TV Host Slut-Shames Woman Who Says She Had Sex With 20 Ghosts

TV Host Slut-Shames Woman Who Says She Had Sex With 20 Ghosts

This would be their choice of headline, not mine. Out of everything I’ve blogged about here in the past 6 or 7 years, this is probably one of the dumbest and weirdest stories I’ve blogged about yet

(Link): TV Host Slut-Shames Woman Who Says She Had Sex With 20 Ghosts

Excerpts:

by Christian Gollayan

Amethyst Realm, a 27-year-old Brit, is getting slut-shamed for claiming to have had sex with at least 20 ghosts — whom she purportedly prefers to living men.

Realm, from Bristol, England, went on the British TV show “ITV This Morning” on Thursday to discuss her out-of-body-on-body experiences. She says it all began in 2005, when she moved into a haunted home with her then-fiancé.

Continue reading “TV Host Slut-Shames Woman Who Says She Had Sex With 20 Ghosts”

Advertisements

TV News Report: Most Johns Are MARRIED Men, and Public Shaming Most Effective Deterrent of Sex Crimes

TV News Report: Most Johns Are MARRIED Men, and Public Shaming Most Effective Deterrent of Sex Crimes

According to this Christian-based news report I saw on TV earlier today, men caught in this sex sting operation by the police are usually MARRIED (and white, middle aged, and college educated).

The report also said that PUBLIC SHAMING over buying sex was the biggest deterrent for men who are considering buying sex – the cops in this area were publishing photos and names of men who are caught soliciting sex (via under-cover cops posing as prostitutes).

This is all very interesting, as we have many conservative Christians who deploy propaganda stating either that married people are more mature and godly than singles, or that (in the reverse) single adults are all a bunch of harlots and immature dolts who need to get married to shape up.

Then we have liberals and squishy conservative Christians who feel everyone everywhere should cease and desist with shaming anyone over any sort of sin or crime – your liberal feminists in particular go ape crazy over “slut shaming.”

This sort of thinking has infiltrated the Christian community, where we now see bonkers editorials and opinions from Christians, on forums, blogs, and Facebook groups, railing against the concept of staying a virgin until marriage, or being celibate.

But here we have a report stating that SHAMING people over their SEXUAL CHOICES (in terms of the johns, the customers) works to REDUCE prostitution rates.

(Link):  Stopping the Sex Trade, One Buyer at a Time by H. Sells

Excerpts:

SARASOTA, Fla.  – Across the country more than 1,000 towns and counties are stepping up tactics to deter men who buy sex. They include seizing vehicles, community service, “john” school, license suspension, public shaming and reverse stings.

Research shows that strategies like the reverse stings can reduce prostitution in a city by as much as 75 percent.

Continue reading “TV News Report: Most Johns Are MARRIED Men, and Public Shaming Most Effective Deterrent of Sex Crimes”

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Oct 20, 2016

by Mike Allen

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

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

Woman Has Abortion Because She Couldn’t Fit Into Her Wedding Dress

Woman Has Abortion Because She Couldn’t Fit Into Her Wedding Dress

Depending on the situation, I may at times attempt to understand WHY a woman had an abortion and even attempt to be compassionate about it. But most abortions take place because the baby conceived was done so via consensual sex. In these cases, I am not generally charitable.

As to the article I link you to below: a woman aborted her kid because she was afraid she wouldn’t be able to fit into her wedding dress later. What a selfish bitch (as are several of the other women mentioned in this article – some of them had abortions for trivial and/or purely selfish reasons).

Contrary to secular, left wing feminists, some of the women mentioned in this article, and/or their choice, should absolutely be “slut shamed” – to the hilt.

(The men who got them pregnant should also be slut shamed, because they are sluts too, and irresponsible ones.)

Some of the women in this article are so cavalier about killing an unborn child – or a blob of tissue that would otherwise turn into a baby – and some are ditzes who are too lazy or sloppy about birth control use.

Continue reading “Woman Has Abortion Because She Couldn’t Fit Into Her Wedding Dress”

“My boyfriend was intimidated by my sexual history. So I dumped him.” by T. Hornung

“My boyfriend was intimidated by my sexual history. So I dumped him.” by T. Hornung

I’m not going to take the usual, secular, left wing feminist standard here (for one thing, I’m right wing and don’t always agree with secular feminists), where I’m supposed to say a woman’s sexual history is not a boyfriend’s business, or the boyfriend should not be upset by his girlfriend’s sexual past, and say, “Rah rah, women’s sexual freedom.”

I am forever amazed that “sex positive” feminists, whether they are men or women, assume that their previous sexual choices should not, or will not, have any consequences upon them or the people around them.

Some of us are more “serious” about sex than other people – sex actually means something to us, so yes, we find it troubling, and I suppose this is doubly so, if we are virgins over 35 years of age, and have to grapple with the fact that our current partner has had sex with other people in the past.

Continue reading ““My boyfriend was intimidated by my sexual history. So I dumped him.” by T. Hornung”

How OKCupid Users’ Views of Sex Have Changed Since 2005

How OKCupid Users’ Views of Sex Have Changed Since 2005

(Link): How OKCupid Users’ Views of Sex Have Changed Since 2005

  • Feb 11, 2016
  • A new report from the company finds that American daters are growing more traditional in some ways, and more open-minded in others.

  •  … This week, the (Link): company released a survey comparing the responses they received in 2005 to those collected in 2015. Though not as rigorous as a truly random survey, the data hint at changing views of sex, love, and gender norms among online daters in the U.S.
  • Surprisingly, OkCupid found that people have become more sexually conservative in certain ways. For example, fewer people now say they would have sex on the first date:

    Would You Consider Sleeping With Someone on the First Date?

    [Pie Chart 2005: Yes: 69% – No: 31% ]

    [Pie Chart 2015: Yes: 50% – No: 50% ]

    Continue reading “How OKCupid Users’ Views of Sex Have Changed Since 2005”

Gonorrhea Super Strain Becoming ‘Untreatable’

Gonorrhea Super Strain Becoming ‘Untreatable’

Another reason of why it’s good to be celibate (or asexual): you’ll avoid stuff like this.

And, by the way, I guess that medical officers in the UK are “slut shamers,” too.

(Link):    New Strain Of Gonorrhea May Become Untreatable, U.K. Officials Say

(Link):   New strain of ‘super gonorrhea’ puts disease at risk of becoming untreatable, doctor warns

(Link): Super-gonorrhea’ in UK may be untreatable, may show up in the US

  • Sixteen cases of antibiotic-resistant gonorrhea, a sexually transmitted disease, have been reported in the UK, leading the country’s chief medical officer to warn of the rise of “super-gonorrhea.”
  • The resistant strain hasn’t appeared in the US so far, but there is growing resistance to one of the antibiotics used to treat the sexually transmitted disease (STD). This week’s warning from Dame Sally Davies, the UK’s chief medical officer, followed a health alert concerning 16 cases in the north of England among heterosexuals.

Continue reading “Gonorrhea Super Strain Becoming ‘Untreatable’”

Salon Author Amanda Marcotte Thinks Media Shouldn’t Judge Women’s Sexuality But She Has Mocked Women Over Their Sexual Choices Before (To Remain Virgins)

Salon Author Amanda Marcotte Thinks Media Shouldn’t Judge Women’s Sexuality But She Has Mocked Women Over Their Sexual Choices Before (To Remain Virgins)

My memory is a bit rusty here, but in a previous, older editorial on Salon, either Marcotte ridiculed women who choose to remain virgins until marriage, or, when she was mocking the concept of virgin- until- marriage, it escaped her notice that some women, of their own volition, choose to abstain until marriage.

I blogged about this before here, on my blog:

Either way it went, Marcotte ended up ridiculing the choice of some women to stay virgins until marriage – and some women do in fact choose to remain virgins until marriage, like this lady, who was in the media about a month ago:

This recent editorial at Salon, by Marcotte, is my reason for writing this blog post today:

(Link):  Now we’re leering at suicide bombers: The grotesque objectification of Hasna Ait Boulahcen by Amanda Marcotte

Here are a few excerpts from that page, about a woman terrorist who was blown up in Paris, France (I have some more comments below these excerpts):

  • by Amanda Marcotte
  • November 20, 2105
  • …But Boulahcen [woman terrorist] was female, and so the forces of sexual objectification are kicking in, creating a grotesque display.
  • …Both articles obsessively comb over every detail of Boulahcen’s pre-conversion life: Her partying, her drinking, the amount of sex they suspect she had, her clothes and even her “heavy makeup”, which both articles take pains to point out. It’s the same kind of thing you see these right wing rags doing day in and out, simultaneously inviting their audiences to leer at and sit in judgment of young women for their clothes, their sexual choices…

Continue reading “Salon Author Amanda Marcotte Thinks Media Shouldn’t Judge Women’s Sexuality But She Has Mocked Women Over Their Sexual Choices Before (To Remain Virgins)”

Rom Com Movie on Women Allowing Themselves To Be Used By Men – And A Leading Man Disappointment

Rom Com Movie on Women Allowing Themselves To Be Used By Men – And A Leading Man Disappointment

(This post has been edited farther below, over August 8 – 10, with more observations based on some new interviews or links I saw.

This post covers several topics, including but not limited to: how feminist characters are depicted in movies, the impact of sexism on dating, to actors who publicly express their religious and political views in an obnoxious manner.)

———————-

I am normally not a fan of “Rom Com” (romantic comedy) movies.

But I heard some good things about this particular one.

I don’t know if I want to say what it is, if I want to say what its title is.

I’ll call it “Rom Com X.”

(If you have seen this movie you may be able to guess what it is, even from my vague description below.)

One reason I don’t want to just come right out and say the title of this movie is because farther in this post I have some mild criticisms of one of its actors, and I do not want any of his fans coming here and leaving me hostile posts. I am not going to name the name of the actor I discuss below.

Rom Com X has been on cable TV a few times. I’ve seen it about twice so far, maybe three times.

I find the MC (main character) sympathetic. Well, usually. There are a few scenes in the movie where she did or said things I never would have, where she unnecessarily was hostile to a person or two.

But of course, to balance that out, she was going through a very difficult time in her life, so to a degree, you do understand she is lashing out on occasion at others and being cranky because her life is in a tail spin.

This movie was interesting on several levels to me.

I related to some of the plights of the MC (main character) in a very big way.

She and I do differ on a few points, but I have some things in common with her, if not in the details, but in the overall scheme of things.

There is an actor who plays MC’s (Main Character’s) eventual love interest in the movie. I’m going to call this guy “Actor X.” I will refer to his character’s name as “Roger.”

Continue reading “Rom Com Movie on Women Allowing Themselves To Be Used By Men – And A Leading Man Disappointment”

Planned Parenthood Tells Teenagers “It’s Great to be a Slut”

Planned Parenthood Tells Teenagers “It’s Great to be a Slut”

There is about no support in today’s culture – secular or Christian – for adult virginity and adult celibacy. None.

Rather than encouraging people to abstain, rather than applauding or supporting adults who remain virgins or who are celibate, our culture (and yes, this includes, to a degree, Christian culture) tells people that it is strange, repressive, or defective to sexually abstain.

Secular culture -and a lot of liberals- in particular heaps on the idea that there is something empowering or good about having sex outside of marriage and with lots and lots of people.

(Link):  Planned Parenthood Tells Teenagers “It’s Great to be a Slut”

by Steven Ertelt | Washington, DC | LifeNews.com | 11/7/12 5:07 PM

“There’s tons of ways that people define ‘slut.’ Most, though, are f’d up.” That’s the lead in for an MTV video targeting teens and tweens on Planned Parenthood’s Info for Teens Facebook page.

This denigrating instructional video takes place in a classroom setting and encourages young girls to become promiscuous and emphasizes that others should respect them because, as sluts, they are “confident in their sexuality.”Francisco, the young, attractive sex “Savage U” sex instructor, stands in front of a chalkboard showing one large stick figure and many small ones. He says, “Let’s say this guy [the big one] has hooked up with all these [little] people. Whoa! What a stud.”

Cheering is heard in the background. “But let’s say this is a girl,” he says, drawing a skirt on the large stick figure. “Is the situation any different? Yes or no? NO!” he says.

Attempting to convince students that anyone who judges someone because they are sexually promiscuous is bad, this “Sextra Credit” video portrays being a slut as a very desirable thing.

However, since some might take offense at the word, Francisco says, “Be careful when you throw a word like ‘slut’ around. It should only be used for good.”

The video ends with a pop quiz. The upshot of the quiz is that if you don’t believe what Francisco says about his assertion that being a slut is a positive, healthy thing, “Sorry—you fail!”Of course, nothing could be further from the truth.

In an article entitled (Link):  “Misery U: Hook-up culture leaves casualties,” Dr. Miriam Grossman, a campus psychiatrist at UCLA, points out some of the more grisly surprises that await young women who have promiscuous sex.

Addressing healthcare professionals and organizations in general, and in particular “Ask Alice”—a promiscuity promoting website that emanates from Columbia University and is linked from Planned Parenthood websites—Dr. Grossman says:OK, hold on a minute.

As a health expert, Alice, aren’t you forgetting a few things?

Let’s start with this: These young women who have turned to you are adolescents, and that likely means their cervix is immature and more vulnerable to infection.

Surely you’ve studied basic gynecology and know about the transformation zone, where human papillomavirus (HPV) has infected about half of sexually active college women, usually from one of their first encounters. Did you forget that this area shrinks with time, making infection less likely? This fact alone behooves you to urge these women to wait.

You must know, as well, that early sexual debut and multiple partners are risk factors in the development of infertility as well as cervical cancer. When you encourage your readers to “experiment” and “explore,” Alice, they are more likely to have more total lifetime sexual partners than if they delay those relationships.

You know that herpes and HPV are transmitted skin to skin and can be passed even when there are no visible lesions, and that even with latex—recent surveys show a minority of college students used a condom during their previous encounter—the “protection” is incomplete.

Continue reading “Planned Parenthood Tells Teenagers “It’s Great to be a Slut””

Sex in a Time of Ebola (ed from WaPo)

Another reason you can be glad to be celibate if you are celibate.

Some liberal Christian or secular, left wing feminist will mock a person for wanting to stay a virgin until marriage, but at least folks who are not sleeping around don’t have to worry about getting ebola (via sex) and those wonderful ebola side effects like “fever, headache, body aches, cough, stomach pain, vomiting, and diarrhea” (source).

(Link): Sex in a time of Ebola

  • October 8 2014
  • However, the Ebola virus can survive in semen for months after a man recovers from the infection, posing an ongoing threat to sexual partners long after he is well. At a time when a man’s bloodstream is swimming with antibodies, and he is immune to the disease, he still may be able to infect others.
  • As a result, Ebola survivors in West Africa and elsewhere are being advised to remain celibate or use condoms for three months after their release from treatment centers.
  • In Lofa County, Liberia, where the epidemic began six months ago, UNICEF workers doing outreach work were told the story of one local man who recovered and infected his girlfriend through sex, according to a UNICEF official. The woman later died. (We couldn’t independently verify that account).

(Link): Ebola: How to recognize the symptoms

  • The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention says these are the symptoms to watch out for:
  • Fever (greater than 38.6°C or 101.5°F)
  • Severe headache
  • Muscle pain
  • Weakness
  • Diarrhea
  • Vomiting
  • Abdominal (stomach) pain
  • Unexplained hemorrhage (bleeding or bruising)
  • The CDC says symptoms could start appearing anywhere from 2 to 21 days after exposure to the virus; the average incubation period is 8 to 10 days.

    In the early stages of illness, symptoms like fever, headache and muscle pain are fairly common and may seem like a case of the flu.

    However, within a few days, someone with Ebola will get much sicker. As the virus begins to take hold of the body, gastrointestinal illness, such as abdominal pain, vomiting and diarrhea will occur. A patient may have trouble breathing and swallowing, experience chest pain, and develop a rash, excessive bruising and bloody blisters of the skin.

    A person in the advanced stages of an acute Ebola infection will begin to have internal bleeding — what’s known as viral hemorrhagic fever. Ebola can cause hemorrhaging of multiple organs, as well as external bleeding from various orifices of the body including the ears and eyes.

———————————————————

Related posts:

(Link):  Marcotte on Anyone Choosing To Be a Virgin Until Marriage: “It’s a Silly Idea” – What Progressive Christians, Conservative Christians, Non Christians, and Salon’s Amanda Marcotte Gets Wrong About Christian Views on Virginity

(Link): No, Christians and Churches Do Not Idolize Virginity and Sexual Purity (it’s actually quite the opposite: sexual purity is under attack by Christians these days)

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

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

(Link): So Long, Compulsory Sex! See Ya, Viagra! Asexuality is Here – by B. DePaulo

In Today’s Pop Culture Virginity Is A Dirty Word – by C. Vicari

In Today’s Pop Culture Virginity Is A Dirty Word

From:

(Link):  50 Shades of Grey Areas in the Church

(the “50 Shades of Grey” post originally appeared (Link): here, at “Juicy Ecumenism”)

Yep. Among Christians and Non-Christians, all expressions of sexuality are accepted and defended, except for virginity and celibacy – those get ridiculed or insulted.

All the whining and ranting I see against purity culture or that Christians supposedly worship virginity and sexual purity are mostly laughable.

The hypocrisy and double standards on this makes me want to throw up – the groups who rant against virginity or celibacy support all other forms of sexuality under the sun, including deviant behavior. They don’t seem to care or respect the fact that some adults choose of their own free will to abstain from sex.

(Link):  50 Shades of Grey Areas in the Church

Excerpts

  • by C Vicari
  • Oct 3, 2014
  • But let me remind us all, that preserving sex for marriage is not something “conservative Christians” invented to be strict, oppressive to women, or used to point fingers and embarrass those, like me, who have crossed boundaries in the past. Sexuality in marriage between a man and a woman is something God Himself invented.
  • …. I believed it, for a time, when our pop culture told us “virginity” is a way that our so-called patriarchal society oppresses women. This reason, I’m told, that feminism must prevail.Then I watch the hardcore-porn novel “50 Shades of Grey,” whose themes glamorize the enslavement, sexual violence and female inequality of a young woman contracted by her old, white businessman, break sales records worldwide. However, feminist did not cry out. Instead they’ve championed it. Newly declared feminist Beyoncé’s music will underlay the 50 Shades of Grey movie soundtrack next year.Cue the Double Standards. This piece of pop culture with its glaring objectification of women goes absolutely viral, yet virginity is a new dirty word.
  • ….Maybe you’ve come into contact with what I’m talking about? Maybe you’ve noticed the growing bitterness towards what some so-called Christians have dubbed the “purity culture” in our churches?
  • ((click here to read the rest))

——————————————————————

Related posts:

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

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

(Link):  Jesus Christ Removed the Stigma, Shame From Being Single and Childless – by David Instone Brewer

(Link):   Some Atheists Are Just As Ignorant About Adult Singleness and Celibacy as Progressive Christians, Secular Feminists, and Protestant Evangelical or Conservative Christians

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

(Link):  Hypocrisy: Secular Pundits Judge Christian Sexuality: Josh Duggar’s So-Called Vanilla Sexual Preferences Deemed Dull

(Link):  Salon Author Amanda Marcotte Thinks Media Shouldn’t Judge Women’s Sexuality But She Has Mocked Women Over Their Sexual Choices Before (To Remain Virgins)

(Link):  Are You Ashamed of Biblical [Sexual] Purity? by J. Slattery

(Link): The Decisive Marriage – Study Says Couples Who Don’t Have Pre-Marital Sex, or Not Much or Not Many Sexual Partners Pre-Marriage, Have Better Quality or Longer Lasting Marriages

(Link): Mainstream Media Thinks Virginity is a Shameful Status, Not a Sacred Choice by K. Yoder

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

(Link): Another cruddy Christian “Have We Made an Idol Out of Sexual Purity?” editorial (this time, from Relevant magazine) – And An Analogy For Married Christians Who Don’t Get It

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

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

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

(Link): Marcotte (secular, leftwing feminist) on Anyone Choosing To Be a Virgin Until Marriage: “It’s a Silly Idea” – What Progressive Christians, Conservative Christians, Non Christians, and Salon’s Amanda Marcotte Gets Wrong About Christian Views on Virginity

(Link): The Contemporary Church Undervalues Celibacy / Virginity

(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): Christian Theologian Says ‘Love’ Is the New Cultural Apologetic Affirming Immoral Activities – Theology of Hurt Feelings – Why Christians Are Reluctant To Call Out Sexual Sin

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

(Link): When Adult Virginity and Adult Celibacy Are Viewed As Inconvenient or As Impediments [by Christians]

(Link):  No Longer Unashamed – editorial critiquing the problems with the Anti Slut Shaming or No Shaming Ever rhetoric

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

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

(Link): Ever Notice That Christians Don’t Care About or Value Singleness, Unless Jesus Christ’s Singleness and Celibacy is Doubted or Called Into Question by Scholars?

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

(Link): Where Are America’s Virgins? Discouraging the Virtuous by Julia Duin

(Link): Are Christians Tossing Out Prohibitions Against Pre Martial Sex (radio show)

Necrophiliac Charged With Banging Three Dead Women, Admits to Doing 100+ Corpses – Are We Allowed to Necrophiliac-Shame?

Necrophiliac Charged With Banging 100 Corpses – Are We Allowed to Necrophilia-Shame?

Some guy was caught having sex with corpses, and admitting to having sex with like 100 dead bodies at some morgue on night shift. This happened over a period of months, not that he boinked all 100 dead people the same night.

(Link): Morgue Employee Admits To Having Sex With Up To 100 Corpses While Working Night Shifts

I still believe it’s okay to have sexual standards and judge things like this as being wrong, but all the weepy, touchy feely folks, or the outraged progressive Christians, traitor conservative Christians, and secular feminists who rant against “sexual purity culture,” or anyone choosing to stay a virgin until marriage (see previous post for just such an example of that) might tell us that to shame a man for having sex with a corpse is a form of “Necrophilia shaming,” and so we shouldn’t say a peep about it.

One article says this guy is MARRIED. So much for the evangelical, fundamentalist, Reformed, and Baptist position that marriage makes a person
1. more godly
2. mature
3. immune from sexual immorality or perversion

Some Christians teach that God will not send you a spouse unless you clean yourself up first and become good, or God has to clean you up… that is you have to be godly to merit a spouse. Say what you will about a lot of Christian singles over the age of 30, but I doubt any or most are having sex with corpses. Yet, this guy who gets a stiffy in his pants for stiffies has a living wife at home. Looks to me like a person doesn’t have to be perfect or godly to get a spouse.

(Link): Morgue attendant had sex with up to 100 dead women

    By ZOE SZATHMARY FOR MAILONLINE
    PUBLISHED: 01:25 EST, 17 August 2014
    UPDATED: 08:23 EST, 17 August 2014

    Kenneth Douglas worked as an employee for Ohio’s Hamilton County

    He admitted to having sex with the bodies of April Hicks, Karen Range and Charlene Appling

    Speaking about Appling, Douglas said ‘I do remember going in the freezer, pulling her in one of the rooms in the back’

    Douglas attributed his behavior to drug and alcohol abuse in a deposition

    The county employee’s DNA was connected to Range in 2008, and later Appling and Hicks
    Hamilton County is facing a lawsuit from their families

    An Ohio morgue employee revealed he may have had sex with ‘a hundred’ corpses and continued to do so even after his wife had tipped off authorities.

    Speaking about the incidents in deposition audio obtained by WCPO, Hamilton County employee Kenneth Douglas said ‘I would get on top of them and pull my pants down.’

    When talking about the body of victim Charlene Appling, Douglas said ‘I do remember going in the freezer, pulling her in one of the rooms in the back’ before he told an investigator he ‘had sex with her.’

    When asked about the number of corpses he had sex with, Douglas answered ‘It could have been a hundred’ in the deposition audio.

    Douglas attributed his behavior to drug and alcohol abuse in the deposition.

    ‘If I wasn’t drinking, or hadn’t had anything to drink when I went to work, it wouldn’t happen. I would do crack and go in and I would drink and go in,’ he said.

    His wife was featured in a deposition video obtained by WCPO, in which she said she tried to contact someone about her husband’s behavior – but she was dismissed.

    At the time, she also said her husband ‘gets undressed and he reeks of [expletive].’

    WCPO said Douglas admitted to having sex with the bodies of April Hicks, Karen Range and Charlene Appling. Both Appling and Range were murder victims.

    ‘[In 2008] DNA connected him to semen found in Range,’ the affiliate station said. ‘[…] In 2008, Douglas pleaded guilty in the Range case and was sentenced to three years in prison. In 2012, he pleaded guilty again in the Appling and Hicks cases. Their families sued that year.’

(Link): Court: Families can sue county after morgue worker had sex with corpses

(Link): Pervert morgue assistant admits to having sex with up to 100 bodies

    A man in Ohio has admitted in court to having sex with up to 100 corpses while he worked at a morgue.

    The shocking admission by Kenneth Douglas has send shockwaves around the community in the town of Hamilton.

    Depraved Douglas told a court he was usually high or drunk and would “just get on top of them and pull my pants down”.

Sexualizing Modesty – Christians Defeating the Purpose

Sexualizing Modesty – Christians Defeating the Purpose

Before I get to the main heart of this post, here is a long introduction.

First of all, I think the modesty debate re-enforces one Christian and secular stereotype: that only men are visually oriented, and women are not. That is, women are thought to hate sex, or not be very interested in sex, and that women prefer “emotional bonding,” knitting tea cozies, and reading poetry, to sex.

The truth is, a lot of women (even Christian ones) are visually oriented and get “turned on” by looking at a good looking man (especially if he’s in great shape and shirtless).

These modesty teachings almost never, ever take into account that women have sex drives, sexual desires, and sexual preferences – and I get so tired of that aspect of it. These modesty teachings only take into account that MEN are sexual and have sex drives and so forth.

I am really not totally on either side of this modesty debate.

Concerning this issue, like several others I regularly discuss on this blog, I’m neither fully on Team (secular or Christian) Feminist, nor am I fully on Team Conservative (or Team Christian).

My views would probably hack off people on either side of the debate, both the anti-modesty types and the pro-modesty ones.

I think both sides make some really good points on some things, but both sides also get a few things wrong.

Where I might agree with the anti-modesty guys on “point X”, I might find that the pro-modesty guys are right about “point Z.”

Where I Agree with the Pro Modesty Side

As far as the pro-modesty side is concerned, I do agree that some teen-aged girls and women dress slutty, and this is not good, right, or cool.

I’m tired of secular feminists shaming pro-modesty types and trying to intimidate them into silence by screaming “slut shamer” at them, or about them, in every other tweet or blog post.

There are some women who do in fact want to use their looks, body, or sexuality to get attention. I saw these sorts of girls and women when I was a teen, in my 20s, and older. We’ve all known them.

They’re not satisfied wearing plain old blue jeans with a normal shirt, no.

They have to wear mini-skirts with fish net stockings and stiletto heels, or daisy duke shorts with their ass cheeks barely hanging out.

There may be a minority of women who dress that way because they genuinely find such fashions cute or flattering on their figure, but you damn well know the majority are wearing such ensembles to look “hot,” and at that, because they want male attention.

Personally, I find that look -the barely dressed, or stilettos with mini skirts types of sexy looks – rather trampy, and I think most women who dress like that are in fact seeking sexual attention from males – and no, I’m not fine with that.

I don’t have to agree with other women’s choices all the time in clothing or how they choose to attract men.

    Side Note:

    (Seriously, this is one odd-ball aspect I’ve seen crop up on secular feminist blogs frequently: by sheer fact that I am a woman, I am expected to always agree with other women and all their choices and political and moral views all. the. time, and to deny my own personal, political, or religious values and opinions in the process.

    Yes, just because I am a woman, and they are a woman. Me supporting all other women all the time on every topic under the sun (and it seems especially true in regards to sexuality, modesty, sex, abortion, and birth control) is considered obligatory, all because I’m a woman too.

    I don’t support all males all the time on every topic, so why would I be expected to support all women all the time, about everything? It makes no sense.)

Some women do in fact make a conscious choice to showcase their sexuality (e.g., by wearing tiny skirts and so forth) because their self esteem and self respect is so low, they don’t think they have anything else to offer a man, or they don’t think they have anything to offer the world but their looks, body, and sexuality.

Or, some women who dress in revealing clothing may assume 99% of men are indeed visually-oriented cave men, sexist swine, who only want “one thing” from women, and if these women are in the market to pick up a boyfriend, yes, they will don the fishnet stockings and mini-skirts.

There is a difference between Taylor Swift and Miley Cyrus. There is a difference between Madonna Ciccone and Whitney Houston.

Some women do in fact choose character, talent, and/or brains to make their place in the world, to gain success, or to get attention, while other women opt to go the sexual and titillation route (which may include dressing in a provocative manner).

And we (women) all know it. We know this is true. But a lot of the anti-modesty squad I see online seems to deny this.

Or, maybe they realize it, and their argument is they feel a Miley Cyrus should be able to act or dress like a harlot in public and nobody should make any negative judgments what-so-ever about it.

I’ve seen secular feminist blogs whose writers get upset with companies who objectify women by portraying women as sexy things in advertisements, or with companies who make too much out of a woman’s looks…

But these same feminists turn around, and quite inconsistently, feel it’s okay for a woman to objectify herself – and nobody is supposed to say anything critical about it (because that would be “slut shaming”).

But to me, that is a double standard.

Where I Agree With the Anti Modesty Side

Too often, as anti-modesty advocates point out, religious “modesty teachings” or modesty propaganda, tell girls and women they ought to dress in a conservative manner so as not to cause men to stumble.

The fact is that men are responsible for their behavior. It does not matter if a woman is fully clothed or wearing a thong bikini in the presence of a man, it is up to a man to control his thoughts and actions.

Continue reading “Sexualizing Modesty – Christians Defeating the Purpose”

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”

Hypocrisy of Left Wingers and Atheists and the #NotAll Hash Tag or Rhetoric

Hypocrisy of Left Wingers and Atheists and the #NotAll Hash Tag or “Not All” Rhetoric
——————————-
REMINDER

If you are new to this blog, I possibly need to remind you that I am socially conservative, right wing, and a Republican.

(Edit, Sept 2016. My views have shifted somewhat in the last couple of years, since I last wrote this post. I am still right wing but more moderate now.)

Although I do criticize my fellow right wingers, as well as Christians, time and again on this site over some subjects, I am not liberal, progressive, Democratic, left wing, nor am I pro-choice or pro-homosexuality.

I do not despise the notions of, belief in, or practice of, moral absolutes, Christianity, the nuclear family, traditional marriage, sexual purity, Christians, the Bible, or a literal biblical hermeneutic.

(However, I do not always agree with other conservatives about topics, or how to handle those topics.)

If you’re feeling very confused or duped at this point, as in, “Hey, I’ve been visiting this blog for months now, or I followed you on Twitter, and I thought you are liberal, and that you hate conservatives and Christianity like I do?!”

No, you have misunderstood me or my positions.

Just because I am sometimes critical of Christians, or how Christians and conservatives sometimes pontificate about certain matters, does not mean I am against either one or that I am automatically a liberal who supports abortion, Democrats, Obama, or homosexuality.

You might want to see this blog’s “About” page for more about my views. I tend to criticize other right wingers more so than left wingers on this blog, but this is one of those posts where I have to criticize the left.
——————————-
Hypocrisy of Left Wingers and Atheists and the #NotAll Hash Tag or “Not All” Rhetoric

Secular feminists hate men who interject into feminist conversations online – or in real life – about sexism and rape apologia to say, “But not all men are like that; I am not.”

Feminists are annoyed over this common behavior to the point they started using the “#NotAllMen” hash tag on Twitter and blogs.

If you’re not familiar with the history of, or the bruhaha over, the “Not All Men” phenomenon, you can read more about it on Time magazine’s site here:
(Link): Not All Men: A Brief History of Every Dude’s Favorite Argument, by Jess Zimmerman.

(Edit. Since I wrote this post, I read one source that says that it was men who started use of the “#NotAllMen” hash to counter balance the feminist “#YesAllWomen” hash, but by the time I started seeing “#NotAllMen” it was being used by feminists against sexist men.)

Not too long ago, in a conversation in the comments on a left wing site under an article criticizing a famous conservative journalist’s position about something related to sexism, I pointed out that not all conservatives and Republicans see eye- to- eye on every issue, so please don’t assume that one journalist’s views on that one issue are indicative of all conservatives – as the author of the article I was commenting on seemed to imply.

I also pointed out in that same post that I myself, who am a conservative Republican, did not totally support conservatives on the particular topic under discussion, and some rude, liberal, Democratic jackass at that site gave me a sarcastic comment and dismissed my view by sarcastically using the “#Not All Conservatives” hash.

(Among other snarky commentary from that person. This person was truly being an assh-le for no good reason.

I said nothing to that point to provoke snarky, condescending remarks from anyone.

After that person was rude to me, and only afterwards, did I tell her she was rude and could kiss my ass, but prior to that, before her rudeness, I was being polite.)

On the one hand, I can certainly understand why, for example, women may find it rude or annoying when their feminist conversation about male privilege or sexism gets interrupted by some man interjecting to say, “But I am a man, and I respect women” because that can seem to diminish the experiences of sexism by women who are discussing the topic.

On the other hand, nobody likes seeing a group they are a member of, or sympathetic to, being generalized unfairly, or painted with a broad-brush.

Liberals are often hypocritical on this point. And they are also terribly blinded to their hypocrisy.

#NOT ALL MUSLIMS

For example, any time a conservative points out that quite a number of Muslims are terribly sexist against women (e.g., honor killings of female rape victims, extreme modesty teaching which blames women for male sexual crimes or male misbehavior, the practice of female genital mutilation, forced marriages of young girls to old men – are all common beliefs or practices in Islamic communities)-

Or, when conservatives make the true observation that most terrorism in the world today is carried out by Muslims (enjoy this site, or this one (*and see a few more links at the bottom of this post)), your left wingers will quickly exclaim,
“But not all Muslims are like that! I’ve even known some Muslims personally, and they are very nice people.”

Hence, we see #Not All Muslims at play by left wingers in conversations about terrorism. Often.

#NOT ALL ATHEISTS

When I have visited theologically liberal or ex- Christian sites, which are sometimes populated by self-professing atheists (who usually claim to be former Christians), they get angry when Christians point to news stories of atheists who get arrested for murder, or rape, or what have you.

Immediately, the atheists, or theologically liberal Christians, start saying (this one seems to comes up on Stuff Christian Culture Likes Facebook group about once a week it seems, eg. in (Link): this discussion),
“How long until conservative Christians point to this news story of this atheist murdering this child as proof that all atheists are unethical, murdering slugs? Don’t they know that not all atheists are killers or child molesters?”

Yes, I sometimes see anti-Christian atheists bring out the “#NotAllAtheist” commentary.

However, many times, these same atheists like to bring up the Christian “#Not All Christian” habit of saying, “Maybe the preacher arrested for child rape was not a ‘real’ Christian,” by mentioning the “No True Scotsman” fallacy (you can read more about that here or here).

You can see examples of Non-Christians complaining about the alleged Christian use of “No True Scotsman” (Link): here (link is to SCCL Facebook group page, a group which runs from theologically liberal to atheistic).

Let us review.

Some atheists get angry at Christians who assume all, or most atheists, are immoral scum balls, but atheists do not mind assuming these things are true of all Christians.

Atheists detest the #NotAllChristians tactic by Christians, vis a vis the “No True Scotsman” stance, but atheists don’t hesitate to scream #NotAllAtheists in similar contexts.

Oh, I see. We want to make exceptions for our side but not the other side; how convenient.

We want to be angry atheists snarking on Christians all day long and pointing out Christian flaws, but Flying Spaghetti Monster forbid if Christians mention crimes or misbehavior by atheists! Talk about a double standard.

NO TRUE SCOTSMAN

I hate to disappoint the die-hard, irrational, frothing- at- the mouth variety of atheists out there (and many of you are indeed irrational – your hatred for God and Christians is based on emotion or personal dislike of Christians, not due to intellect or dispassionate reason as is often claimed), the “No Scotsman Fallacy” does not totally apply to Christianity to start with.

Jesus Christ himself taught that not all who consider themselves Christians are in fact actual, real, genuine followers of his, even if they do claim to be so.

See for example, (Link): this biblical passage or (Link): this one or (Link): this one.

#NOT ALL HOMOSEXUALS

I’ve noticed that any time crimes or bigotry by homosexuals against heterosexuals, other homosexuals, or other groups, are brought up on blogs or news sites, especially on forums or blogs that tend to have a large segment of left wingers, most of the left wingers are quick to jump in with the “not all homosexuals” argumentation.

One case in point was a recent letter to the “Ask Amy” advice columnist.

Here is a link to the letter:
(Link): Mom worries about gym teacher in locker room

Here is the letter:

DEAR AMY:

    My seventh-grade daughter’s female gym teacher is openly gay. None of the parents or kids has a problem with this.

The issue is that she observes the girls changing into and out of their gym clothes, and my daughter and many of her peers feel very uncomfortable having a lesbian watch them walk around in their underwear.

I’m afraid to say anything because I worry that my daughter will be given a “special area” to change, and it will make her feel awkward.

I understand that seventh-graders need supervision in the locker room, but it seems to me the school should know that it may not be appropriate to have a lesbian in the locker room with young girls!

By the way, the teacher has never behaved unprofessionally — nor is anyone worried that she might — it is simply an issue of discomfort.

What’s the right answer that respects everyone involved? — Concerned Mom

Here is part of Amy’s reply:

DEAR CONCERNED:

    …You might start this conversation by letting your daughter know that there is a likelihood some of her fellow students at school or on sports teams are also lesbians, and that in this environment, along with trusting her instincts, she also has to trust other people (gay and straight) to have integrity.

You seem to think that because this teacher is a lesbian, she may also be attracted to — or be an unhealthy presence — for girls.

Judging by the preponderance of recent alarming news reports of improper sexual relationships between teachers and students, a student is much more likely to be hit on by a heterosexual teacher than a gay one.

— (end Amy letter)—

First of all, notice that Amy’s tact here is pretty much a “Not All Homosexuals” argument. She even goes further to use a “Most All Heteros” argument.

Amy is telling the mother who wrote the letter not to assume that just because a female gym teacher is lesbian that this necessarily means that the teacher is viewing the students in a sexual manner or will “hit” on them.

That may very well be true, but note the “Not All Lesbians” rhetoric is being employed in the first place.

When I visited sites that published copies of this letter and had a comment section, I noted that many of the commentators left statements to the effect of “the gym teacher’s sexual preference should not be an issue, as not all homosexuals prey on children.”

It was remarkable how often the “Not All Homosexuals” cliche’ kept popping up under this particular “Ask Amy” letter and previous ones like it, that mentioned homosexual people.

Secondly, per Amy’s comment that

    “Judging by the preponderance of recent alarming news reports of improper sexual relationships between teachers and students, a student is much more likely to be hit on by a heterosexual teacher than a gay one”

there are more heterosexuals than homosexuals in American culture, so it would mathematically figure that there are more hetero predators than homosexual ones, based on “counting noses” of sexual offenders alone.

However, based on various studies I have seen over the past ten or more years, there is a HIGHER PERCENTAGE of pedophiles among homosexuals than heteros.

Continue reading “Hypocrisy of Left Wingers and Atheists and the #NotAll Hash Tag or Rhetoric”

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”

‘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