)):

[Dear Pat Robertson]

I married a man who I thought was a Christian … even though I knew he cheated on me a year before I married him.

He is addicted to porn and I just recently found out he was talking to another woman.

They both said they did not have sex, but I am crushed.

Is this adultery? What should I do? He says he wasn’t made for marriage,

[Signed] Caroline.

Robertson basically tells her she does not have grounds to divorce the guy (I disagree with him. More on that farther below).

Continue reading “Cheating Christian Man Tells Wife He is Not Built for Marriage – Take Carrie’s Advice On Cheating Jerks – Equally Yoked Is A Stupid Teaching”

Not Wanting Kids Is Entirely Normal – Why the ingrained expectation that women should desire to become parents is unhealthy by J. Valenti

Not Wanting Kids Is Entirely Normal – Why the ingrained expectation that women should desire to become parents is unhealthy by J. Valenti

(Link): Not Wanting Kids Is Entirely Normal – Why the ingrained expectation that women should desire to become parents is unhealthy by J. Valenti

Excerpts:

In 2008, Nebraska decriminalized child abandonment. The move was part of a “safe haven” law designed to address increased rates of infanticide in the state. Like other safe-haven laws, parents in Nebraska who felt unprepared to care for their babies could drop them off in a designated location without fear of arrest and prosecution.

But legislators made a major logistical error: They failed to implement an age limitation for dropped-off children.

Within just weeks of the law passing, parents started dropping off their kids. But here’s the rub: None of them were infants. A couple of months in, 36 children had been left in state hospitals and police stations.

Twenty-two of the children were over 13 years old. A 51-year-old grandmother dropped off a 12-year-old boy.

One father dropped off his entire family — nine children from ages one to 17. Others drove from neighboring states to drop off their children once they heard that they could abandon them without repercussion.

The Nebraska state government, realizing the tremendous mistake it had made, held a special session of the legislature to rewrite the law in order to add an age limitation.

….What happened in Nebraska raises the question: If there were no consequences, how many of us would give up our kids?

…..Whether it’s because of hardship or not, many Americans are giving up on parenthood.

Continue reading “Not Wanting Kids Is Entirely Normal – Why the ingrained expectation that women should desire to become parents is unhealthy by J. Valenti”

Married Couple is Drifting Apart (Ask Amy Letter)

Married Couple is Drifting Apart (Ask Amy Letter)

This guy who wrote the Ask Amy advice columnist has been married for about ten or more years and says he and his wife are drifting apart. (I have pasted a copy of the letter much farther below in this post.)

He essentially says his wife is bored by him and his company and spends a lot of time away from him, out at night, with friends, or else, she’s on the phone a lot with her friends.

I was engaged to a guy for a few years – I ended up dumping the guy. While we were a couple, I could sit in the same room as him and yet still feel all alone.

The guy I was engaged to was terribly self-absorbed. My ex-fiance never took an interest in me, my opinions, my job, my life. He never paid me compliments, never gave me encouragement. I felt single and alone, even though I was in a relationship with him.

I so often see this assumption by Christians, in Hollywood movies, TV shows, and relationship advice books and articles, that you’ll never, ever be lonely if only you could just find a romantic partner. This notion is a bunch of nonsense. The truth is you can be in a relationship with someone and still feel lonely and unfulfilled.

Your partner might be a self-absorbed twit like my ex was, or your partner may be so emotionally troubled (or have an alcohol or drug addiction problem), which will leave you so busy catering to your partner’s needs, that he or she will be unable to meet yours (because your partner is too drunk, high on drugs, or psychologically damaged to be able to do so).

Continue reading “Married Couple is Drifting Apart (Ask Amy Letter)”

Christian University, Liberty University, Hires Guy for Athletic Director Role Who Ignored Gang Rape Reports by Women At His Previous College Employer – according to news reports

Christian University, Liberty University, Hires Guy for Atheletic Director Role Who Ignored Gang Rape Reports by Women At His Previous College Employer – according to news reports

I can’t say as though I am surprised by this story.

A lot of Christians and Christian institutions have sexist, out-dated views about women and sexual assault. They still blame women for being raped, while diminishing the role the male rapist plays in the rape.

Many of these conservative Christian groups, colleges, and persons (who tend to be “gender complementarian” in outlook) claim to care deeply about women and the safety of women, but their actions show they do not truly care about girls and women.

I find it hypocritical that so many conservative Christians place a lop-sided premium on a woman’s virginity (and no value on a man’s virginity), but they do nothing to safe-guard a woman’s virginity being taken from her against her will by a rapist.

Or, if a woman is raped and her virginity is taken (assuming she was a virgin at the time of the rape), these Christian groups, persons, and universities do nothing to hold the rapist accountable – or they seem very reluctant to do so.

Even under Old Testament laws, a male rapist had to marry his female victim or face other consequences (which was a way for a female rape victim in those days to avoid facing ostracism and other negative ramifications – not that I advocate for rape victims to have to marry their attackers). How strange that certain types Christians these days take rape less seriously than Old Testament cultures in some ways.

I am not comfortable with trans-women being allowed into women’s restrooms as I discuss (Link): in this post, and I see many conservative Christians are also wary of allowing men into women’s restrooms, and this fear is in large part due to the idea that men with bad motives will use Trans rules and laws to rape or otherwise sexually harass girls and women in areas once considered female-only (such as women’s bathrooms or locker rooms).

However, I wonder why those same Christians are so willing to have such lackadaisical attitudes towards women being raped by Christian men in or on Christian university sports programs or Christian campuses?

There are two different links below related to this story. First link:

(Link 1): Liberty University’s hiring of ex-Baylor AD sends a chilling message about sexual assault by Adam Kilgore

Excerpts:

Liberty and its president, Jerry Falwell Jr., hired a man in the midst of ongoing litigation relating to the high-profile disgrace that forced him from his old job.

McCaw ran the athletic program in which law firm Pepper Hamilton, tabbed by the school to perform an independent investigation, found “a failure to identify and respond to a pattern of sexual violence by a football player, to take action in response to reports of a sexual assault by multiple football players, and to take action in response to a report of dating violence.”

Evidently, that did not disqualify McCaw from landing the same position at Liberty.

Fifty-three percent of the roughly 15,000 students who attend Liberty University are women. How were they supposed to feel when they woke up Tuesday morning? How should their parents feel?

Continue reading “Christian University, Liberty University, Hires Guy for Athletic Director Role Who Ignored Gang Rape Reports by Women At His Previous College Employer – according to news reports”

Christian Abstinence Speaker Forces Girl Students to Hear Mandatory Sexual Purity Message While Boys Excused

Christian Abstinence Speaker Forces Girl Students to Hear Mandatory Sexual Purity Message While Boys Excused

I am not opposed to Christians teaching their kids about the benefits or moral basis of remaining a virgin until marriage. I do believe the Bible teaches that position, actually.

However, I do take issue with the fact that Christians almost always emphasize staying a virgin for girls but not for boys. That seems to be the case here.

That the boys were excused for a sexual abstinence message is, in my view, incredibly sexist and sends the wrong message – both to boys and girls. This sort of thing also makes Christians look like backwards, sexist rednecks to the Non-Christians who blogged about this to mock it or criticize it – which they have.

I do think there is at least one possible positive: at least the teen girls are hearing that staying a virgin is a viable option.

Where-as many secular feminists and liberals are always mocking virginity and celibacy, so that they make young girls (and even older women) feel as though they MUST have sex or there is something wrong with them if they are not having sex, or if they don’t want to have sex.

Contrary to what ths Henning guy says, it’s not true that men have higher sex drives than women or are more visually stimulated than women, so Henning can drop that from his materials. God did not “wire men to be more sexual” than women. (I’ve done other blog posts on those topics before, so I’m not going to get into that here.)

It’s not a girl or woman’s responsibility to dress in such a way that a boy or man does not feel aroused, as Henning claims. Each boy and man is capable of controlling himself, regardless of how a girl or woman is dressed. Christians: stop making females responsible for the sexual sins and failings of males – even the Bible does not do this.

(Link):  School Makes Girls Attend Christian’s Abstinence Lecture

Oct 20, 2016

by Mike Allen

Payson High School in Arizona recently required girls to attend an assembly about sexual abstinence, while the boys were given the option to attend, or not attend, an assembly on dating.

Continue reading “Christian Abstinence Speaker Forces Girl Students to Hear Mandatory Sexual Purity Message While Boys Excused”

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”

She changed his flat tire. He never called her again. Is this a case of a fragile male ego?

She changed his flat tire. He never called her again. Is this a case of a fragile male ego?

(Link): She changed his flat tire. He never called her again. Is this a case of a fragile male ego?

October 13, 2016

[Man and woman go on date; woman changes their flat tire]

“I figured if I can, why not do?” Ukpo said by phone of the date she first wrote about on the blog (Link): Madame Noire. “I don’t subscribe to this idea that because I’m a woman, I have to play this damsel in distress thing.”

It’s at this point in the story that Andrew Smiler, communications director at the Society for the Psychological Study of Men and Masculinity and the expert I called to discuss the fragility of the male ego, began chuckling.

He knew where the tale was headed — and why. Like me, he’s heard countless stories like Ukpo’s, where confident, well-intentioned women are trying to help, but a dating disaster ensues.

For clarity, I asked him, “What exactly is so funny?”

Smiler laughs again and explains: “We give people some really messed-up messages about gender roles. Even in the early 21st century, we have this supposedly egalitarian culture, and guys are taught that they should never show weakness or ignorance or inability to do a task. And in various ways they should ‘wear the pants’ in the relationship.”

Continue reading “She changed his flat tire. He never called her again. Is this a case of a fragile male ego?”

Sexism, Protecting Women, Family Values, and Christians Placing Biological Family Above Everyone Else

Sexism, Protecting Women, Family Values, and Christians Placing Biological Family Above Everyone Else

(Link):  The Problem with Protecting our Wives and Daughters

Excerpts:

by K. Du Mez

….I’m reminded here of the poignant words of Madeline Southard, one of the leading proponents of women’s rights in the Methodist church in the twentieth century. In her 1927 book, The Attitude of Jesus toward Woman, Southard raised precisely this question.

For centuries, Southard noted, women had been considered “the creature of her sex-relationships and of the resultant blood relationships.” As such, a woman’s status had been determined by her being “the wife, mother, daughter, concubine or mistress of some man,” but not as “a person in herself.”

Continue reading “Sexism, Protecting Women, Family Values, and Christians Placing Biological Family Above Everyone Else”

No, Focus On the Family, I Do Not Want to Civilize a Barbarian – via Biblical Personhood Blog

No, Focus On the Family, I Do Not Want to Civilize a Barbarian – via Biblical Personhood Blog

There is certainly nothing wrong with marriage or the nuclear family, but often times, in attempting to defend the nuclear family or the institution of marriage, a lot of Christians and conservative groups (such as Focus On The Family) err too far in making an idol out of both and denigrating singleness (or childlessness) in the process.

I have taken Focus on the Family to task before on that issue and one or two others.

Another blogger, Biblical Personhood, caught wind of a Focus on the Family blog post by  Glenn T. Stanton – well, it’s on a blog called “First Things,” which the lady blogger of Biblical Personhood says is an off-shoot of Focus on The Family.

I have discussed Stanton on my blog before, such as in these posts:

(Link): Focus on Family spokesperson, Stanton, actually says reason people should marry is for ‘church growth’

(Link):  Mefferd Guest Incredulous that Preachers Push Kids To Marry Early

Based on what I remember about Stanton, he can veer a little bit too much into idolizing marriage.

At any rate, here is the link to the blog post by Biblical Personhood, with some additional comments by me below this excerpt:

(Link): No, Focus on the Family, I do not want to civilize a barbarian via Biblical Personhood blog

Here is an excerpt from the opening (please click the link above to visit the other blog if you’d like to read the entire page):

From Biblical Personhood Blog:

(Link): Focus on the Family recently suggested something that seems, at first glance, to flatter women. I did not feel flattered at all. They suggested women are the number one way to change men for the better:

/// start quote

… the most fundamental social problem every community must solve is the unattached male. If his sexual, physical, and emotional energies are not governed and directed in a pro-social, domesticated manner, he will become the village’s most malignant cancer. Wives and children, in that order, are the only successful remedy ever found. – Glenn T. Stanton

/// end quote

This is highly problematic, to say the least.

From the theological perspective :

Have Focus On The Family never heard of Jesus and being born again? Surely Jesus is better at changing humans – even the alleged “malignant cancer” called unattached males – from the inside than any woman is? How could a Christian™ organization say that women, not Jesus, is the only remedy for men’s bad tendencies?

(( read the rest here ))

If you are an unmarried man (and you either want to stay single for the remainder of your life, or are aware you may never marry, even though you may want a wife), I’m sure you must really appreciate guys like Stanton saying you are basically a raging animal, or an immature man-baby, unless you are married to a woman.

You, if you are a single (unmarried) man, are a nothing, an incompetent, immoral loser unless you have a wife, is how Stanton’s reasoning comes across. You must have a wife and possibly father a child by said wife to count or to be a “real man.” This is pretty insulting stuff, especially bearing in mind that the Bible that Stanton likely would say he reads and agrees with, says nothing of the sort.

I did read over the Biblical Personhood blog post a day or two ago, but I don’t remember exactly everything that blog author wrote.

I will here add my own thoughts about the Stanton penned blog post. Some of my observations may be similar to those by the Biblical Personhood blogger.

Stanton writes:

 Women create, shape, and maintain human culture. Manners exist because women exist. Worthy men adjust their behavior when a woman enters the room. They become better creatures. Civilization arises and endures because women have expectations of themselves and of those around them.

I disagree with just about everything he said there, on different levels, and for different reasons.

Most cultures are patriarchal, and this has been the way the world has been for thousands of years.

Women are not allowed to shape or maintain politics, marriage, or church – let alone culture, because men hold all the power. Women are taught by parents and culture from girlhood that this is normal, that men should be in charge, and females are conditioned from childhood to accept this and go along with it, especially Christian girls.

As much as I dislike blatant sexism, where men sound like cave-men and make loud, rude, condescending claims, such as women are not as logical or intelligent as men (this is used to justify limiting women in the workplace and so on)-
I also do not appreciate this (Link): benevolent sexist, noble-sounding, sappy and fouffy writing that tries to convince women that being subservient to men, allowing men to lead and protect them, and thus they can and should give up self-determination and their agency, is in their best interest, because dang it, women are so much more morally superior creatures to men.

This sort of writing is sugar-coated sexism. It’s asking women to give up their personhood,  identity, or their independence, in exchange for something else (in this case, the betterment of men or culture).

I’m really tired of how sexists keep demanding things of women, and nothing of men, of expecting women to fix men, or to fix society.

Continue reading “No, Focus On the Family, I Do Not Want to Civilize a Barbarian – via Biblical Personhood Blog”

Christian Married Father (Promoted by His Christian Employer as being a Family Values Guy) Sexually Assaulted Boys at Christian Camp, Some During Bible Study, Say News Reports – And He Led Sexual Purity Classes for Kids

Christian Married Father (Promoted by His Christian Employer as being a Family Values Guy) Sexually Assaulted Boys at Christian Camp, Some During Bible Study, Say News Reports – And He Led Sexual Purity Classes for Kids

Several Christian blogs have been covering this story lately.

A married Christian father named Peter Newman is reported to have sexually assaulted under-aged boys that he met at a Christian camp called Kamp Kanakuk in Missouri.

A guy named Joe White is the CEO of Kanakuk Ministries, which includes Kamp Kanakuk.

Newman, the reports say, invited some of these boys over to camp property in off-season, after hours, or to his home – sometimes under the pretense of having them over for Bible study.

According to online news, Newman told some of the boys if they allowed him to masturbate them (or vice versa), it would eliminate sexual temptation for them. These reports say Newman also went on to sodomize these boys or perform oral sex on them (or them on him).

If I am understanding the blog coverage and secular news reports correctly, even though the Christians who ran the camp knew (yes, they knew) that this Newman guy was allegedly fondling children, they did nothing about it.

Further (again, if I am understanding the coverage correctly) Newman was later hired to work at Fellowship Memphis Church, a church which (Link): also protected another known sexual deviant who preyed on girls and women within their church during church hours, despite the fact the folks there were aware of his deviant history.

Of course I find child sexual abuse to be horrible, evil, and deviant.

However, the focus of my blog is not child abuse per se.

I tend to focus on the topic of adult singleness and issues that may be of interest to singles – such as how Christians love to discriminate against, or otherwise ignore, singles, and how they promote this bogus notion that married parents are morally superior to single, childless adults. So, when I link to stories about child abuse, it tends to be in a way that relates to singleness.

When I was reading up on this story – mostly skimming articles, I’ve been a little busy lately to devote much time to writing posts for this blog – I noted how some of the promotional work for this Newman guy by Christians at the camp kept emphasizing what  a godly, stand-up guy he supposedly is.

These Christian groups were saying he’s a real great example of “Family Values.”

At one point, the Christians (either the Christian camp or the church, I don’t recall which) had Newman work as a (get this!) speaker about sexual purity for teens at some Christian conference.

Continue reading “Christian Married Father (Promoted by His Christian Employer as being a Family Values Guy) Sexually Assaulted Boys at Christian Camp, Some During Bible Study, Say News Reports – And He Led Sexual Purity Classes for Kids”