A Day In The Life Of An Abstinence Ed Teacher by S. Gomez

A Day In The Life Of An Abstinence Ed Teacher by S. Gomez

(Link): A Day In The Life Of An Abstinence Ed Teacher

Successful abstinence education begins with establishing and reiterating every child’s invaluable self-worth.

Excerpts:

…Many Young People Are Learning the Hard Way

My conversation with Kimberly comes at a time where abstinence-until-marriage curricula are being dragged through the media as an archaic form of moralistic sexual repression reserved exclusively for only the most backwards cities and states.

The Trump administration was chastised for its hire of pro-abstinence education leader Valerie Huber, and more recently for ending federal funding for a number of “teen pregnancy prevention” programs under the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.

It should be noted that “teen pregnancy prevention” is a remarkably pliable term and can include harmful curricula that don’t focus on self-worth or developing healthy boundaries.

If teens aren’t learning that mistakes have consequences, how are they to truly comprehend deciding to have sex this weekend at a party can affect their health, future fertility, and future families?

…Lost amid this battle is the one message teenagers need above all: that they are worthy of a love that is unconditional and comes without the cost of their body.

Continue reading “A Day In The Life Of An Abstinence Ed Teacher by S. Gomez”

Advertisements

Teen Vogue Magazine Promoting Anal Sex (2017)

Teen Vogue Magazine Promoting Anal Sex

One wonders if this teen magazine ever offers celibacy or virginity as choices for teen girls? Probably not. Liberals generally do not support a girl or woman’s choice to sexually abstain, but will mock it.

I don’t think the vast majority of women want to have anal sex with a man but are usually pressured into it by a boyfriend. Ditto on oral sex and other non-missionary style forms of sex. (But perhaps the article was aimed at LGBT individuals.)

If you are a teen girl (I cannot imagine why a teen girl would be reading my blog, but regardless…) you can do with your body as you please. If you do not want to have any sex at all, then do not have sex. If you do not want to have anal sex, then do not have anal sex.

Do not allow feminists, boyfriends, magazines, or Hollywood pressure you, shame you, or guilt trip you into doing sexual activity you feel conflicted about or don’t want to participate in.

If you have a boyfriend who is pressuring you to have sex or to engage in a particular sex act you’d rather not perform, please realize it is better to be single than to stay in a relationship with a guy who guilt trips you, uses threats of breaking up, or whatever, to get his way with you sexually.

If a guy does not respect your boundaries and wishes in the area of sexuality, break up with him!  Please stop wasting your time with him. You will eventually get another boyfriend later. There is nothing wrong with being single.

(Link): Teen Vogue’s Bizarre Anal Sex Article Shows Women Are Still Being Defined in Relation to Men

Excerpts:

The supposedly progressive piece, intended for teenage girls, refers to women as ‘non-prostate owners’, ignores the organ for female pleasure and fails to mention any potential dangers

Defining women by the men around them is an issue feminists have sought to address, and correct, for years.

…It would stand to reason that we could assume that in 2017 any work aimed at women would be sure to avoid such regressive patterns.

However, in (Link): Anal Sex: What You Need To Know for Teen Vogue, sex educator and feminist activist Gigi Engle managed to harp back to a time where women were defined by their relationship to men.

…Not only is any potential pleasure a woman may feel during anal sex reduced to the lack of male body parts (she is a “non-prostate owner”) but the clitoris, the actual hub of female sexual pleasure, has been removed. The lack of a male body part is the focus of what defines the female body, and what is actually there isn’t identified at all.

What is this teaching the audience of a magazine aimed at teenage girls? It tells them their identity is not “woman”, but rather “non-man”.

It tells them that should they consent to anal sex, their body is just a hole for the man to penetrate, and the part of their body that is most sensitive and reliable for the female orgasm is so irrelevant that it doesn’t even warrant a label.

It tells them that consenting to anal sex is not about their pleasure, but about their partner’s.

What it fails to tell them is the potential dangers of anal sex. The possibilities of fissures and tears which can become infected very easily due to contamination by faeces, severe enough to need surgery, or lead to anal abscesses which increase the chances of catching HIV.

By treating anal sex as an equivalent to vaginal sex, you increase the chances that your audience will not understand the potential damage they can do to their own or their partner’s body, and in turn increase their chances of becoming seriously ill.

(Link): Parents outraged over Teen Vogue anal sex how-to column (but magazine still defends it)

Teen Vogue is defending its decision to publish a graphic tutorial to anal sex for children and teenagers – (Link): calling critics homophobic.

“This is anal 101, for teens, beginners and all inquisitive folk,” author Gigi Engle wrote in “A Guide to Anal Sex.”

… (Link): The original article did not include any references to practicing safe sex – but was later amended to include a line about condoms being “non-negotiable.”

“Here is the lowdown on everything you need to know about butt stuff,” the writer declared.

Parents across the nation became enraged upon learning that Teen Vogue wanted to turn their children in sexual deviants.

Continue reading “Teen Vogue Magazine Promoting Anal Sex (2017)”

Talking With Both Daughters and Sons About Sex – article via NY Times

Talking With Both Daughters and Sons About Sex

You will notice that this study which is mentioned below describes how sexual stereotypes influence how parents teach their kids about sex: daughters (girls) are encouraged to be abstinent and to delay sex, but not boys.

I see this same exact (sexist) pattern among Christian families: Christians buy into secular stereotypes that girls should be as sexually pure as the freshly driven snow and Christians wrongly assume females lack a libido, but males are assumed to be sex-starved horn-dogs who lack control, and boys are not generally expected to remain celibate.

Ergo, females are taught in Christian sermons and other Christian content to sexually abstain. Christian boys don’t generally receive as much pressure or sermonizing on abstaining. There may be something “off” about Christian teachings about sex, since they are mirroring secular cultural assumptions about gender and sex in these matters.

On the other hand, regarding other (non sexual) topics, I can see how Christians might BENEFIT (or, ironically, be MORE in line with the Bible) if they went along with secular mores instead of with their incorrect biblical interpretation of some topics. But on this issue, they sound quite similar to secular culture, and are off they mark, I believe.

(Link): Talking With Both Daughters and Sons About Sex – via the New York Times

Excerpts:

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”

School sex education around the world is out of touch with teens, study finds.

School sex education around the world is out of touch with teens, study finds.

(Link): School sex education around the world is out of touch with teens, study finds.

By DR. KATHRYN J. HORTON

Sep 16, 2016, 4:49 PM ET

…Recent data suggests, however, that schools in many nations are falling short in educating young people effectively about sex and relationships. Students and young adults in different countries express frustration at school-based sex education programs, according to a (Link):  new review published earlier this week in the British Medical Journal.

Continue reading “School sex education around the world is out of touch with teens, study finds.”

Teenagers Given Condoms at School Likelier to Become Pregnant and get STDs / STIs: 2016 Study

Teenagers Given Condoms at School Likelier to Become Pregnant and Get STDs / STIs: 2016 Study

(Link): New Study Shows ’90s Era Condom Programs Increased Teen Fertility Rates

Excerpt:

  • by MICHAEL J. NEW
  • June 17, 2016
  • A new study by a pair of Notre Dame economists received some media attention this week. It found that school districts that instituted condom distribution programs in the early 1990s saw significant increases in the teen-fertility rate [as well as an increase in sexually transmitted diseases].

Continue reading “Teenagers Given Condoms at School Likelier to Become Pregnant and get STDs / STIs: 2016 Study”

Will The Left Turn On Sexual Freedom? by D. Linker

Will The Left Turn On Sexual Freedom? by D. Linker

(Link): Will The Left Turn On Sexual Freedom? by D. Linker

Excerpts

  • But more interesting is the question of whether criticism of economic libertarianism will be broadened to encompass the (Link): moral libertarianism that both underlies it and inspires the parallel drive toward the liberation of sexuality from moral judgment.
  • Understood in this wider sense, we’ve been living through an extended libertarian moment since the early 1960s.
  • Moral libertarianism presumes that no authority — political, legal, or religious — is competent to pronounce judgment on an individual’s decisions, provided that they don’t negatively effect other people. Thanks to this assumption, a grand edifice of inherited moral and legal strictures on sexuality have crumbled over the past half century, leaving individuals free to live and love as they wish, as long as everyone involved gives their consent.

Continue reading “Will The Left Turn On Sexual Freedom? by D. Linker”

Abstinence Groups: New Sex-Ed Study Misses Point of Urging Teens to Wait

Abstinence Groups: New Sex-Ed Study Misses Point of Urging Teens to Wait

(Link):  Abstinence Groups: New Sex-Ed Study Misses Point of Urging Teens to Wait

Excerpts:

  • By KILEY CROSSLAND
  • Posted May 11, 2016, 03:30 p.m.
  • Abstinence advocacy groups say a new (Link): study criticizing virginity pledges misses the point of abstinence education.

  • The study, “Broken Promises: Abstinence Pledging and Sexual and Reproductive Health,” published on the website of the Journal for Marriage and Family, reports that the vast majority of virginity pledgers break their promise to save sex for marriage.

Continue reading “Abstinence Groups: New Sex-Ed Study Misses Point of Urging Teens to Wait”

Woman Realizes Having Open Relationship Bothers Her / Married Couple Confront Each Other About Their Other Sexual Partners via Cosmo Magazine

Woman Realizes Having Open Relationship Bothers Her / Married Couple Confront Each Other About Their Other Sexual Partners via Cosmo Magazine 

I do have some problems with how conservatives (including conservative Christians not just secular social conservatives) deal with the topic of sex (hey, about 65% of my blog posts are about that topic). However, your liberals can be problematic in this area as well.

Liberals like to believe sex has no consequences, not physical nor emotional.

However, at the same time, they scream on their blogs against abstinence-only public school sex education and yell that women should receive tax-payer funded birth control, abortion should be legally and widely available, and so on.

Liberals tend to downplay the possible physical ramifications of sex, especially for women, when speaking or writing for women (ie, sexually transmitted diseases and unplanned pregnancy), to teach women that being trampy is not shameful but is feminist and empowering. I find that liberals sometimes speak out of both sides of their mouth on this topic.

Secular feminists also like to tell women (especially the younger, naive ones) that they won’t have any emotional fall-out from having sex.

I’ve known women (in person) and read of too many testimonies by women online and in magazines to know that is not always so.

Plenty of people do have issues accepting that their partner has a sexual history or has cheated on them with another person.

Here is another example  or two of this being the case (I have not watched the video on the page with the video.)

I will also link to a page I saw recently by a woman who said she was initially fine and accepting of her poly-whatever boyfriend but after so many months of dating the guy, knowing he was emotionally growing attached to the other women he was dating and having sex with disturbed her.

(Link): I Tried an Open Relationship—and It Was a Disaster 

Excerpts:

  • by Sophie S. Thomas
  • Three ways I’m better at being monogamous now.
  • …Jack [the writer’s boyfriend] was polyamorous. And because I was in love with him, I wanted to go with the flow and make it work. I tried for three years to do things his way — I’d sometimes sleep with other people while he sometimes went on dates with potential new partners.

Continue reading “Woman Realizes Having Open Relationship Bothers Her / Married Couple Confront Each Other About Their Other Sexual Partners via Cosmo Magazine”

Can Someone Really Be a ‘Born-Again Virgin?’ by L. Borreli

Can someone really be a ‘born-again virgin?’ by L. Borreli

I do not support the term or concept of “born again virginity” as I’ve explained in a few previous posts, such as (Link): this one, so I shall not belabor that point here.

(Link): Can Someone Really Be a ‘Born-Again Virgin?’ by L. Borreli via Medical Daily

Excerpts:

  • Is it really possible to become a “born-again virgin” through spiritual and surgical routes?
  • The Social Construct of Virginity
  • The (Link): social construct of virginity will most likely not disappear. People define virginity by what it means to them and what works in accordance to their morals and values. However, the most common definition of virginity for heterosexual women is whether they have had penile-vaginal intercourse.
  • According to (Link): The Kinsey Institute: “Losing one’s virginity is a physical act, whether or not a woman notices any blood from her vagina. The reason why some women bleed when they first have sex is because a thin layer of tissue called the hymen covers part of a woman’s vaginal entrance.”
  • It is believed when a woman has sex, the hymen tears and she may begin to bleed a bit. However, some women don’t have much of this tissue to begin with, or have tissue that has been torn from using tampons, from masturbation, or from being fingered by a partner. This is why looking for blood on the sheet or going to the doctor is a poor way of determining whether or not a woman is a virgin.
  • Born-Again Virgin: What Is It?
  • According to Dictionary.com:
  • “Revirginzation is the process of a sexually active person attempting to regain virgin status by abstaining from sexual relations, esp. during the time just before marriage; also called secondary virginity, revirgination.”
  • UrbanDictionary defines being a born-again virgin like this:
  • “More than a year between sexual relations, with anyone else.”
  • But, how did this label come to be?
  • The concept of born-again virginity started to be embraced in the 1990s and early 2000s as abstinence education took root in public schools.

Continue reading “Can Someone Really Be a ‘Born-Again Virgin?’ by L. Borreli”

The Myth of Safe Sex by D. Foley

The Myth of Safe Sex by D. Foley

(Link): The Myth of Safe Sex by D. Foley

Excerpts:

  • It’s time for the common understanding of “safe sex” to be re-visited.
  • …The CDC estimates that nearly (Link): 20 million people contract a sexually transmitted disease (STD) every year in the U.S. That equates to 54,000 people every day. Half of all those infections occur in young adults between the ages of 15 and 24.
  • Statistics show that the use of protection is higher than it has ever been with the total revenue from sale of condoms in 2014 topping just over $600 million. Even with this increased attention to protection, in November 2015 the CDC released new statistics that show STD infections have hit a record high.

Continue reading “The Myth of Safe Sex by D. Foley”

The real truth about sex: What we’re not telling our kids (article advocates teaching staying a virgin until marriage)

The real truth about sex: What we’re not telling our kids

I bet ol’ John Morgan will see this story via my blog and quote it on his blog and not credit me at all.

Please see these posts to see what I mean:

The person who wrote this page I am linking to below advocates that people wait until marriage to have sex.

This does seem to be the position of the Bible, and yes, people can stay celibate for many years.

However, I had expected to marry by my mid 30s at the latest, am still single and a virgin in my 40s, and have given up on the “virgin until marriage” belief (for myself personally).

If or when I get a suitable, long term or serious boyfriend, I am willing and ready to have pre-marital sex.

I do think it is prudent for anyone under the age of 25 to hold off on sex. If you are emotionally mature and have the financial means (to pay for birth control, etc), I would say if you find someone who loves you, go ahead and have sex, even if you are not married to the person (but only if you really want to – never cave in to a man who pressures you for sex, or who threatens to leave you if you don’t put out, or not as soon as he wants  you too. He is trash.)

I don’t think people need to “marry early” to avoid fornication, as some evangelicals advocate. I am proof that a person can maintain his or her virginity beyond their 20s or 30s. It’s not impossible to remain celibate for years.

But, I’m no longer completely on board with this “keep refraining from sex even if you still find yourself single past 35” view, either. It’s ridiculous.

(Link):  The real truth about sex: What we’re not telling our kids

Excerpts:

  • By Marcia Segelstein
  • Published June 05, 2015
  • ….Here are some cold, hard facts to consider.  Every year there are ten million – ten million! – new cases of sexually transmitted diseases among our sons and daughters who are 15 to 24 years old.  As of 2008, one in four teenagers already had an STD, according to the Centers for Disease Control.
  •   The most commonly transmitted STD is HPV, or human papillomavirus.  We now know that certain types of HPV cause cancers of the head and neck.  Think Michael Douglas.  Others cause cervical cancer.
  • Another “common STD,” according to the CDC, is chlamydia.  In 2013, there were nearly a million cases among 15- to 24-year olds.  If our daughters are among that million, it could mean they’ll never be able to have kids of their own.
  • ….As for getting pregnant, the CDC reports that nearly half of all pregnancies in this country are unintended.  For women 19 and younger that rises to four out of five.  What’s not to understand here?  Sex makes babies!
  • According to the Guttmacher Institute, at 2008 rates, one in ten women will have an abortion by the time she is 20 years old.
  • Even if you’re morally neutral on the subject of abortion, the image of your  daughter crying in her college dorm room as she contemplates the possibility of aborting your grandchild can’t be a pretty one.
  • And even if you believe abortion is the equivalent of getting a tooth pulled, how could you not worry about the possibility of some psychological fallout.
  • Then there are the emotional consequences of sexual intimacy.  Studies have linked sexual activity with depression in teenage girls.
  • We now know about oxytocin, a hormone released in the female brain during sexual activity.  Among other things, it promotes feelings of bonding and trust.
  • Like it or not, sex comes with emotional strings attached.  Dr. Miriam Grossman is a psychiatrist who worked in the campus counseling center at UCLA.
  • She recounted the devastating effects of casual sex among her patients in her book, Unprotected.  “Almost daily, I prescribe medication to help students, mostly women, cope with loss and heartbreak.”  Are we willing to live with the prospect of our kids suffering from depression?  Depression that was preventable?
  •  

    As parents we spend our lives trying to protect our kids.  So here’s a radical thought.  How about urging them to wait till they’re married before having sex?  If we really want what’s best and safest and healthiest for our kids, let’s start a sexual revolution.  Hey, it’s been done before.

——————————-

Related Posts:

(Link):  How About Using Celibates as Role Models For Celibacy? (Oddity: Christians Holding Up Non-Virgins [Fornicators] As Being Experts or Positive Examples on Sexual Purity)

(Link):  Slut Shaming and Secular and Christian Culture – Dirty Water / Used Chewing Gum and the CDC’s Warnings – I guess the CDC is a bunch of slut shamers ?

 

(Link):  Churches Would Rather Hear From Ex Porn Stars Than Adult Celibates or Virgins – Church Invites Ex Porn Star to be Guest Speaker

 

 

Victim Blaming, Rape Apologia Piece by H. Ferguson on Christian Post site: “Rethinking Date Rape”

Victim Blaming, Rape Apologia Piece by H. Ferguson on Christian Post: “Rethinking Date Rape”

I am surprised I have not seen more Christians tweet or write in criticism of this page:

(Link): Rethinking Date Rape by Hope Ferguson – on The Christian Post

Here are some excerpts:

  • … Sulkowicz did not deny previously having taken part in consensual relations with the same young man. So was this a case of rape or of miscommunication?
  • According to the latest statistics, one in five women on American campuses has been subject to acquaintance rape. Although the circumstances vary, one common element is that alcohol has usually been consumed by both parties.
  • A young adult woman, lugging a mattress – the supposed scene of a crime – around with her to class, seemed to me to crystalize all that is wrong with the current focus on the “rape culture,” on college campuses and how it subsequently infantilizes adult women. I could only think of a child lugging around her security “blankie.”
  • ….If a woman decides that a consensual encounter is now not to her liking, and she tells the man to stop, but in a frenzy of testosterone and pleasure, he refuses, is that rape? Does her later no cancel out her earlier yes?If a young woman, such as one profiled in the New York Times recently, gets stinking drunk at a frat party with equally drunk young men, and finds herself “taken advantage of,” is that rape?
  • …While the young men, every bit as immature and drunk as the young women, are excoriated and raked across society’s collective coals, the young women are absolved from all liability and responsibility for their behavior.
  • We are not talking about mature adults preying on kids.
  • We are talking about peers and how they think about, negotiate, and act on their sexual desires.The Columbia student who was so outraged about being “raped” by her date, had already had consensual sex with the same young man previously. Rather than dismissing the incident as sexual communication gone wrong, instead, the young man, a student at Columbia as well, is labeled as a rapist on national TV, with no opportunity to defend himself without exposing his identity.
  • …Roiphe points out how smart young women who populate campuses are seemingly embracing the discarded stereotype of a woman who does not own her own actions, who is innocent, easily persuaded and manipulated; an image that women of her mother’s generation sought to dispel.
  • Are women really helpless victims?In the latest controversy over Jackie’s story in Rolling Stone, the writer, Sabrina Rubin Erdely, admittedly began her quest with an agenda to expose acquaintance rape on a prestigious college campus; to show how the charge is not taken seriously by college administrators (who frequently do not report the cases to police, either for fear of sullying their institution’s reputations, or in recognition of the murkiness of many of the charges) and to show how young women are therefore victimized all over again.
  • Now I am not defending rape, acquaintance rape, date rape nor any other kind. I am saying, as Roiphe did in her piece, that cases of heterosexual miscommunication may end up as “rape,” if the woman later regrets what she did; doesn’t remember what she did; can’t recall consenting; or did something under the influence of alcohol that she wouldn’t normally do, with the attendant shame.However, perhaps the young men also did something under the influence of alcohol that they would not normally do.
  • Why are they held to a higher standard of accountability than the young women? Why isn’t there more education on college campuses about the dangers of binge drinking? Nearly 2,000 young people a year die on American campuses of alcohol-related circumstances.
  • …Why aren’t young women taught to protect themselves and to avoid being caught in avoidable situations that could end badly, like being drunk to the point of passing out in a frat house full of horny young men suffering from TMT (too much testosterone).

I personally do not find it victim-blaming to tell women of preventative measures they can take to lessen their chances of being raped; I wrote about it earlier, here:

(Link):  Suggesting Preventive Measures Is Not Necessarily Victim Blaming

So far on that score, I’m in partial agreement with Ferguson, but I am astounded at how much victim blaming is in this article.

Where Ferguson writes,

  • However, perhaps the young men also did something under the influence of alcohol that they would not normally do. Why are they held to a higher standard of accountability than the young women?

Because a woman getting drunk is not the same thing as a man attacking a woman.

It doesn’t matter if the man in question is inebriated or not when he attacks a woman. Rape remains rape, and a crime that one human does against another.

A woman who is getting drunk in a frat house is only doing harm to herself (she may get liver problems if she continues drinking).

And that is one reason of several why society should hold young men “more accountable” in a situation where he rapes a woman, whether he is drunk or sober at the time. This isn’t rocket science, and I’m shocked that Ferguson doesn’t understand any of this.

Men who kill people while drunk driving face legal penalties, why should they not also do so in cases of sexual assault, if they rape a woman while they are drunk?

Ferguson writes,

  • A young adult woman, lugging a mattress – the supposed scene of a crime – around with her to class, seemed to me to crystalize all that is wrong with the current focus on the “rape culture,” on college campuses and how it subsequently infantilizes adult women. I could only think of a child lugging around her security “blankie.”

For those of you not familiar with the story of the rape victim who carried her mattress around campus, here are a few articles about it (all off site links):

I find it very troubling that this author, Ferguson, shows no understanding or concern for the young woman carrying the mattress, but chooses to view this as the woman “infantilizing” herself.

The young woman’s mattress was symbolic of her attack, and of seeking justice.

To compare the mattress of this story to a child’s “security blankie” belies deep ignorance on the part of the author (and I’m betting this is willful ignorance) and a lack of compassion for sexual assault victims.

Ferguson writes,

  • Although the circumstances vary, one common element is that alcohol has usually been consumed by both parties.

While I have no problem educating and cautioning women from drinking too much around men, especially at frat houses and at bars, it is immoral to blame women for being raped because they were drunk at the time of the assault.

Would Ferguson say that children who follow a child molester into his van for a promise of candy are to blame for being raped by the molester in the van?

Would she, Ferguson, shame those child victims and say, “It was their own fault they were assaulted, because they should have known better than to believe a stranger’s promise about candy?”

Probably not, so why blame a grown woman for being raped?

Ferguson writes,

  • Sulkowicz did not deny previously having taken part in consensual relations with the same young man. So was this a case of rape or of miscommunication?

Any time a woman says no or protests, or does not give her consent to have sex (the woman may be drugged or knocked out and incapable of accepting or declining), the situation is rape.

It does not matter if the man who rapes the woman is a man she has had consensual sex with 100 times in the past, only one time, or ten times, or zero times.

Marital rape was legal in the United States even up into the last half of the 20th century or earlier, because cultural and legal views were such that people believed that a husband had a right to have sex any time with his wife, even if the wife said “no” and did not want to have sex.

It looks as though Ferguson subscribes to this view that women have no agency, that they are forever the property of other men, and that their decisions about their own bodies or lives do not matter.

I also find it very odd and sexist that Ferguson acts as though because a woman may have had consensual sex with a man at one point in time that the man is forever entitled to that woman and her body any time he pleases in the future.

To argue in that manner would be to argue also that because I let the plumber into my house once five years ago to un-clog my kitchen pipes, with my consent, now means that same  plumber can just waltz into my house any time he wants to now and touch my pipes.

Just because I consented to let the auto mechanic down the street change the oil in my car six months ago at the local garage does not give that guy the right to get into my car today, change the oil, or drive the car around.

A one time “yes” of two days ago or ten years ago, does not equate to a lifetime “yes.”

Perhaps the most hypocritical part of the essay was this:

  • …Roiphe points out how smart young women who populate campuses are seemingly embracing the discarded stereotype of a woman who does not own her own actions, who is innocent, easily persuaded and manipulated; an image that women of her mother’s generation sought to dispel.

If anything or anyone is guilty of infantilizing women, it’s conservative Christian teachings about gender roles, dating, and marriage.

Under the rubric of “biblical womanhood,” “traditional gender role” or “gender complementarian” teachings, Christians tell Christian women to behave and think like little girls – though advocates of these positions may deny it, this is what their teachings boil down to in practice.

Christian women, in particular from evangelical, Reformed, fundamentalist, and Baptist backgrounds, get the repeated message from parents, churches, Christian material (such as books, blogs, etc) that a woman’s only  acceptable or suitable role in life is to be a wife and mother.

As a wife, they are told, their husband has authority over them, and they are to “graciously submit” to that husband. Christian women in abusive marriages are counseled by preachers to stay with abusive husband and to continually submit to him.

For examples of that, see these off site links:

(Link): Preacher John Piper: Wives should “endure” abuse “for a season”

(Link): Paige Patterson has never retracted his words on wife beating

Those are common views among conservative Christians concerning women in abusive marriages. I said COMMON, those are not rare, those are not exceptions.

Christian women are taught from the time they are young that they are always to put the needs and feelings of other people before their own.

Christian women are taught and pressured from the time they are girls and as adults that they are always to say “yes” to other people’s requests, no matter what.

Christian women are taught by most other Christians and conservative Christian culture that conflict is bad or wrong and to be avoided.

Therefore, many Christian women raised in such families or environments never get any practice at developing assertive life skills, disagreeing with others, standing up to people, defending themselves.

Conservative Christians raise females with the expectation that a good, biblical female is one who is constantly quiet, sweet, un-assertive, doesn’t make choices for herself, doesn’t challenge or disagree with people, especially never men.

Christian women are, in other words, fed a steady diet of Codependency, and they taught that being Codependent is God’s will for every woman’s life.

Women who are raised like this are incapable of making decisions for themselves. They tend to cave in quickly when they are too afraid to stand up to a person who is demanding something of them. The word “no” gets caught in their throat.

This puts Christian women in a dangerous position, from the time she is a kid, teen, and into her adult years, unless and until she visits therapists and reads books by doctors who explain it’s not mean, uh-Christ-like, bitchy, or selfish for a woman to say “no” and to have boundaries.

Here’s an example that happens to a lot of women a lot as they grow up and even into their adulthoods (this happened to me a lot):

If a strange man approaches a woman on the street asking for help, the woman’s instinct or gut tells her this man is possibly a mugger or a rapist, but she don’t want to hurt his feelings, offend the man, or appear as a bitch.

After all, their mothers, Christian pastors, and books about men and dating, raised them that Christian girls are ALWAYS sweet, helpful, and nice, and should not put even their own safety ahead of a stranger in need – so instead of running away or making an otherwise quick exit, which they should do, they let the strange man approach them and talk to them.

And all the while, they have butterflies in their stomach, worried if this man is going to harm them or not.

By the way, a lot of rapists prey on women using this as a tactic and use this to exploit women.

Ted Bundy, the serial killer, used to put a cast on his arm, and approach young women asking them for help, to carry things to his car. He knew they did not want to appear bitchy or mean, so they would help him out. Once they were by his car, he wound knock them out, toss their bodies in his car, drive away, and kill them.

Rapists, muggers, etc, count on women caring more about others than their own safety, they rely on women caring more about appearing nice, sweet, and “Christian” then they do about their own safety, and they exploit these traits to get female victims.

And Christians keep right on teaching women to be easy targets for rapists, con artists, abusive boyfriends, and muggers.

Yes indeed, it’s conservative Christian teaching itself which causes some Christian women to be raped, mugged, or killed.

It’s not always the fault of secular feminism, university campus parties, or alcohol drinking that is to blame for rape, but the cultural and Christian pressure on women from the time they are young, to always be compliant, lack boundaries, and afraid to say No to anyone.

The ideal biblical, Christian woman to most Christians is a passive, wimpy, sweet, subservient, woman who will never stand up for herself, never utter a negative comment.

And it’s precisely those kinds of women abusive men and rapists love to choose as their victims.

Christian gender role teachings set women up to be enticing, easy targets for con artists, rapists, abusive husbands, but then Christians – such as Ferguson – who write those awful articles, blame the women for being raped.

Christians who pressure girls and women to abide by gender complementarian teachings (which is nothing but codependency) set women up to be rape victims, conditions them to act and think like victims, but then they turn around and blame them if they are raped.

It’s demonic, evil, and very deplorable to set women up to be assaulted, and then blame them if or when they are assaulted. The Christian Post really should delete that article.

————————-

Related posts:

(Link):  How Feminists Are Making Women Easier Rape Targets

(Link):  Southern Baptist’s New Sexist “Biblical Woman” Site – Attitudes in Total Face Palm of a Site One Reason Among Many This Unmarried and Childless Woman Is Saying Toodle-Oo to Christianity

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

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

(Link): Population Decline and Bay-bee Obsession – Patriarchy, Quiverfull, Traditional Family, Christian Gender Complementarian Nuts

The Next Frontier of Sex Ed: How Porn Twists Teens’ Brains

The Next Frontier of Sex Ed: How Porn Twists Teens’ Brains

While I think it’s fine to teach kids that contemporary porn is sleazy and unrealistic, I think presenting staying a virgin into adulthood is a valid option that should be presented. As it stands, the left wing in particular like to encourage kids to have sex prior to marriage, and the overall secular culture treats virginity as though it’s a disease that one needs to dispense of as quickly as possible.

Imagine if staying a virgin or becoming celibate after having been sexually active were both choices treated with respect, not derision.

Imagine if conservative Christians actually presented celibacy and adult virginity as achievable and possible, rather than, like secularists, assuming neither one is possible for anyone over the age of 25.

Perhaps if Christians and Non-Christians respected people’s choices to abstain from sex (instead of ridiculing it, as is often the case), more people would not seek out pre-marital sex, which could reduce the number of things such as sexually transmitted diseases, unplanned pregnancies, and so on.

(Link): How Porn Twists Teen’s Brains

Excerpts

  • Someone has to tell young adults that porn stars are like WWE wrestlers, and that real sex with a real partner isn’t like XXX flicks. The Internet shouldn’t fill that hole.
  • by A. Snow
  • …While those parents who tackle “the talk” stick to tradition, let’s not forget that in 2014 a frank discussion about sex can’t ignore pornography. Yes, you read that right. Someone has to tell kids that porn stars are like WWE wrestlers, and that real sex with a real partner isn’t like XXX flicks.“Pornography is not meant to teach about sexual education, it is meant for adults and has no place in the hands of children,” says porn star and UCLA grad Tasha Reign.

Continue reading “The Next Frontier of Sex Ed: How Porn Twists Teens’ Brains”