views and thoughts on topics, especially ones pertaining to christianity – with an emphasis on how most christians either ignore or discriminate against unmarried christians – and how christians have turned marriage and parenting into IDOLS and how there is no true support for sexual purity, virginity, or celibacy among christians – this is a blog for me to vent; I seldom permit dissenting views. I don't debate dissenters ————-
Five Things Every Married Man Should Stop Obsessing Over Around Single Women by J. Kamps
Thank you, Jean Kamps! Kamps is one of the very few married (Christian) women I’ve seen who comprehends how terribly Christianity, especially married Christian men, treat single women – the way most to all married, Christian men ASSUME (wrongly!) that all single women are minxes out to bed any and every married man we come across.
(These married Christian men must have some ego to assume I find them attractive enough to want to boink. I don’t. Women are visual too and have sexual desire, but we don’t want to sleep with any and every man we come across.)
Often times some of the assumptions Kamps is addressing here in an article by a married Christian man, are taught under the BGR “Billy Graham Rule.” I have blogged on this topic many times before. I will put links to some of those posts at the bottom of my post, under “Related Posts.”
Did Hell Freeze Over?: Liberal Rag Promotes Idea that Celibacy is Acceptable, and a Valid Life Choice / Re: 2016 Study Says Millennials Aren’t Having Much Sex
The following editorial comes from left wing site Salon, known for publishing pieces by left wing feminist Marcotte, who likes to insist everyone respect women’s sexual choices except for virginity and celibacy – she thinks it’s okay to mock those (see this link and this link for more on that).
Most of the time, liberals are loathe to admit that it’s okay for adults (or kids) to be virgins or celibates. They often portray the state of being abstinent as being sexually repressed or weird. They get all judgey-judgemental about it, but at the same time ask us not to “slut shame” the people, especially women, who boink around like dogs in heat.
So, I was quite surprised to see this liberal editorial defending the idea that it’s okay for people to be chaste, and that people need to stop pressuring everyone to have sex. This sort of editorial from a left wing site is very, very rare.
Everyone calm down and stop judging young adults for “missing out on a good time”
….While the study’s findings are of cultural interest about changing sexual practices, an unfortunate side effect is the concurrent media sex panic. To wit: a Washington Post headline asked if this means “(Link): the end of sex?” while (Link): The Cuttouted “Millennials Confirm That Sex Is No Longer Cool.”
WashPost Columnist: ‘Ghostbusters’ Haters Are ‘Virgin Losers’ – (via NewsBusters Site); Both the Right and Left Wing Get Some things Wrong About This
This story comes from NewsBusters, which is discussing a column written for Washington Post newspaper by columnist Kristen Page-Kirby about the new Ghostbusters movie.
The original Ghostbusters movie, released in the 1980s, contained four male leads. The reboot version of the movie, which was released July 15, 2016, contains four women leads instead.
Unfortunately, over a year or more ago, when news came out that there would be four women leads in the film, some of the sexist jerkwads who inhabit the internet started lambasting the movie all over You Tube, Twitter, and where ever else – not because the move was bad (it wasn’t even released yet), but because they were incensed that Hollywood was cramming some form of feminism down their throats.
Interestingly, I didn’t see as much backlash over the main character of the new Star Wars film, “Star Wars: The Force Awakens” being a woman – Rey.
At any rate, I will be discussing two or three different topics in this post that are related to this new film, or mentioned by the conservative essayist at the NewsBusters site.
This is another story where I am in the middle. I can’t say as though I’m completely on one side or another in regards to some aspects of this story, depending on what is under discussion.
I am currently a moderate right-winger (I used to be more to the right than I am currently. In the last few years, I’ve been reconsidering if some of my former political and Christian beliefs are wrong.)
I’ve been more open the last few years to hearing the criticisms and views of liberals and Non-Christians – which is not to say I agree with everything I see left wingers and Non-Christians espousing or arguing in favor of.
I sometimes think secular, liberal feminists have good points on some topics, but I normally disagree with them.
As far as the Ghostbusters film reboot is concerned, I do think some of the backlash against the movie does in fact stem from sexism. But then, I do think some people may honestly feel that the movie is genuinely bad due to having a poor story line, or what have you.
I have not seen the movie yet. I don’t go to movie theaters that much anymore.
I usually wait until movies air on cable television; I’m willing to bet that this Ghostbusters reboot will probably be shown on F/X channel, or SyFy, or some other cable network in the next two years, and I have cable television, so I don’t know if I want to invest my time and cash into driving down to a theater to see this, since it will eventually be on television.
I saw the original Ghostbusters in a movie theater when it was in theaters in the 1980s. I was a kid at the time.
The original was okay, it was quite enjoyable and plenty of fun, but it was no movie masterpiece, so to all the men online who were griping about the reboot featuring all women leads: get the hell over it already.
And yes, you were, or are, being sexist douche bags about it. I don’t buy for a moment that ALL male griping about the film is based on non-sexist reasons, like shoddy trailers, or supposed poor CG work.
The vast majority of the professional reviews (and I have read a ton of them) for the new Ghostbusters film have deemed it “okay.” -Not terrible. Not great. But just “meh.” It’s so-so, most reviews have said.
What I don’t appreciate is that the columnist for WaPo who was discussing male backlash about the movie is using virginity as an insult.
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].
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.
Salvation Army Bans Duggar / Quivering Cult’s ‘Retreat’ (Called ‘Get Them Married’) that Promoted Arranged Marriages for Teen Girls – Quivering Advocates Are Anti-Adult Singleness and Anti-Celibacy
Before I present you with the links to the news reports about this story (which are much farther down the page), I wanted to make some introductory comments in general, and a few specific comments refuting a few points from a pro-Quivering page about celibacy.
In regards to the specific news story I am blogging about today, this Quivering group is completely overlooking Apostle Paul’s comments in (Link): 1 Corinthians 7 that it is better for people to remain single than it is to marry – and Paul does not say that this teaching is in regards only to “a few,” or only a “minority” of people.
The Bible nowhere states that marriage is “a norm,” or that God expects or wants all, or most, people to marry.
It just so happens that in other cultures thousands of years ago, most people did happen to marry – one should not deduce from this cultural situation that God supported it or wanted it to be so. It just was what it was.
If the Bible said that all or most ancient Jews painted their bodies green once a year and balanced weasels on their heads while jumping up and down on a watermelon one week out of a year, one should not assume from this that
1. God created that cultural practice and/or that
2. God wanted Americans in the year 2016 to practice these things as well.
The Quivering group’s position on marriage, celibacy, and singleness is unbiblical, not to mention disturbing.
According to this article (linked to much farther below), the Quivering group was going to call this event, (where they set up marriages for little girls to marry), “Get Them Married.”
Why not have an event called, per 1 Corinthians 7, “It Is Better To Stay Unmarried”?
Am I opposed to marriage? No.
Is the God of the Bible against marriage? No.
But the Bible does not say that being married is better or more holy for girls, women, or culture, than being single, but a lot of Christian groups, and these wacky Christian cults, insist otherwise.
Christians need to do a better job of recognizing adult singleness and celibacy as legitimate, godly, biblical lifestyles and choices for all persons (and not only meant for a small minority of people who were supposedly “gifted” with it), instead of promoting marriage and natalism as the only legitimate avenues or as ways of fixing culture, the nation, or as pleasing God.
Virginity is a Sacred Choice, Not a Shameful Status by C. Martin / Giving Sex to a Man is Not A Guarantee for a Lasting Relationship – Contra Comic Chelsea Handler
The following blog post contains strong profanity in places and some frank sexual talk. —————————————–
Not that I object to this editorial per se, but it’s being carried by the same site (a pro-life site) that (Link): usually denigrates female virginity – because they put too high a premium on people pro-creating, and if a woman is remaining chaste, she is, in their opinion, in sin, or error or some sort, for not having sex and making babies, because supposedly, a woman’s only purpose in life is to make babies (even though the Bible no where teaches this concept).
But here is a guest editorial they are featuring where the author is defending a person’s right to sexually abstain, and it’ okay.
Our society is obsessed with talking about sex, regardless if you’re having it or not. Take for instance the recent March (Link): cover of People magazine, which featured the title, “Bachelor’s Sean & Catherine, Waiting for Our Wedding night.”
To make things a bit clearer, they added below the title, “No sex until ‘I do.’” The cover may intrigue those who scratch their heads, wondering in earnest why anyone would (gasp) wait to have sex.
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.
“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.”
The pastor I reference in my headline of this blog post is Tullian Tchividjian.
I know I probably should not be surprised at this point, but I still find myself surprised or dumbfounded at how so many Christians or churches today do not take sexual sins seriously.
I already know that most churches prefer to hear sexual purity sermons (Link): from fornicatorsthan they do from actual, honest- to- God adult virgins.
But I thought, maybe, just maybe, some churches out there at least have the sense to sermonize against adultery and other sorts of sexual sins, or hold sexual sinners ~ especially pastors who commit adultery or some other sort of sexual sin – accountable.
But no. They don’t.
This article says that this church knew about their preacher’s adultery (even the previous one), and asked him to keep it hush-hush.
What is that verse from the Bible, again?: “God is shamed and judged negatively among the Gentiles because of your behavior.” -or something like that.
Okay, take that verse and reword it slightly to, “God is shamed and judged harshly among the Non-Christians because of your behavior,” and I think that would apply.
Do these churches and people claiming the name of Jesus Christ not care at all about what Jesus taught?
Do churches today and Christians not care about Christian ethics and morality, about doing the right thing, even if doing so may be unpopular?
How can anyone who claims to be a Jesus-follower be so causal about following His teachings?
Note that this other woman he had an affair with is MARRIED.
That’s right, Christians like to depict SINGLE women as the threats to married men, when here we have married people cheating on their spouses with OTHER MARRIED PEOPLE.
At least two elders at Coral Ridge Presbyterian Church in Florida allegedly had knowledge that their former pastor, Tullian Tchividjian, grandson to evangelical icon Billy Graham, had engaged in an adulterous affair with a married member of his flock and advised him to keep it secret from his wife.
Reacting to a (Link): report in The Christian Post Thursday that Tchividjian was fired by Willow Creek Church in Winter Springs, Florida, after they were blindsided by his latest confession, a highly placed source informed CP Friday that the recent disclosure is really the result of a “systemic cover up” by church leaders that began two years ago.
“Tullian had actually been confronted about that two years ago. At the time, he was confronted by two elders at Coral Ridge and Steve Brown (Key Life Ministries), and confessed to having a relationship with a married woman,” said the source.
“At the time, he was not advised to step down as lead pastor, but instead was advised not to immediately inform his wife about the matter — she only learned about this last week. To make matters worse, the two elders never informed the rest of the session about this situation. One can only wonder whether the second situation could have been averted if the first situation had not been covered up,” the source continued.
“This is not a situation that Tullian had kept quiet and suddenly disclosed to someone for the first time last week. It’s been known by at least three others in addition to Tullian and the woman involved for over two years,” the source added.
No, I Do Not Like Richonne (Rick and Michonne as Romantic Couple on television series The Walking Dead) – Sex Can Be Risky in the Apocalypse
Richonne is Over (Finally! – I Hope) – see update below, under the “November 2018” section – and I keep hearing from pesky, awful “Richonne” fans on Twitter – edit on that below, too
This may be, perhaps, the only, or one of the very few, anti- Richonne blog posts on the internet.
To any Richonne Fans Who Are Reading This
If you have not seen my “About” page (and I currently have this stated at the top of the blog itself), I seldom permit dissenting views to be published on my blog.
Therefore, if you are a rabid Richonne supporter who leaves me a nasty, rude comment in response to this post, I likely will not publish it.
I don’t even bother to read the entirety of such posts – the moment I glance a few cuss words or rudeness in the first sentence of a post that is pending, awaiting me to grant permission to publish it, I hit the “trash can” button and delete it. I don’t even read the entire thing once I have ascertained it’s a vitriolic post.
So please, don’t waste your time or mine by composing one.
There is an addendum below addressing people on Twitter who were commenting to me how having Michonne, a black woman, in a romance with a white guy on this TV show, was supposedly oh- so- important. I have addressed those types of comments much farther blow (towards the end of the post, before the “Related Posts” section).
I did an internet search or two in the days after the February 21, 2016 airing of the zombie apocalypse show The Walking Dead episode in which the Rick Grimes character has sex with the Michonne character for the first time.
In the vast majority of reaction I see in blog posts or comments on entertainment sites that discuss “Richonne,” most people appear approving or enthusiastic about this TV show pairing. I cannot fathom why this is so.
I remain perplexed at the drooling, nutty, overboard enthusiasm so many TV viewers have for wanting to see TV characters date each other.
Further, if you dare disagree on these other sites about “Richonne” and admit to disliking “Richonne,” no matter how politely you state your views, many of these “Richonne” supporters become unhinged and vitriolic.
I happen to like the Michonne character and the Rick character – Rick has always been one of my favorite characters on the show. I have nothing against either actor who plays these characters.
However, I do not like or enjoy a Michonne-Rick romantic pairing.
I did not enjoy the show attempting to romantically pair Rick up with Jessie, either.
(Jessie was later killed by being eaten by zombies).
I mention this early on, as a lot of these Richonne fans wrongly assume anyone who dislikes “Richonne” must be a “Jessie – Rick shipper.”
Non-Romantic Nearness, The Billy Graham Rule, and Pope John Paul’s Friendship With a Married Woman
Apparently, Pope John Paul II had a long term, platonic friendship with a married woman named Anna-Teresa Tymieniecka.
First, I will list an assortment of news articles summarizing the former Pope’s relationship with this woman –
And then I will link to (much farther down this page) a really good blog post by a Christian, Dan J. Brennan, who criticizes other Christians who sexualize all male-female relationships or who discourage male-female friendship.
He is against the BGR (Billy Graham Rule), which teaches Christian men to sexually objectify ALL women, even celibate Christian women and keep single women at arm’s length.
Letters shown to the BBC by the National Library of Poland have revealed an intense 30-year relationship between former Pope, John Paul II, and philosopher, Anna-Teresa Tymieniecka. There is no suggestion the late pontiff broke his vow of celibacy with Tymieniecka, a married woman.