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

Skeevy, Sexist, Pastor John Piper Response to “Is Oral Sex Okay” And His Commentary on Teens Who Make Out At Night

Skeevy, Sexist, Pastor John Piper Response to “Is Oral Sex Okay”

Oh gross. This comes from sexist wacko John Piper (he was a preacher at one point, I think, but retired a few years ago, unless I am mistaken, but he still writes books and blogs, etc.) who gives permission to women to use the bathroom without getting a man’s permission, and who says women being abused should endure the abuse “for a season.” Go google for it, my friend. I’m not in the mood to back it all up with citations in this post. Google is your friend.

(Link): Is Oral Sex Okay? From John Piper’s Desiring God site

As the Bible does not specifically mention oral sex, and does not even allude to it (unless one wants to get into Rev. Driscoll’s pervy Song of Songs treatment), go ahead and have oral sex.

It’s like the masturbation debate; the Bible is totally silent on the matter, it doesn’t usually involve another person, so go for it, and without guilt.

I mean geeze, people. Some of you who write these preachers are ADULTS.

You are ADULTS and can read the Bible for yourself and make your own decisions about life. Why in the hell are you writing an over the hill (retired?) preacher and weirdo like Piper for sex advice?

Here is part of how Piper responded to the question “Is Oral Sex Okay?”

    I think it is wrong outside marriage. And we can talk about that another time more extensively. But here is the short answer. Why? Oral sex is even more intimate and delicate, it seems, then copulation. And we know this because even married couples are wondering if they should go there. It is as if it is a stage of intimacy that may not even be proper for married people. And so to think it can be an innocent substitute for copulation so people can obey the letter of the law outside marriage is a mirage. That is the first observation.

Read the rest here (if you have the stomach for it).

Where in the holy hell does he get this from,

    Oral sex is even more intimate and delicate, it seems, then copulation.

The Bible does not teach that, by the way. That is entirely Piper’s view or speculation.

In my opinion (and yes, this is only my opinion), I can see the argument that oral sex is EQUALLY intimate to penetration, or that penetration is MORE intimate to. I can see either of those arguments. What I cannot see is how oral sex is “more” intimate than penetration, which is what he’s arguing.

Piper does admit that “I don’t think oral sex is explicitly prohibited in any biblical command. If the Bible pro-scribes it, it would have to be by principle and not by an explicit command.”

I didn’t see too much objectionable in the remainder of his advice, but it’s beyond me why anyone would ask him for advice anymore than (Link): some Americans keep asking Pat Robertson for advice.

Then there was this Piper tweet (link to Tweet):

    Down by the river the teenagers would go to make out. I watched them drive back. They never looked happy. Especially she.

What?

Julie Anne at Spiritual Sounding Board blog (link to blog) reproduced a Tweeted reply to that, which I found to be a good come back:

    by Emily T.
    Maybe they weren’t happy because a creepy old man was watching them.

Indeed.

This was also good:

    Cindy Kunsman
    @JohnPiper Is a perv.
    I knew he was a perv, but this just adds to the confirmations. Does he wear ADIDAS? #AllDayPiperDreamsAboutSex

Parody (hat tip, Julie Anne of Spiritual Sounding Board blog):
(Link): Down By The River music parody

Christians are not obsessed with sexual purity. They are obsessed with sex. Maybe if they actually stood behind sexual purity, we’d not see so many odd ball pronouncements in public from them about… sex.
—————————————
Related posts:

(Link): No Christians and Churches Do Not Idolize Virginity and Sexual Purity – Christians Attack and Criticize Virginity Sexual Purity Celibacy / Virginity Sexual Purity Not An Idol

Eight Movies About Characters Vowing To Lose Their Virginity

8 Movies About Characters Vowing To Lose Their Virginity

(Link): 8 Movies About Characters Vowing To Lose Their Virginity

The article begins with this line, which I disagree with:

    Our society already places a lot of importance on virginity….

No, it doesn’t. American society, including Christian culture, mocks and ridicules virginity and says it’s not a big deal. Secular society treats virginity as though it’s a disease one needs to get rid of pronto.

Here’s some more from the article:

    Our society already places a lot of importance on virginity, and it often talks out of both sides of its mouth.

    On the one hand we judge teens who lose it only to face consequences like pregnancy, and then we focus an MTV reality show on it. On the other hand, once you get past a certain age without having sex, you’re looked upon as strange, and then we focus an MTV reality show on it. You’re shamed if you do and you’re shamed if you don’t, whether it’s by parents or peers or pop culture. No wonder young people are so angsty.

    Hollywood itself is already obsessed with sex — ahem, Fifty Shades of Grey, ahem — so it makes sense that virginity would factor into that obsession.

    But virgins can’t just go about their lives not worrying about when their first time is going to happen.

    Hence the plot is often driven by their attempts to lose said virginity.

    And often that comes in the form of a pact. They make the pact either with themselves or with their friends, and sometimes it’s even reversed and characters vow to take virginity rather than lose it. It’s quite the cliche, and it’s been around for decades, but that doesn’t mean Hollywood is done with it. Here are just eight examples of the “OMG I have to lose my virginity ASAP or else everyone will think I’m a monster!” plot.

Visit their page to see the list of movies
——————————-
Related posts:

(Link): ‘Old Fashioned’: Your Christian-Friendly, Kink-Free Alternative to ‘Fifty Shades of Grey’

(Link): Goodbye to romance: Are rom-coms worse than porn? (How Hollywood Feeds Into People’s Tendency to Idolize Marriage and Turn a Spouse Into a Deity)

(Link): Sex, movies and the desperate attempt to shock audiences. (Hint: it’s not working.) by A. Hornaday

(Link): Virgin Shaming: Hollywood’s Attack on Purity (by B. Bowen)

(Link): Christian Hollywood Rorschach – seeing Jesus in every single show, movie, or fictional character

(Link): Movie About Female Virginity – The To Do List – released July or August 2013

‘When Women Refuse’ Proves Violence Doesn’t Usually Come With a Misogynistic Manifesto

‘When Women Refuse’ Proves Violence Doesn’t Usually Come With a Misogynistic Manifesto

(Link): ‘When Women Refuse’ Proves Violence Doesn’t Usually Come With a Misogynistic Manifesto

    • Male violence against women who refuse sexual advances isn’t merely the domain of a college student suffering from mental health issues. It’s an epidemic that’s a troubling part of the fabric of America. That’s the message sent by (Link):

When Women Refuse

    , a Tumblr blog created on Monday in response to Friday night’s horrific mass shooting in Isla Vista, Calif., near the campus of the University of California, Santa Barbara.

The blog’s creator, feminist activist, author, and Lux Digital cofounder Deanna Zandt, told Think Progress that she was inspired to start the site because “we still don’t view gender based violence as a large cultural issue—we tend to think of these as isolated incidents.”

In the aftermath of the shooting, media detailed the mental health challenges of the shooter, 22-year-old Elliot Rodger, who targeted women who had spurned his advances. Rodger killed six people before turning a gun on himself. Snippets of Rodger’s 137-page manifesto to friends and relatives have been published, and then there are the chilling videos he posted on YouTube.

“I don’t know why you girls aren’t attracted to me, but I will punish you all for it,” Rodger declared in one video just hours before he embarked on his shooting spree.

In an effort to distance themselves from Rodger’s deadly misogyny, men took to social media with the hashtag #NotAllMen to post tweets like, “Dividing men into the ‘good guys’ and the ‘bad guys’ is short-sighted.” Zandt told Think Progress that she noticed that several guys in her social networks also shared the belief that Rodger’s actions were an exception. Then, after seeing writer Kate Harding sharing news stories on her Facebook page of men who’d used violence after being rejected, Zandt decided to launch the Tumblr to show Rodger’s actions weren’t an isolated incident.

Anyone can submit a story of a woman who’s been the victim of violence because she rejected sexual advances. Scrolling through the When Women Refuse submissions shows that Rodger’s actions aren’t unique. There’s the story of a 16-year-old stabbed to death after refusing to be a guy’s prom date, and the tragic (and all-too-common) tale of a woman whose controlling ex couldn’t get over her and stabbed her, her mother, and her new boyfriend.

((read the rest))
————————–
Related posts:

(Link): Bitter, Frustrated 22 Year Old Male Virgin and Member of Men’s Rights / PUA Groups Kills Several Women Because He Couldn’t Get Dates – what an entitled sexist doof

(Link): Female Dragonflies Are Pretending to Die in Order to Avoid Irritating Males

(Link): Nice Guys: Scourge of the Single Woman

(Link):   Dude Writes to Miss Manners Advice Columnist: “Miss Manners: No one Ever Replies to Me on Dating Sites”

(Link): ‘It’s Not Me, It’s You’: A Loser’s Guide to Dealing with Rejection by The Guyliner

(Link):  Nice Guys Aren’t So Nice After All: Men in the “Friend Zone” Often Have A Hidden Agenda, Say Psychologists (Daily Mail article)

(Link):  Dudes, Stop Putting Women in the Girlfriendzone

(Link): Testosterone-Deficient Gamma Male Whines About the ‘Friend Zone’ (post from The Other McCain) – AKA, Ugly, Fat, Weird, Awkward, or Poor Nice Guys Who Unrealistically Expect to Attract Rich, Pretty, Thin, Socially Normal Women

(Link): Guy So Depressed Over Being Single He Cut Off His Own Penis (article)

(Link): When Adult Virginity and Adult Celibacy Are Viewed As Inconvenient or As Impediments

The Christian, Liberal, and Feminist Tendency to Intellectualize Away the Meaningfulness of Female Virginity; Also: Are Engagement Rings Sexist? Liberal Vs Conservatives Sound Off

The Christian, Liberal, and Feminist Tendency to Intellectualize Away the Meaningfulness of Female Virginity; Also: Are Engagement Rings Sexist? Liberal Vs Conservatives Sound Off

✮ From the liberal corner:
(Link): Engagement rings are barbaric

✮ The conservative reaction:
(Link): Engagement rings are barbaric because men are awful or something

✮ My reaction:
This is another time the secular, left wing feminists are off their rockers (I sometimes agree with them, usually do not and this is one of those times, no, I don’t agree). I see no harm or inherent sexism in a freaking engagement ring.

Here are excerpts from the Salon page, with commentary about it, by me, below it:

(Link): Engagement rings are barbaric

    Sparkly rocks remind us of an age when women were considered a form of chattel
    by SHANNON RUPP, THE TYEE

    Unsavoury custom

    … The engagement ring is not, as diamond advertisers of the last 80 years or so have insisted, a symbol of love: it’s a sort of down payment on a virgin vagina.

    I’ve always thought giving engagement rings was a slightly unsavoury custom, given that it began in an era when women were chattel, more or less. It’s hardly romantic. The rings remind me of a time when women couldn’t own property because they were property. Well, except for widows. There’s a reason that Merry Widow of opera fame was so merry.

    As Scott Fitzgerald noticed in the 1920s, the rich are different from you and me, and the custom of laying down an engagement ring was something rich people did in an era when marriage was recognized for what it really is: a business contract. It was done to secure property (and political alliances among royalty and the aristocracy) and to ensure there would be an heir and a spare to inherit it all.

    That’s why female virginity was such a big deal. It had financial value because it was connected to property. Pre-DNA testing, no one could be sure who the father was unless the bride was irreproachably chaste. And no one wants to see property going to bastards. Post-delivery of the requisite sons, everyone was free to go about discreet amusements, and the country weekend at the manor house came into vogue.

    … Then, engagement rings functioned as a sort of retainer — a lease-a-womb scheme, if you will. The unspoken part of the deal was that an engagement often allowed for a sampling of the goods.

    … Frances Gerety (who incidentally was a spinster) cleverly connected romantic love to diamond engagement rings, forever. She obscured their creepy origins as down payments on chattel, and diamond purveyors are still profiting from her sharp thinking.

    …That’s not a coincidence, and it’s not just the wedding industry ramping up. Apparently about half of couples were having premarital sex in the 1940s, and researchers believe that women were looking for some sign of commitment from a man before doing the wild thing. In an era of unreliable birth control, a ring was still seen as a down payment and a sort of insurance policy in the event the man bolted and left her holding the baby.

Since when is a woman having a “virgin vagina” or entering into marriage with one, an “unsavory custom?”

Is this another sign that secularists, left wingers, and others, are biased against adult virgins, or biased against the idea of a woman choosing to remain a virgin until marriage? Because it kind of sounds like it.

As to this:

    That’s why female virginity was such a big deal. It had financial value because it was connected to property. (etc)

This is another dismissal of virginity, another tactic I have seen used not just by secularists and left wingers, but one I’ve seen used a time or two on Christian, or ex-Christian sites, especially by women who are red hot infuriated over “modesty” and “purity” teachings.

Women who are opposed to virginity try to argue that the only reason any woman at any time in history has remained a virgin until marriage is due to patriarchal concerns about tracing the family tree, and at that, with monetary inheritance concerns.

Continue reading “The Christian, Liberal, and Feminist Tendency to Intellectualize Away the Meaningfulness of Female Virginity; Also: Are Engagement Rings Sexist? Liberal Vs Conservatives Sound Off”

A Sexual Revolution for Young Evangelicals? No. (from NR, by Russell Moore)

A Sexual Revolution for Young Evangelicals? No.

Moore is at it again. And he’s flip flopping in a way.

Moore goes from bashing the concept of virginity until marriage ((Link): see this post) to now sort of arguing in favor of, or thinking it’s great that more Christians are supposedly remaining sexually pure. He also (like the rest of Christendom) seems to assume there are no virgins past the age of 30 (but there are).

(Link): A Sexual Revolution for Young Evangelicals? No.

    Defying the secular culture, churchgoing Christians are sticking to Biblical teaching.

    By Russell D. Moore and Andrew Walker

    In any discussion about the future of religion in America, especially as it relates to stalled growth in churches and denominations, those outside our religious communities find one theory especially compelling.

    This is the idea: that young Evangelicals are frustrated with Christian orthodoxy’s strict standards of sexual morality.

    We’re told that these young Evangelicals will soon revolutionize our churches with liberalized views on same-sex marriage, premarital sex, gender identity, and so on. But a new study by a University of Texas sociologist finds that Evangelical Christians ages 18 to 39 are resisting liberalizing trends in the culture.

    Continue reading “A Sexual Revolution for Young Evangelicals? No. (from NR, by Russell Moore)”

Looking For Free Sperm, Women May Turn To Online Forums

Looking For Free Sperm, Women May Turn To Online Forums

Thank Dog I never cared one way or another if I ever had a baby or not. I just never hankered for one.

I could not imagine being so desperate to have a kid that you’d go to a site to hook up with a stranger to pork each other and have a kid. No thanks, I’d rather die alone, single, childless, celibate.

(Link): Looking For Free Sperm, Women May Turn To Online Forums

    Commercial sperm banks have operated in the U.S. since the early 1970s. Today, women who can afford to use them tend do so without stigma. But banks are no longer the only source for women hoping to get pregnant.

    There are informal, unregulated websites popping up where men who are willing to donate their sperm for free can meet women who are hoping to have a baby.

    The most established sperm donation website in the U.S., the Known Donor Registry, launched in 2010. Since then, it has grown to more than 16,000 members.

    Membership to this site and others does not necessarily reflect how many people actually conceive this way — in fact, there really aren’t solid statistics on this kind of exchange. But there are anecdotes, and people have come forward saying they’ve tried it.

    Continue reading “Looking For Free Sperm, Women May Turn To Online Forums”

Parents who kill their children by intentionally leaving them locked in hot cars all day – Dad was sexting while his toddler son was dying in car

Parents who kill their children by intentionally leaving them locked in hot cars all day – Dad was sexting while his toddler son was dying in car
—————————————–
Notice from Christian Pundit blogger: There is coming a time when I will either not be blogging as frequently or not at all. Please read more about that here in this post (Link): Blog Break – May 2014 – and List of This Blog’s Best or Most Relevant Posts
—————————————-
There was a story in the news this past week of an idiot father, Harris, who killed his toddler son by intentionally leaving him locked in a hot car for several hours.

The police examined Harris’ home computer and say both he and his wife researched information online on ‘how long does it take for child to die in a hot car’ and so forth.

But wait, it gets even better. According to headlines I saw today, not only did Dirt Bag Dad leave his toddler son to die in a hot car, but he “sexted” women, including TEENAGERS, while his kid was dying, and in the weeks before. (See links to that below for more.)

I’m in my early 40s but am like a cranky old woman when it comes to babies and children. I have never married and never had children. I do not like children or babies or being around them. I try to avoid them if I can.

But you know what: I would never intentionally harm or murder a baby or a child. If I saw a kid in trouble, I would come to his or her assistance, or at least call the police.

I bring this all up because it is a common, nasty stereotype in Southern Baptist, Reformed, Fundamentalist, and evangelical Christianity that single adults and the childless (or childfree) are selfish, warped, weird, immature losers, but that parents and the married are instantly more godly, ethical, and more mature. I think news stories like the ones I’ve linked to below debunk these Christian stereotypes.

Understand that I am NOT opposed to people remaining virgins until marriage, but:
I also think this news story blows holes in the evangelical sex propaganda that if people just maintain virginity until marriage, that the sex will be mindblowing, great, frequent, and constant.

How “mindblowing” was this married father’s sex life if he was sexting women and teen girls with nude photos?

On a last note: some Christians will argue that you must become perfect and godly before God will reward you with a spouse. Is a man, like the one in this news story below, who murders his own two year old son and who sends pornographic photos to young teen women, perfect and godly?

If you’re a Christian who believes in the nonsense that an unmarried person must clean herself up, become godly and perfect, before God will reward her with a spouse, please explain what it was this dirt bag father did to merit a spouse from God? He is far from perfect, godly, and loving.

(Link): Detective: Dad who left child in hot SUV showed no emotion after boy died

    By KATE BRUMBACKASSOCIATED PRESS
    updated Thursday, July 3, 2014

    Harris was exchanging nude photos with several women, including teenagers, even on the day his son died when he was at work, Stoddard said. In the weeks before the boy’s death, the man also had looked at a website that advocated against having children and had done an Internet search for “how to survive in prison,” the detective said.

(Link): Detective: Dad had 2 life insurance policies for son

    MARIETTA, Ga. — A Georgia man charged with murder in his 22-month-old son’s death was sexting with several women on the day of his son’s death and that he had two life insurance policies on his son, a detective testified Thursday.

    During a probable cause hearing in Cobb County Magistrate Court for Justin Ross Harris, Cobb County Police Detective Phil Stoddard said Harris, who is charged with murder and child cruelty in the June 18 death of his young son, Cooper, intentionally left his son in the car.

    Stoddard testified the two life insurance policies on Cooper were for $2,000 and $25,000.

    The detective also testified that Harris had accessed websites advocating “child free” and searched “how to survive prison” before Cooper died.

(Link): Georgia Dad in Hot-Car Death Case ‘Sexted’ Other Women: Cops

    The suburban Atlanta father accused of murdering his toddler by leaving him in a hot SUV for several hours was in an unhappy marriage and wanted a “child-free life,” a detective testified Thursday.

    Justin Ross Harris, 33, of Marietta, had even been sexting with other women in the two weeks before son Cooper was found dead in the back seat of the family SUV on June 18, said Cobb County Det. Phil Stoddard.

    Prosecutors during Harris’ probable cause hearing were building a case for why Harris allegedly left his son in a sweltering car on purpose while he was at work. “Evidence shows he has this whole second life … with alternate personas,” Stoddard said. It was also revealed that Harris and his wife, Leanna, had two life insurance policies on their 22-month-old son.

(Link): Watch live: Prosecutor says Justin Ross Harris sexted while toddler in car; witness describes him as sobbing father

(Link): Dad Charged With Toddler’s Hot Car Death Was Sexting While Boy Died: Cop

No Longer Unashamed by T. Harrison – editorial critiquing the problems with the Anti Slut Shaming or No Shaming Ever rhetoric

No Longer Unashamed – editorial critiquing the problems with the Anti Slut Shaming or No Shaming Ever rhetoric

The online magazine “Christianity Today” is a little behind the times. I’ve been blogging about the problems with anti-shaming regarding sexual sin for over a year now (see the links at the bottom of this post for some of my previous posts on this topic).

(Link): No Longer Unashamed

Excerpts:

    Certain shame can push us to repentance and our God of grace.
    Tish Harrison

    In the age of of cyber-bullying, we see deplorable instances of public shaming to rival Hester Prynne’s scarlet letter. Yet, simultaneously, we are in the midst of what psychotherapist Joseph Burgo calls an (Link): “anti-shame zeitgeist.” Just as it’s become common to deride all who disagree with us with the epithet “haters,” it’s now popular to label those with any deeply held moral conviction as “shamers.”

    The en vogue phrase “slut-shaming,” which is sometimes used to rightly discourage victim-blaming, is often wielded as a bludgeon to silence anyone who questions a woman’s sexual choices. I first heard the phrase less than a year ago, when bloggers at New Wave Feminists were chastised as “slut-shamers” for their opposition to abortion.

    Increasingly, we dismiss experiencing shame for any reason as a bad thing, something we shouldn’t feel, something that’s probably someone else’s fault.

    …If we seek to smother any ember of shame or stamp out moral disagreement, will we douse our ability to experience true moral conviction and culpability? Perhaps at times, our experiences of shame are a natural, needed (if not inevitable) response to the reality of sin.

    …And although there can be intelligent disagreement about what beliefs, attitudes, and choices should and should not warrant shame, to begin that discussion, we have to stop understanding shame as merely a boogeyman to run from. And we cannot reject any moral stance that might cause another person to experience shame as, therefore, intrinsically wrong, oppressive, or untrue.

    Some Christians try to mitigate shame by relaxing or ignoring biblical standards—there’s no reason to feel shame since nothing is all that wrong. The theological term for this lax permissiveness is “antinomianism.” Others turn to moralism and try to become spiritually perfect enough to avoid feeling shame. We work hard to keep our own sin managed and hidden while shaming others for theirs.

    … The women in my group never made excuses for me. They never justified my sin or told me that it was understandable or not so bad. But they responded lovingly and gently. They prayed that I’d know I was entirely forgiven and accepted by God.

((( click here to read the rest )))
———————————-
Related posts, this blog:

(Link): Sometimes Shame Guilt and Hurt Feelings Over Sexual Sins Is a Good Thing – but – Emergents, Liberals Who Are Into Virgin and Celibate Shaming

(Link): Hypocrisy From The ‘No Slut Shaming’ Crowd by C. Nance

(Link): The Christian and Non Christian Phenomenon of Virgin Shaming and Celibate Shaming

(Link): Slut-Shaming Is Bad—But The Overreaction Against It Also Hurts Women by J. Doverspike

(Link): Virgin Shaming: Hollywood’s Attack on Purity (by B. Bowen)

(Link): Celibate Shaming from an Anti- Slut Shaming Secular Feminist Site (Hypocrisy) Feminists Do Not Support All Choices

(Link): Anti Virginity Editorial by Christian Blogger Tim Challies – Do Hurt / Shame Feelings or Sexual Abuse Mean Christians Should Cease Supporting Virginity or Teaching About Sexual Purity

(Link): Confusing Sexual Assault and Sexual Abuse with Consensual Sex and Then Condemning Sexual Purity Teachings – and other, related topics

(Link): Stop Rewarding People For Their Failure – Christians Speaking Out of Both Sides of Their Mouths About Sexual Sin – Choices and Actions and How You Teach This Stuff Has Consequences – Allowing Sinners To Re-Define Biblical Terms and Standards

(Link): Warning: This Column Will Offend You – by M. Moynihan (Re: Trigger Warnings in Written Material, Terms such as slut shaming, man-splain, etc)

(Link): No, Christians and Churches Do Not Idolize Virginity and Sexual Purity

(Link): Are Most Churches Too Judgemental About Sexual Sin? (of the hetero variety)

(Link): Virgin – and Celibate – Shaming : Christian Double Standards – Homosexuals Vs Hetero Singles – Concerning Thabiti Anyabwile and Gag Reflexes

(Link): The Activist Who Says Being Gay Is Not A Sin – double standards for homo singles vs hetero singles

(Link): Christians Who Attack Virginity Celibacy and Sexual Purity – and specifically Russell D. Moore and James M. Kushiner

(Link): Slut Shaming and Virgin 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 ?
———————————————
Related post, off site:

(Link): Same-Sex Marriage and the Single Christian – How marriage-happy churches are unwittingly fueling same-sex coupling—and leaving singles like me in the dust.

Virgin Shaming: Hollywood’s Attack on Purity (by B. Bowen)

Virgin Shaming: Hollywood’s Attack on Purity
—————————————–
Don’t forget, I may not be blogging as much or as often in the future, if at all.
See this link (Link): [Blog Break] for more info.

—————————————–
I’ve been writing about Single-, Virgin-, and Celibate- Shaming on this blog long before The Christian Post brought it up.

But to the guy who wrote this? Christians are heavily into virgin-shaming these days, see several of the posts linked to at the bottom of this post under the heading “Related posts at this blog”

If you are operating under the assumption it is only Hollywood, secular or theological liberals, or secular feminists who are into virgin-shaming and anti sexual purity screeds, think again – Christians are also attacking virginity and virgins themselves. Christians are also highly critical of sexual purity these days.

(Link): Virgin Shaming: Hollywood’s Attack on Purity – by Barry Bowen, from The Christian Post

Excerpts:

    … Virginity has long been a subject of jokes in movies and TV shows. This crude humor has been described as “virgin shaming.”

    On The Student Room website a commenter named dosvidaniya posts:

    Then, why do we still ridicule men so much for being sexually inexperienced? We all know that the ageing male virgin is an object of cultural ridicule. I mean, how many times have you heard a guy insulted (particularly on the internet) for being a ‘pathetic virgin’? Probably several thousand times.

    Hollywood mocked the aging male virgin in the 2005 movie The 40-Year-Old Virgin.

    …Virgin shaming has even attracted the attention of Buzzfeed where Hunter Schwartz notes the religious implications:

    Like slut-shaming, virgin-shaming involves making fun of someone for their personal choices regarding sex. But while slut-shaming has become increasingly frowned upon, virgin-shaming remains fairly acceptable, and can be a form of veiled religious bigotry. (emphasis added)

Bowen ends by saying:

    My limited experience with virgin shaming taught me that Christians should be pro-active in defending the choice of abstinence.

Well, I’m sorry Barry, but that is just not so. Christians today, like Non Christians, are attacking and criticizing the concepts of staying a virgin until marriage and practicing celibacy.
———————-
Related posts on this blog:

(Link): No Christians and Churches Do Not Idolize Virginity and Sexual Purity – Christians Attack and Criticize Virginity Sexual Purity Celibacy / Virginity Sexual Purity Not An Idol

(Link): The Christian and Non Christian Phenomenon of Virgin Shaming and Celibate Shaming

(Link): The Contemporary Church Undervalues Celibacy / Virginity

(Link): When Adult Virginity and Adult Celibacy Are Viewed As Inconvenient or As Impediments

(Link): Sex, Love & Celibacy by Christian Author Dan Navin

(Link): Joshua Rogers of Boundless / Focus on the Family Attacks Biblical Teaching of Virginity Until Marriage

(Link): Pat Robertson says ‘Virginity Has Nothing To Do With Marriage’ and Says (Paraphrasing) ‘Virginity Was Fine For Mary But Not Applicable For Any Other Christians’

(Link): I thought Christians “worshipped” virginity? Guess not: TLW (True Love Waits) Spokesman Says TLW Will NOT “Elevate Virginity” – Life Way to Relaunch “True Love Waits” Campaign

(Link): Editorial about Celibacy by Ed Shaw

(Link): Christian Gender Complementarian Group (CBMW) Anti Virginity and Anti Sexual Purity Stance (At Least Watered Down) – and their Anti Homosexual Marriage Position

(Link): Sometimes Shame Guilt and Hurt Feelings Over Sexual Sins Is a Good Thing – but – Emergents, Liberals Who Are Into Virgin and Celibate Shaming

(Link): More Virgin and Celibate Shaming in Article: How the New Abstinence Movement is Trying to Reshape Our Views on Sex (from Relevant Magazine) Another Christian Anti Virginity Hit Piece – Fornicators Need To Repent of Their Pride in their Fornication Testimonies Maybe?

(Link): Douglas Wilson and Christian Response FAIL to Sexual Sin – No Body Can Resist Sex – supposedly – Re Celibacy

(Link): False Christian Teaching: “Only A Few Are Called to Singleness and Celibacy” or (also false): God’s gifting of singleness is rare – More Accurate: God calls only a few to marriage and God gifts only the rare with the gift of Marriage

(Link): Virgin – and Celibate – Shaming : Christian Double Standards – Homosexuals Vs Hetero Singles – Concerning Thabiti Anyabwile and Gag Reflexes

(Link): No Christians and Churches Do Not Idolize Virginity and Sexual Purity (they attack both concepts)

(Link): Celibate Shaming from an Anti- Slut Shaming Secular Feminist Site (Hypocrisy) Feminists Do Not Support All Choices

(Link): Christian TV Show Host Pat Robertson Disrespects Virginity – Says Pre-Marital Sex Is “Not A Bad Thing”

(Link): Hypocrisy From The ‘No Slut Shaming’ Crowd by C. Nance

(Link): I Shouldn’t Need An Excuse To Be A Virgin – (Secular Editorial Defends Virginity – More Rare Than a Unicorn Sighting)

(Link): Virginity Lost, Experience Gained (article with information from study about virginity)

(Link): Anti Virginity Editorial by Christian Blogger Tim Challies – Do Hurt / Shame Feelings or Sexual Abuse Mean Christians Should Cease Supporting Virginity or Teaching About Sexual Purity

(Link): Christians Who Attack Virginity Celibacy and Sexual Purity – and specifically Russell D. Moore and James M. Kushiner

(Link): Why So Much Fornication – Because Christians Have No Expectation of Sexual Purity

(Link): Gift of Singleness Gift of Celibacy Unbiblical – Those Terms and Teachings Contribute to Fornication / Editorial About Sex Surrogates

(Link): Christians Speaking Out of Both Sides of Their Mouths About Sexual Sin – Choices and Actions and How You Teach This Stuff Has Consequences

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

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

(Link): Regarding the post “Abstinence is unrealistic and old fashioned” at The Matt Walsh Blog vis a vis Stuff Christian Culture Likes group

(Link): Christian Preacher Admits He Won’t Preach About Sexuality For Fear It May Offend Sexual Sinners

(Link): Slut Shaming and Virgin 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 ?

Hypocrisy From The ‘No Slut Shaming’ Crowd by C. Nance

Hypocrisy From The ‘No Slut Shaming’ Crowd by C. Nance

Nance repeats a lot of the same arguments I have been making on this blog the last two years (see the link with excerpts much farther below).

I don’t think Nance (nor I, for that mater) will ever fully convince all, or most feminists, that some of us ladies freely chose, of our own minds, to remain virgins until marriage.

Why?

Because a lot of Non-Christian, secular, left-wing feminists are absolutely convinced that women who say they chose to stay virgins were shamed or brain-washed by their Christian or conservative upbringing into staying sexually pure.

And yes, one can see numerous blog posts or comment sections elsewhere that typically read as follows:

    Hi. My name is Jane.

I was brought up in a Christian home, used to believe in Jesus, but am now a vegan New Ager who also practices Wicca, worships Gaia, and knits friendship bracelets out of hemp, which goes towards charity that frees girls from horrible sex trafficking, thank the Goddess!

I was taught to believe when being raised as a Christian that good girls don’t have sex before marriage, and I really believed that at one time, but now, praise Gaia, at the age of 28, I think sex before marriage is okay, I’ve tried it, and it’s great.

Christians brainwashed me and shamed me into being afraid of sex. That is why I was not having sex.

Bearing in mind I just made that story up. I did not paste that from anywhere else, but really, I’ve seen similar stories time and again at ex-Christian, secular feminist, or pagan- type sites.

It doesn’t seem to dawn on such feminists that some women freely choose to remain virgins (or become celibate, if once sexually active in the past).

Left wing, secular, Non-Christian feminists cannot fathom any human willingly giving up sex for any amount of time, or avoiding sex altogether until marriage.

Voluntarily choosing to sexually abstain is a totally foreign mindset to sex-obsessed, sex-worshipping people who do not even bother to control their own libido.

They choose not to control their own sexual appetites and falsely assume other people are just as weak-willed and impulsive in this area as themselves.

They live with this delusion that no woman can possibly choose of her own accord to stay a virgin, because doesn’t everyone have sex and feel powerless to resist?

In this, they are like the Mark Driscolls, Doug Wilsons, and other conservative Christian preachers and talking heads, who assume it is impossible for anyone, including Bible believing Christians, to stay a virgin past the age of 25, or to go without sex for more than ten minutes, unless God sprinkles magic “No Sex Fairy Dust” on them; such Christians essentially deny that the Bible teaches all believers have sexual self-control.

See there, your conservative Christians and your secular feminists, and other assorted Non-Christians, all assume – and quite wrongly – that nobody can voluntarily give up sex indefinitely or for long stretches of time. This is one area all these otherwise conflicting sides have in common.

I have another comment or two to make below this long excerpt by Nance:

(Link): Hypocrisy From The ‘No Slut Shaming’ Crowd

Excerpts:

    BY CLAIRE NANCE
    June 15, 2014|8:44 am

As a teenager, I’m used to facing peer pressure. Everything from T.V. and magazines to parents and teachers tell me how to live and act. Don’t get me wrong, many of those influences are positive and uplifting, but a new pressure has completely blindsided my friends and me.

This new pressure, namely liberal feminists, accuse me and other teenage girls who wear purity rings and pledge to save sex for marriage, of valuing our virginity too much. Umm, what?

Tracy Clark-Flory wrote an article, The Virginity Fetish, that compares young women like me who believe in saving sex until marriage, to Natalie Dylan, a young woman who sold her virginity online to the highest bidder.

Clark-Flory claims that young women saving their virginity for marriage “auction off [their] virginity to the person with the biggest ring.”

The person who compares love and self respect to prostitution obviously doesn’t understand what a purity ring, or even virginity in general, represents.

….The irony that these are the same women who accuse conservatives of waging a war on women is not lost to me.

…Tracy stated that a girl’s value shouldn’t lie in whether she’s a virgin or not. I agree, and the same should apply to those who are.

Liberals such as Tracy claim you can be free with your sexuality while in the next sentence implying that unless you are willing to give it all away you are a prude and not worth anyone’s time.

Unfortunately, I know more than one girl who bought into this lie and, no surprise, they’re not happy with the result. Any conversation about it tends to go the same, “How will I tell my husband?”

So what’s the big deal? In today’s atmosphere of “tolerance”, “diversity”, and “being yourself,” I’m shocked at the hostility from liberals directed at women of moral fortitude. Many of these women claim to be in the “pro-choice” tent. Why then is my choice being scorned?

Continue reading “Hypocrisy From The ‘No Slut Shaming’ Crowd by C. Nance”

14 Young People Explain Why They’re Waiting for Marriage: ‘I Want to Have Sex But I’m Determined to Stay a Virgin Until Marriage’

14 Young People Explain Why They’re Waiting for Marriage: ‘I Want to Have Sex But I’m Determined to Stay a Virgin Until Marriage’

I am a wee bit concerned with the one teenager who wrote on his (or her) placard that he thinks waiting for marriage to have sex “will be worth it.” If he means to say that honeymoon sex will be great, he needs to think again…

I have too many links on this blog to stories by people who were virgins at marriage but the sex turned out to be terrible (see (Link): this story for example).

I am not saying it is wrong for a person to choose to stay virginal until marriage, only you need to realize that doing so is not a guarantee that the sex will be amazing.

(Link): 14 Young People Explain Why They’re Waiting for Marriage: ‘I Want to Have Sex But I’m Determined to Stay a Virgin Until Marriage’

    by O. Darcy

    Why are you waiting for marriage?

    Individuals who choose to refrain from having sex before marriage are often confronted with this particular question — and some are now speaking out. Using the popular smartphone application Whisper, many young people have turned to the social network to explain to others why they are choosing to wait.

    Whisper guarantees its users absolute privacy and, as a result, some of the confessions are raw and powerful.

A few of the images from whisper (click here to view the rest):

Whisper confession
Whisper confession
Whisper confession
Whisper confession

Whisper confession
Whisper confession

————————————
Related posts this blog:

(Link): On ‘Late’-In-Life Virginity Loss (from The Atlantic)

(Link): An Open Letter to Male Virgins by Anna Broadway

(Link): Virgins and Celibates are Sexual – Not Asexual and Androgynous – You don’t have to have sex to possess sexuality

(Link): Virginity Lost, Experience Gained (article with information from study about virginity)

(Link): Living Myths About Virginity – article from The Atlantic

(Link): Long Editorial about Virginity at CT – Don’t Blame Evangelicals for the Cult of the Virgin – I Notice It’s the Fornicators Who Want to Ignore or Downplay the Bible’s Teaching that People Are To Stay Virgins Until Marriage

(Link): No Christians and Churches Do Not Idolize Virginity and Sexual Purity – Christians Attack and Criticize Virginity Sexual Purity Celibacy / Virginity Sexual Purity Not An Idol

(Link): More Snarky Virgin – and Celibate – Shaming, Courtesy the “The anti-purity movement” Facebook Group – the blog page “My Secondary Virginity” – and a Proud Slut Parody

(Link): Celibate Shaming from an Anti- Slut Shaming Secular Feminist Site (Hypocrisy) Feminists Do Not Support All Choices

(Link): Inconsistency on Feminist Site – Choices Have Consequences

(Link): Anti Virginity Editorial by Christian Blogger Tim Challies – Do Hurt / Shame Feelings or Sexual Abuse Mean Christians Should Cease Supporting Virginity or Teaching About Sexual Purity

(Link): Weak Argument Against Celibacy / Virginity / Sexual Purity by the Anti Sexual Purity Gestapo – Sexual Compatibility or Incompatibility – (ie, Taking Human Beings For Test Spins – Humans As Sexual Commodities) (Part 2)

(Link): Slut Shaming and Virgin 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): I Shouldn’t Need An Excuse To Be A Virgin – (Secular Editorial Defends Virginity – More Rare Than a Unicorn Sighting)

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

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

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

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

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

    by AMANDA MARCOTTE, ALTERNET

    This article originally appeared on AlterNet.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Hetero Males Tricked Into Getting Oral Sex From Man They Met Online

Hetero Males Tricked Into Getting Oral Sex From Man They Met Online
—————————————–
Don’t forget, I may not be blogging as much or as often in the future, if at all.
See this link (Link): [Blog Break] for more info.

—————————————–
From this blog’s on-going series:
Times you are glad you are celibate.

Hetero men were tricked into letting some guy suck on their dongs through a hole in the wall (known as a “glory hole”).

(Link): Chesterfield police officer accused of recording restroom patrons, posting to porn site

(Link): Chesterfield cop charged in gas station spycam, sex act taping

    CHESTERFIELD •
    A Chesterfield police officer secretly videotaped men in a gas station restroom stall, lured anonymous sex partners to his home through Craigslist ads and posted dozens of voyeuristic and pornographic videos to his own website, authorities say.

    … Charges in St. Charles County stem from Cerna’s now-defunct website, police say. Cerna has admitted to the crimes and told investigators he placed ads on Craigslist posing as women wanting casual sex, and would send photos of a woman he didn’t know to men who responded.

    After sending photos, Cerna provided a cellphone number and sent text messages from that number, giving his home address with instructions on what to do when men came to the front door.

    Cerna said he would record video of men having anonymous oral sex with Cerna through a hole in a door. As many as 60 men visited his home over 18 months, Cerna told police.

    Continue reading “Hetero Males Tricked Into Getting Oral Sex From Man They Met Online”

‘Dating Lesson’ Asks Eighth-Grade Girls To Publicly Declare How Far They Will Go Sexually

‘Dating Lesson’ Asks Eighth-Grade Girls To Publicly Declare How Far They Will Go Sexually

(Link): ‘Dating Lesson’ Asks Eighth-Grade Girls To Publicly Declare How Far They Will Go Sexually

    At least one pair of parents is fuming after their eighth-grade daughter came home from school saying that every student in her class had to indicate – publicly – how far they are prepared to go sexually.

    The incident happened this week at Woodland Park Middle School in the San Diego, Calif. suburb of San Marcos, reports local ABC affiliate KGTV.

    The parents, who don’t want to be named, say their 14-year-old daughter was embarrassed because the teacher in her family life and health class instructed her and all of her classmates to stand under one of several signs. Each sign was labeled with a different phrase.

    Some of the labeled signs were innocuous, according to KGTV. These included “smiled at,” “hugged” and “kissed.”

    Other signs, such as “above the waist,” “below the waist” and “all the way,” were to varying degrees considerably less innocuous.

    “To put them up in front of their friends to be humiliated or to be asked questions that I believe are personal, it’s really none of the school’s business,” one of the peeved parents told the ABC station.

    The parent added that her daughter felt confused and peer-pressured afterward.

    Officials at the taxpayer-funded school defended the exercise, calling it a dating lesson.

    “The parents sign permission slips for the class and can look at the curriculum prior,” the Woodland Park Middle School told KGTV. “The purpose of the lesson was to open the lines of communication between parents and students about dating expectations.”

    It’s not clear how standing under signs labeled “above the waist” or “all the way” while at school would open up lines of communication between eighth graders and their parents.

    The principal added that the school found the lesson at a community clinic and has used it for several years now.

    According to the middle school’s website, the principal is Brian Randall.

    The angry parents suggested that perhaps an anonymous student survey could be less humiliating for students.

————————-
Related posts on this blog:

(Link): Uproar at ‘Biblezine’ sex tips for kids / Christians in Aussie Public School Religious Classes Teaching Girl Students “Not To Make Their Nipples A Distraction and Temptation for Men”

(Link): Las Vegas Police message to young girls: Have premarital sex and risk death or become a prostitute

An Open Letter to Male Virgins by Anna Broadway

An Open Letter to Male Virgins by Anna Broadway

I want to preface the editorial farther below by saying our culture, both Christian and secular, ridicules and shames FEMALE ADULT VIRGINS and FEMALE celibates too, not just MALE ones.

Once you have gotten to your late 20s as a woman and are still a virgin, you are looked at askew by society – both in and out of church.

I say this too because I see older male, usually Christian, virgins on other sites and blogs whining, crying, and boo-hooing at how tough they think male celibates have life! Oh please, as if you guys have it more difficult? You do not.

Women virgins over 25 / 30 years of of age get teased, left out, and treated like loser-freaks by Non-Christian and Christian culture, PLUS, we ladies get the added shame messages in church sermons and Christian propaganda on blogs and in books, that we are not fulfilling our “God given duty” or “Godly role” to make a baby!

We ladies get the shame, insults, and scorn double.

Men do not face anywhere NEAR the amount of pressure by Christian culture to breed and pop out kids.

Men never (or not as often as women) have to make excuses as to why they are not a daddy, but we women get asked that all the time in regards to parenting, why are we not mothers, don’t we like kids, when do you plan on having a kid, don’t you know you better hurry your bio clock is running out, etc. We ladies get the ‘baby’ questions constantly.

It is not only MALES who face discrimination and stereotypes for being virgins. We women virgins get lambasted for it as well. We female virgins are assumed to be frigid, weird, lesbian, have too much baggage, we must be obese and ugly, or neurotic.

By the way, while the young man himself in the recent news story is responsible for his actions – the 22 year old guy who shot up a bunch of people because he was frustrated at being a virgin and not getting dates – I can’t help but wonder if the Celibate- and Virgin- shaming I see on anti-sexual purity blogs, and the overall anti-virginity attitudes I see on blogs and Facebook groups only contribute to the problem.

Maybe if culture was more accepting of virginity and did not humiliate or shame people who never lose it, or who don’t lose their virginity until they are 25, 35, 55 years old, this guy would not have felt the need to go out and shoot a bunch of people.

But as I have been reporting on here the last couple or more years, Christians have jumped aboard the “virgin and celibate shame” train, too.

It is no longer only secular culture that mocks virginity and says staying sexually pure is impossible, it is every other preacher on TV or in church now, too.

Christians are now taking “pot shots” at the concept of sexual purity and virginity on their blogs, and saying nobody can be expected to stay a virgin their entire life, or past age 25.

Maybe if the church stood on a hill and screamed, “It’s okay to be a virgin and single your whole life, feel no shame,” you wouldn’t have 22 year old men thinking they are a loser-nothings for being a virgin… maybe that kid would have realized he was okay as he was, he would not have gotten worked up and angry and murdered several people as he did.

The Christian church should be presenting virginity as a perfectly fine, viable option for adults in our culture, to act as a counterpoint to our sex-saturated culture, but often, they do not.

Christians – the married ones, and the preachers – also shame older virgins for being virgins and for being single, and they never discuss singleness and celibacy. Preachers are always giving sermons on MARRIAGE and MARRIED SEX.

(Link): An Open Letter to Male Virgins by A. Broadway

Excerpts:

      • What do you tell the male virgin in a sexed-up 21st-century “bro culture”? Is there anything an older sister of sorts could say to encourage men frustrated by their unwanted celibacy? Here’s my attempt.

To the male virgins out there:

  • I suspect you feel a lot of shame about the term “virgin.” These days, it’s hard not to. Even among young adults, virgins are a clear minority; according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, only one in 10 American men enters marriage a virgin; most start having sex in late high school. The numbers show women behave very similarly.
  • … Whatever our various reasons for ending up so, adult virgins must navigate a culture that regards sex as central to human fulfillment. But abstinence from this supposedly penultimate experience raises slightly different identity issues for men and women.
  • For women, men’s disinterest can seem like a knock on our beauty and desirability. Depending on where we find our value, that rejection can throw our own self-worth into question. But where women may blame unwanted abstinence on some lack in ourselves, men seem to read sexual inexperience as a fundamental failing, or even evidence of women’s universal aversion to or even contempt.

Continue reading “An Open Letter to Male Virgins by Anna Broadway”

Christian Mouthpiece – Russell Moore – Who Says Christians Are Prideful About Virginity Has Audacity to Make Pro Sexual Purity Arguments on TGC (Gospel Coalition) Site

Christian Mouthpiece Who Says Christians Are Prideful About Virginity Has Audacity to Make Pro Sexual Purity Arguments on TGC (Gospel Coalition) Site

Russell Moore is being a hypocrite on this topic. He speaks out of both sides of his mouth about it.

(Link): Can We Trade Sexual Morality for Church Growth? by Russell Moore, hosted on TGC site

Here is an excerpt or two from that page with observations by me below the excerpts:

    by Russell Moore

    From time to time we hear some telling us that evangelical Christianity must retool our sexual ethic if we’re ever going to reach the next generation.

    Some say that Millennials, particularly, are leaving the church because of our “obsession” with sexual morality. The next generation needs a more flexible ethic, they say, on premarital sex, homosexuality, and so on. We’ll either adapt, the line goes, or we’ll die.

    …Always Difficult

    The same is true with a Christian sexual ethic. Sexual morality didn’t become difficult with the onset of the sexual revolution. It always has been. Walking away from our own lordship, or from the tyranny of our desires, has always been a narrow way. The rich young ruler wanted a religion that would promise him his best life now, extended out into eternity. But Jesus knew that such an existence isn’t life at all, just the zombie corpse of the way of the flesh. He came to give us something else, to join us to his own life.

    …But even if it “worked” to negotiate away sexual morality for church growth, we wouldn’t do it. We can only reach Millennials, and anyone else, by reaching them with the gospel, good news for repentant sinners through the shed blood and empty tomb of Jesus Christ.

    If we have to choose between Millennials and Jesus, we choose Jesus.

    …No Amendment

    Some think the Christian sexual ethic is akin to our congregation’s constitution and by-laws, that it can be amended by a two-thirds vote. But this isn’t the case. Sexuality isn’t ancillary to the gospel but is itself an embodied icon of the gospel, pointing us to the union of Christ and his church (Eph. 5:29-32).

    This is why the Bible speaks of sexual immorality as having profound spiritual consequences (1 Cor. 6:17-20), ultimately leading, if not repented of, to exile from the kingdom of God (1 Cor. 6:9-10).

    Sexual immorality isn’t simply a matter of neurons firing. A Christian view of reality means that the body is a temple, set apart to be a dwelling place for the Holy Spirit. Sexual immorality isn’t just bad for us (although it is); it’s also an act of desecrating a holy place.

And Moore’s editorial goes on like that for several additional paragraphs.

I don’t think a guy who advises Christian virgins that they are “idolizing” virginity if they are upset or disappointed that their betrothed is a non-virgin – as Moore has done preivously (see link below) – is really in a place to opine about how churches should not “trade sexual morality for church growth.”

Even sadder is that a well-known Christian apologetics group was tweeting a link to this Moore editorial yesterday, as though they approve of it.

I tweeted them a link to my rebuttal:
(Link): Christians Who Attack Virginity Celibacy and Sexual Purity – and specifically Russell D. Moore and James M. Kushiner

A person who claims to represent Christian sexual ethics and who scolds a virgin Christian for wanting, or hoping, to marry another Christian virgin, and accusing her of “idolizing virginity” or “being prideful” about it, has no place to write

    “Sexual immorality isn’t simply a matter of neurons firing. A Christian view of reality means that the body is a temple, set apart to be a dwelling place for the Holy Spirit. Sexual immorality isn’t just bad for us (although it is); it’s also an act of desecrating a holy place”

and similar things.

Continue reading “Christian Mouthpiece – Russell Moore – Who Says Christians Are Prideful About Virginity Has Audacity to Make Pro Sexual Purity Arguments on TGC (Gospel Coalition) Site”

Another Study Shows That ‘Hookup Culture’ Is a Myth

Another Study Shows That ‘Hookup Culture’ Is a Myth

(Link): Another Study Shows That ‘Hookup Culture’ Is a Myth

    by Eliana Dockterman
    May 6, 2014

    Parents had just as much sex in college as their kids are having now

    A gaggle of sociologists and think-piece writers have been saying that young adults don’t have time to invest in relationships and therefore are treating their romantic lives with reckless abandon and having sex with random strangers.

    But despite pundits’ outcries that the moral fiber of America is decaying as college students ditch dating in favor of “hookup culture,” it turns out the sexual practices of millennials aren’t that different from those of their parents.

    A new study published in the Journal of Sex Research compares a survey on sexual practices from 1988-1996 to one from 2004-2012.

    Researchers from the University of Portland found that respondents from the later survey did not report more sexual partners after the age 18, more frequent sex or more partners during the past year than respondents from the earlier survey. “We find no evidence of substantial changes in sexual behavior that would indicate a new or pervasive pattern of non-relational sex among contemporary college students,” the researchers conclude.

    In fact, most people are still having sex with a regular partner rather than with random people. According to the new study, 78.2% of those recently surveyed reported that their sexual partner was either a spouse or a significant other, compared to 84.5% in the survey from the ’80s and ’90s.

    The researchers chalk up the differences in responses to the earlier set of people surveyed containing a higher proportion of married people. This isn’t surprising news since (Link): marriage rates are going down and (Link): people are getting married later.

    We’ve known for a while now that the media hype surrounding hookup culture is overblown: Less than 15% of college students (Link): “hook up” more than twice per year —and that definition of “hook up” ranges from kissing to intercourse.

    Almost a year ago (Link): I wrote that the sex lives of college students today aren’t all that different from their parents and their grandparents, citing surveys from the 1960s and 70s that show students were having as much sex then as they are now. But despite all the evidence to the contrary, there’s been so much coverage of this nonexistent new hookup culture (Link): that some students are feeling left out if they are not having tons of casual sex.

Read the rest here:
(Link): Another Study Shows That ‘Hookup Culture’ Is a Myth
——————————-
Related:

Hmm. If like the article above says that “Hook Up Culture” does not exist, what gives with articles like this:
(Link): Students Discuss Dissatisfaction with “Hookup Culture” [Casual Sex, Fornication, Pre Marital Sex]

(Link): The Trivialization of Sex (a post by A. Hamilton)

(Link): Today’s College Girls Explain Why They Are By-Passing Relationships To Be Big Ol’ Whores (partly because guys are man-whores) (Article)

(Link): Boys Also Harmed by Hook Up Culture (article)

(Link): New ‘Christian Swingers’ Dating Site Offers Faithful Couples Chance to ‘Hookup’

(Link): Religious Dating Sites: More than Half of Users Surveyed Are OK with Premarital Sex

(Link): The ol’ Christian myth that married couples are impervious to sexual sin but singles have lots of sexual sin

(Link): Can Boys Be ‘Coerced’ Into Sex? (article from Daily Beast)

Having Sex in Restaurant Bathrooms is Now A Thing

Having Sex in Restaurant Bathrooms is Now A Thing

I don’t even like using public bathrooms for their intended purpose. I couldn’t imagine using one for sex.

One guy interviewed said he’s caught people having sex while laying down on the restaurant bathroom’s floor. I don’t even like walking on those floors to get to the sink to wash my hands, there is no way I can fathom laying on the floor for any reason, never mind the whole having sex thing.

(Link): Stall Tactics: Getting It On in Restaurant Restrooms Is More Common Than You Think

    April 2014

    When Constantine Stavropoulos first opened Tryst in Adams Morgan, he couldn’t figure out why the wall-mounted sink in the men’s restrooms kept breaking.

    “I was really going crazy, like what is going on here?” he recalls. Then he came across a website—he doesn’t remember which—that listed Tryst’s restrooms as a hotspot for, well, trysts.

    “I had one of those ah-ha moments,” Stavropoulos says. “That explains everything.” So he installed legs to reinforce the sink. And the lesson stuck with him as he opened other restaurants: Don’t use wall-mounted sinks.

    Sex in restrooms is, after all, a fact of restaurant life. And while D.C. may have a reputation as a buttoned-up town, restaurant and bar owners know better. “They’re buttoned-up, except when they’re in the bathroom having sex,” says Derek Brown, who owns several bars, including The Passenger and Mockingbird Hill. “I think there’s a lot of it.” He speculates that D.C. has a lot of people with a lot of stress, and, you know, what better way to relieve it?

    Whether it’s a dive bar or an upscale restaurant, no establishment seems to be exempt from the sexcapades of patrons (and staff). For the first time this year, Washington City Paper added a new category to our Best of D.C. readers’ poll: Best Restaurant to Bang in the Bathroom. The No. 1 write-in response? “Gross.” But that was followed by Nellie’s Sports Bar, The Coupe (also owned by Stavropoulos), and The Palm.

    … Most restaurant and bar staff will, however, try to prevent things from getting to that point by reminding couples headed into a restroom together that only one person is allowed in at a time. “That’s generally a preventative enough measure,” says The Passenger’s Brown. “When people do this, there’s the thrill of getting caught, but they don’t want to get caught. That’s not the fun part.”

    … If they can’t keep people out in the first place, there’s the uncomfortable business of interrupting mid-act. For restaurateur and barman Todd Thrasher, the story that sticks with him most happened when he was a 26-year-old bartender working at the now-closed Café Atlántico in Penn Quarter. The restaurant used to have crazy Saturday night dance parties. One night, as he was knee-deep in making mojitos and caipirinhas, a woman told him two girls had locked themselves in the multi-stall restroom. Thrasher knocked first but didn’t hear anything, so he pushed the door open to find the women almost completely naked on the floor. “One girl was on her back. The other girl was doing what she had to do to the girl with her feet against the door,” he says. “I’m like, ‘Ladies, you really can’t be doing this here. There’s a stall right there!’”

    Thrasher says they ultimately put on their clothes on and left—“with their boyfriends.”

—————————
Related:

(Link): Man Had Sex With Sandwich Shop Window

(Link): Sex Makes People Do Stupid Things – New Jersey brokers accused of using client home for sex fests

(Link): Weirdo Dude Arrested for Having Sex with Raft and Pumpkin