So, Which Is Harder, Marriage or Singleness? (via Relevant magazine)

So, Which Is Harder, Marriage or Singleness? (via Relevant magazine)

The author comes down more on the side of singleness- she believes that singles have life a bit more difficult in the overall scheme of things, since they have to do everything alone.

Some of the comments by the singles in the comments section below are annoying. Some of them are the sort who were single until the age of 29, so they’re like, “Hey man, I know how tough it is to be single, I didn’t marry ’til age 29.”

I’m like, shut up. I’m in my 40s and have never married, my dear. Being still single at age 40+ is not the same as getting married off once you hit age 29, 30 or 35.

Just because you didn’t marry until you were 29 doesn’t make you an expert on what extended singleness is like.

People who marry by their mid-30s who act as though they know how hard or frustrating it is to still be single at 40+ annoy me to no end, and they piss me off.

Then you have your adult singles in the comments on the ‘Relevant’ magazine page whining things like, “Aw jeeze, you make singleness sound so terrible. Speak for yourself, I be lovin’ the single life.”

To those people, I in turn am like, why don’t YOU shut up, because some of us are tired of being single and would like to be married? Great for you if you have reached full peace and contentment in your singleness, but some of us still would like to be married.

Here’s the link:

(Link): So, Which Is Harder, Marriage or Singleness? (via Relevant magazine) by Lizzy Harford

Singleness is often viewed as an undesirable life stage. If you ask anyone in the Church, for the most part, they despair at their single years. Singleness is hard, often lonely and unwanted.

When you’re married, you’re working and living in tandem.

You and your spouse, though separate individuals, are living together, moving along the same path with the same goals. While God is the true source of our comfort and reliance, there is an added feeling of security in marriage that singleness does not have.

…But singles are inevitably going to encounter multiple instabilities not once, not twice, but perhaps numerous times, for as long as they are single and unable to afford living on their own.

Continue reading “So, Which Is Harder, Marriage or Singleness? (via Relevant magazine)”

How Do We Solve a Problem Like the Singles? by R. Kilgore

How Do We Solve a Problem Like the Singles?  by Rachel Kilgore

Before I get to the link to the essay by Kilgore, which is hosted at MOS (Mortificiation of Spin / specifically, Aimee Byrd’s blog, ‘Housewife Theologian’):

For years and years on this blog, here on “Christian Pundit” blog, I have been explaining over and over again that most evangelical, Baptist, Reformed, and Fundamentalist Christian denominations, churches, and groups IGNORE adults singles – the older a single you are, the worse it is – the more ignored you are.

I have also commented on other people’s blogs under the Christian Pundit blog name, and under other names, alerting Christians to how horribly American Christians treat adult singles. I have Tweeted about it.

When Christians aren’t ignoring us older singles, and they do manage to notice our existence, many Christians shame us for being single. They insult us. They try to make us feel like we are losers (seriously, see (Link): this post, (Link): this post, (Link): this post), (Link): this post – I could cite many more examples from my blog of anti-Singles bias by Christians, but that should suffice.)

I used to be what is called a gender complementarian.  I am not interested in spending a lot of time explaining what that means.

I am no longer a gender complementarian.

I am linking you here to a post about adult singleness at a blog (the one by A. Byrd) owned by what I would term “soft gender complementarians.”

Continue reading “How Do We Solve a Problem Like the Singles? by R. Kilgore”

Love-Sick Teenager Who Won’t Take No For an Answer is Finally Shut Down by his Ex-Girlfriend’s FATHER in an Epic Text Exchange – Men of All Ages Need To Learn to Handle Rejection and to Respect Other People’s Boundaries in Dating

Love-Sick Teenager Who Won’t Take No For an Answer is Finally Shut Down by his Ex-Girlfriend’s FATHER in an Epic Text Exchange – Men of All Ages Need To Learn to Handle Rejection and to Respect Other People’s Boundaries in Dating

If there are any MEN reading this – especially men over the age of 21 – you need to realize that some of you are just as bad in your online behavior, especially on dating sites and apps, as this 15 year old kid is.

See how obnoxiously persistent this teen kid is, how he keeps dragging this exchange on and on with the teen girl’s father? This is how 90% of you men over the age of 21 behave towards grown women online, especially on dating sites.

You men refuse to take “no” from women for an answer, or to choose to view a woman turning you down as the ultimate insult.

You men take rejection by women far too personally, and send negative, nasty, insulting comments to some women, all for merely politely turning you down on a site, for refusing to give you their number, or going on a date with you.

Women you don’t know (single women) don’t owe you squat in life – women don’t owe you a smile, flirtation, chit chat, their phone numbers, sex, emotional support, or dates.

You will be turned down as you go through life by various women you flirt with or ask on dates – it’s a reality. Get over it. Learn to let go, accept defeat graciously, and stop taking it so damn personally.

Learn to respect other people’s boundaries. If a woman or girl tells you “no” or “not interested,” just let it go. Don’t send the girl or woman nasty, insulting messages if or when she turns you down. Just move along.

Continue reading “Love-Sick Teenager Who Won’t Take No For an Answer is Finally Shut Down by his Ex-Girlfriend’s FATHER in an Epic Text Exchange – Men of All Ages Need To Learn to Handle Rejection and to Respect Other People’s Boundaries in Dating”

How to Date When You’re Almost Middle-Aged by A. Broadway

How to Date When You’re Almost Middle-Aged by A. Broadway

I skimmed this article over the other day (the link to it is much farther below; I wanted to say a few words first).

I’m over 40, the author was like 38 around the time of writing.

I don’t wish to re-read it, so I’m gong on memory. From what I remember, she seems to tilt to the belief that the older you get, the fewer decent men you have to choose from (I sometimes see this idea in regards to older women: that single women over the age of 35, 40 or 45 are somehow “flawed,” which is why they are still single, or single again).

The author therefore assumes if she does land a man at age 38 / 40, he is likely to be a loser or weirdo.

Look, I am not on board with that sort of negative, defeatist thinking. I’m over 40 and have never married (but yes, I was engaged to a guy for a few years. I have done the “serious relationship” thing).

Like all humans, yes, I have made mistakes in life and have a few odd-ball habits: but who does not. Still, for the most part, I am pretty normal. I’d make a great wife.

Therefore, any time I see married people or adult singles argue that singles over 35, 40, or older, are somehow losers or odd balls, I resent it – because, by default, you’re lumping me into that generalization. I am not a loser or a weirdo.

Over my time on the internet, especially since starting this blog, I’ve met other never-married or single again persons who are over the age of 35, and they’ve not been able to find a life partner. Not because they are losers, weirdos, or failures, but just for the simple fact that finding a compatible partner is not all that easy.

There are more never-married adults over 35 and 40 now (and “single again” adults) than at any time in our nation’s history, according to various news report I’ve seen the last 2 or 3 years. I find it hard to believe that all of the many thousands of over-40 singles are weirdos or too mal-adjusted to marry.

God knows I’m not as effed up as the (Link): married people I routinely blog about: the married, Christian men who rape their wives, abuse girlfriends, or who (Link): murder mistresses or who are arrested for fondling kids.

Continue reading “How to Date When You’re Almost Middle-Aged by A. Broadway”

Please Stop Shaming Me for Being Single by J. Vadnal

Please Stop Shaming Me for Being Single by J. Vadnal

I first spotted a link to this via Bella DePaulo’s Twitter account.

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

Excerpts:

  • … “Even today, there’s truth to the idea that women get validation by being in a relationship,” says Rachel Hills, author of The Sex Myth. “If you’re single, it’s seen as a problem to be fixed.”
  • After that, I began to notice it everywhere. My exclusion from couples-only dinners. A married-with-kids friend implying that a second glass of vino was a wild night for her but for me every night was a drinkfest. Invites to weddings arriving without “and Guest” next to my name. Because I’m single, I’m made to feel bad about it.

Continue reading “Please Stop Shaming Me for Being Single by J. Vadnal”

Response to Various Cranky Critics Who Have Left Nasty Posts At This Blog From June to August 2014

Response to Various Cranky Critics Who Have Left Nasty Posts At This Blog From Around June to August 2014

If you have even bothered to glance at the heading on this blog, it says,

  • this is a blog for me to vent; I seldom permit dissenting views. I don’t debate dissenters.

This disclaimer doesn’t stop cranky people, the occasional troll, or idiot from leaving nasty, vulgar, or negative remarks.

I do not usually read the negative posts that closely. I generally scan the first few lines of a new post, and if I ascertain quickly it’s a troll post, that it contains vitriol, snark, or a rant, I send it to the trash.

In the past two months, I’ve gotten a handful of nasty grams. I sent those posts to the trash can.

Here are summaries of the various nasty grams I have received, and my responses.

In this post, I will be discussing,

  • 1. The Bitter Lady
  • 2. The Grouchy Be Equally Yoked Lady
  • 3. The You’re An Intolerant Homophobe Guy
  • 4. The Immature I Am a 40 Year Old Man Who Likes to Pork 20 Year Old Women Lying Creepster Troll

-among others

Continue reading “Response to Various Cranky Critics Who Have Left Nasty Posts At This Blog From June to August 2014”

Are Single Christians Marginalised By Their Own Church? – by J. French

Are Single Christians Marginalised By Their Own Church?

The target audience for this editorial appears to be black ladies, but I still related to most of it (and I’m white). I think this is also by a British author – I’m not sure.

(Link): Are Single Christians Marginalised By Their Own Church?

Excerpts:

    Written by Jacqueline French
    14/07/2013

    …It’s official – the church is failing single people according to research conducted by the Christian Connection dating website which analysed the responses of its users.

    The survey found that over a third of Christians who are not married, said that they felt they are not treated as those who are part of family; that nearly four out of 10 single churchgoers said that they often felt “inadequate or ignored”, while 42.8 percent felt that their “church did not know what to do with them”; and a total of 37 percent said that “they did not feel treated as family members.”

    Although many of us find it hard to meet a godly suitor, most of us will still insist on marrying a Christian. Churches are simply not learning how to reflect the changes to the modern world in accommodating or even remotely recognising the needs of it’s single members.

    Don’t even get me started on the marginalisation of single women in the churches!

    Let’s face it – outside of joining the choir and/or volunteering to serve in a “ministry” of sorts, church leaders are at a loss as to how to support those of us aged 30 upwards.

    To be fair to them however, they are often struck with ever-decreasing numbers of strong-conviction male Christians who feel confident in developing relationships with women. Indeed, my experiences include liaisons with the following:-

    The Harem Wrangler – Married on average, for around 20 years, with 2.4 kids, he loves his wife but has a string of female, “friends” none of whom he has a sexual relationship with, but some of whom he is sometimes strongly emotionally connected to, often enjoying a better friendship with some of these women than he does his wife.

    The Prophet of Doom – Bible-toting, Hawaii Five-O-style Christian male full of conviction as he roams the streets, buses and train stations preaching the Word in and out of season, because he’s married to The Ministry.

    The Apostle Paul being his hero, he fiercely guards his heart from the merest hint of forming a relationship, as he is sure he has no need of women. He is here to herald that women are the ultimate deceiver, cunning and wily.

    There are of course, many other “types” but you get the picture – the panoramic view does not bode well for single Christians (particularly women) wanting to meet other single Christians not necessarily via dating websites or via other social networking media but within Christian circles – at minor, everyday or major events. This is, by far, the most underrated trial in the church, with single Christian women comprising a vast majority of most congregations.

————————–
Related posts:

(Link): Awesome Relationship Advice for Single Women by Ms Heart Beat

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

(Link): The Types of Christian Singles Who Annoy Me

Nun gives birth after being rushed to hospital with stomach pains… and she says she had no idea she was pregnant – I thought nuns were supposed to be celibate?

Nun gives birth after being rushed to hospital with stomach pains… and she says she had no idea she was pregnant

I thought nuns were supposed to be celibate? I haven’t seen anything I’ve skimmed over indicating she was raped. I am assuming, therefore, that the baby was conceived via consensual sex.

(Link): Nun gives birth to baby named after Pope

    By Nick Squires
    2:05PM GMT 18 Jan 2014

    A nun who was rushed to hospital complaining of acute stomach pains has given birth to a baby boy – and named him Francesco after the Pope.

    The 31-year-old nun began to feel severe abdominal cramps on Wednesday and gave birth just a few hours later.

    The discovery of her pregnancy has embarrassed the Catholic Church in Italy, with the local bishop saying that she will have to leave her convent in Rieti, north of Rome, after breaking her vow of chastity.

    “It would be preferable that she now lead a secular life with her baby, away from religious institutions,” said a spokesman for Delio Lucarelli, bishop of Rieti.

    The nun, who is from El Salvador, had kept her pregnancy a secret and even as she was being taken to hospital in an ambulance denied that she could be pregnant.

    “It’s not possible, I’m a nun,” she told doctors, according to the Italian press.

    The nun, who has not been named, had been working in an old people’s home attached to the Campomoro convent near Rieti. She was a member of the Little Disciples of Jesus order.

    The convent’s mother superior, Sister Erminia, said: “It seems she was not able to resist temptation.”

    There was speculation that the nun may have fallen pregnant during a visit to her home country last year.

– Yes, she could avoid temptation but chose to give in to it.

(Link): Nun who gave birth in Italy ‘unaware of pregnancy’

(Link): Nun gives birth after being rushed to hospital with stomach pains… and she says she had no idea she was pregnant

    -31-year-old woman was rushed to hospital in the central Italian city of Rieti
    -The woman is originally from El Salvador and lives at the convent
    -She has named her child Francesco (Francis) after the current Pope

—————
Related:

(Link): Roman Catholics on Priest Celibacy – Other Topics

(Link): Priest Daniel McFalls Fathers a Baby – Speaks Out Against Celibacy

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

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

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

Much farther below is a link to an editorial by a writer at Christianity Today about sex surrogates – there are people, such as paralyzed people in wheelchairs, who hire people to have sex with them.

“Sex surrogacy” apparently happens frequently in Europe and has begun making inroads in the USA.

I can’t speak for Europe, as I’m not as familiar with their evangelical culture, as I am with the American.

If the Christian evangelical, fundamentalist, and Baptist church in America presented virginity and celibacy as a viable, real alternative to pre- marital / extra marital sex, as a standard anyone can achieve, instead of, as they do, erroneously painting virginity and celibacy as though only a few very holy, few chosen have the G.O.C. (“gift of celibacy”) or G.O.S. (“gift of singleness”), perhaps there would not be as much fornication as there is, and no need for “sex surrogates.”

By the way, NEITHER CONCEPT, GOC or GOS, IS TAUGHT IN THE BIBLE.

God does not “gift” any one with singleness, or with celibacy.

God does not determine in eternity past that some Christians will be elected unto celibacy and singlehood; marriage and singlehood are personal choices God leaves up to YOU-

-if celibacy were taught in this way, as something that is open and possible for everyone, then most would feel they had a shot at resisting sex before marriage (or outside of it).

Part of what is feeding the fornication among Christians is this false teaching of GOS and GOC: Christians mistakenly think only a few chosen few have “the gift of celibacy,” including famous Christian personalities, such as this guy:

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

Marriage is pushed so hard by evangelicals and other branches of American Christendom because most Christians assume nobody but nobody can practice sexual self control, that lifelong sexual control is possible only by the tiny minority God ‘gifts’ it to.

It is therefore further reasoned that marriage is the ONLY answer to avoiding fornication for the large part, as in 99%, of humanity, that has not been “gifted with celibacy.”

Christians think of celibates as being “specially gifted” by God, unlike the ordinary believer in the pew, and celibates are thought of as being so very rare.

The Bible does not teach that celibacy or singlehood are gifts God gives to people. Singleness and celibacy are presented in the Bible as options open to any and all believers in Christ.

Marriage is explained in the Bible as being a good gift of God, and it seems to imply this is also true of singleness, but God leaves it up to each person which route they will go. Neither is a status God “calls” one to, “bestows,” or “predestines” one to.

In other words,

God does not pick the name “Jane Smith” out of a hat and then say,

    “I shall grant a Gift of Singleness and Celibacy to Jane. I shall never send Jane Smith a husband, and I shall remove all longing for sex and marriage from Jane, unlike 99% of other Christian women, who I will permit to have these things and desires”

-but this is often exactly how GOS/GOC is taught, caricaturized, and understood among Christians, even among Christian adult celibates and never married themselves, unfortunately.

Anyone can be content in singleness or live without sex.

Christians misunderstand GOS/GOC to mean that God must supernaturally lower the libido in celibates, that God removes all hankering for sex and marriage from them, but this is not so.

The thing is, even celibates have and experience sexual desire: but we maintain the self control not to act upon it.

There is no special God- given super power or “grace,” that makes celibates immune from having sexual feelings (again, this is how most people understand the GOS and GOC talk, and the Bible no where teaches either concept).

All adults and teens are quite capable of exercising control and not having sex. It is up to your personal decision, not to any special “giftings of God” that only a few have been granted by God.

Continue reading “Gift of Singleness Gift of Celibacy Unbiblical – Those Terms and Teachings Contribute to Fornication / Editorial About Sex Surrogates /”

The Society of Phineas blog on Singleness

The Society of Phineas blog on singleness

(Link): Manufacturing Singleness Part 2, from The Society of Phineas blog

There are aspects of the above blog page I agree with, and ones I do not.

I will here-after refer to this blogger as “Phineas,” though he also uses the screen name of “ballista74.”

The blogger of the above classifies Al Mohler, DeYoung and Mark Driscoll as “feminist preachers.” There is nothing feminist about Mohler or Driscoll. I don’t know DeYoung well enough to comment on him.

Mohler and Driscoll are actually anti-feminist. They are gender complementarians. They believe in strict gender roles, that women should be sweet, pretty, and passive, while males should be tough, assertive, decisive, and active.

I would not be interested in marrying a Christian man who agrees with Mohler’s or Driscoll’s views on marriage and women.

Most women, Christian and Non, find Driscoll to be a sexist pig, not a feminist who champions their causes. Saying that Driscoll is feminist would be like saying that the Coyote loves and esteems the Road Runner; it does not compute. Driscoll says things that both genders find offensive.

Christian gender complementarians such as Driscoll and Mohler are known for blaming feminism for the lack of marriages among Christians; see this post: (Link): Christian Males Blaming their Unwanted Protracted Singleness on Feminism – They have the wrong target

That Mohler and Driscoll hold young males partially responsible for the drought of marriages among Christians today is not a party line of feminism (feminists are usually anti-marriage, believing it traps women and only benefits men), and more a throw back to their incorrect interpretations of how they think the Bible discusses and defines gender roles.

I do agree with Phineas that many Christians remain blind to the fact that Christian women on occasion commit sexual sins – I would say this is due in part to inherent sexism of their complementarian gender role views.

Christian males don’t like to admit to themselves that Christian women (or Non Christian women) want sex or enjoy sex.

Male Christians like to think of married Christian women as being frigid, uninterested in sex, and reluctant sex partners who have to be cajoled or guilt-tripped into having sex with their husbands.

Witness the numerous sermons by preachers on marriage where the male preacher will usually pound it into the heads of married women in the congregation that men really like sex, so, married ladies, they are told, be sure to sexually service your husband regularly, because men really, really, really like sex!

Sex is viewed as a male activity. Women are told repeatedly that men are “visual,” so that women are pressured to stay very skinny, diet all the time, and look like fashion models day in and day out, so that their spouses will continue to find them sexually and visually appealing.

Men, especially Christian ones, are not under the same kind of pressure so far as physical appearance is concerned.

Christian men get the notion they can let themselves go and be physically repulsive looking and Christian women, they are told by pastors, will still want them sexually, so long as they are a “strong spiritual leader,” or attend church weekly, or some other ridiculous, poppycock, sentimental or churchy sounding reason.

Regarding this part of Phineas’ post:

    So I perhaps shouldn’t be too offended by all the man-up rants [directed at single Christian males], since they are in response to the women complaining about how the 10-15% of the men they do see don’t want anything to do with them.

    They don’t address how the women generally find it repulsive and disgusting to be addressed by the 85-90% that doesn’t meet their hypergamous standards. After all, if they want the Alpha Experience, they should know too that the Alpha just won’t settle down and marry, or follow after Scripture in any way.

-reeks a bit of sexism to me, in part because there are too many assumptions and generalizations about women.

Women are allowed to be attracted to whom they wish to be attracted to. It always sounds like sour grapes to me any time I see a male complaining that women are not as keen to date the less-attractive males.

From (Link): It’s Okay To Call A Guy Creepy (and a partial copy of this is (Link): located here on this blog)

    Women have a right to express that they don’t appreciate a man’s advances.

    by HUGO SCHWYZERJUN

    What SNL played for laughs, many men (and some women) took – and still take – seriously: Some men can’t win with women, these people believe, no matter what they do or say.

    This attitude is best observed in the recent backlash against calling men “creepy.” “Creep is the worst thing you can call a man,” wrote Jeremy Gordon for the Hairpin, pointing out it’s an impossible charge for a guy to disprove. As Gordon writes, “creepy is a vibe you can’t define… you just know it.”

    Others argue that “creepiness” connotes something specific: male homeliness. Men’s rights activist Robert Lindsay titled a post “Creepy” is Woman Speak for “An Unattractive Man Who Shows Interest In Me,” while Thought Catalog’s Johanna de Silentio wrote that “there are also a lot of guys who are labeled ‘creepy’ just because they happen to be really unattractive.”

    I often hear something similar in my gender studies classes. (It was in a “Men and Masculinity” course years ago where an anguished young man first drew my attention to the Brady skit.)

    Whenever the subject of sexual harassment or “creep-shaming” comes up in class, someone–almost always a man–makes the case that SNL was right: the only way for straight men to safely express sexual interest in women is to do so while following the skit’s three rules.

    With almost invariable bitterness, these young men complain that unless a guy has won striking good looks in the genetic lottery, he’s doomed to be rejected and seen as overstepping his boundaries, no matter what he does.

    …… Men’s rage about sexual harassment regulations and “creep-shaming” may well be rooted in an unwillingness to accept these cultural changes that have given women unprecedented power to say “no” to the lecherous and the predatory.

    Complaints that unattractive, socially awkward men are unfairly labeled “creepy” miss the point. “Creepy” describes having “the creeps;” it’s a word that centers on women’s own feelings.

    It’s no more “unfair” for Ashley the hypothetical barista to be “creeped out” by the advances of an older, unappealing co-worker than it is for her to be excited by the same approach from the man to whom she’s attracted.

    In that sense, the SNL sketch got to an important truth: Women’s subjective experiences and instincts matter.

I also recoil any time I see a male use the terms “alpha” or “beta” when discussing other males as on Phineas’ blog, because these terms are usually employed by embittered, women-hating males who blame feminism and women themselves for their singleness.

They are typically the guys who declare they are “nice guys” and that all women really want to date “bad boys” or perfect, really good- looking guys with a lot of money and won’t even give the “nice guy” a chance.

I’ve blogged about “nice guys” before, so I will not belabor that issue here. See these posts at my blog:
(Link): Nice Guys: Scourge of the Single Woman
(Link): Nice Guys – the bitter single men who complain women don’t like nice men

Where Phineas writes,

    There are many more things that could be pointed out. In conclusion, the feminist preachers such as Mark Driscoll, Kevin DeYoung, and Albert Mohler need to look into the mirror and see what they are doing to precipitate the results that they are noticing.

    When you do certain things within a system you create, these things always create very specific results.

    Insanity is to expect different results out of doubling down and doing the same things. The man-up rants that they write come off as complaining that what they have set up and supported is not working as they desire.

I can agree with that in- so- far as most Christian teaching on dating, sex, marriage and gender roles has contributed to keeping both genders perpetually single.

It is not that Driscoll and Mohler support misandry and “blame the males” at every turn that is solely to blame for protracted singleness among Christians, but that Christians, at the root of it, are

1. afraid of fornication (pre-marital sex)

and some Christians are

2. beholden to traditional gender roles (they fear or hate feminism)

I see in another post at Phineas’ site ((Link): Some Problems in Christian Dating) that he does acknowledge that Christian fear of pre-marital sex drives a lot of the absurd teaching on dating that singles receive.

Points 1 and 2 above drive a lot of the ridiculous dating advice that Christian singles receive, an issue I have covered on this blog before, in posts such as (and I’m tossing in a few related topics here)…

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

(Link): Christian Males Blaming their Unwanted Protracted Singleness on Feminism – They have the wrong target

(Link): Being Equally Yoked: Christian Columnist Dan Delzell Striving to Keep Christian Singles Single Forever

This is hosted on another blog:
(Link): Feminism, Singleness, And The Idol Of The Nuclear Family

(Link): How Christians Keep Christians Single (part 3) – Restrictive Gender Roles Taught as Biblical

(Link): Magical Christian Thinking: If you have pre-marital sex you won’t get a decent spouse

As for Phineas’ part 1 (Link:) Manufacturing Singleness Part 1, I think he blames single women too much and unfortunately plays into some stereotypes about singles that marrieds possess (I’m not sure if Phineas is single or married).

Notice Phineas refers to older single women as being “bitter.”

Phineas also errs in assuming that older singles “have baggage,” which is another stereotype of singles. The truth is that all people of all ages, both married and single, have “baggage.”

Ironically, some of us, as we age, lose whatever “baggage” we had at one time; particularly is this true for females, most of whom learn to accept themselves by the time they reach age 40.

I spent childhood to my late 30s not knowing who I was and being deeply insecure. I now know who I am and what I want in life and am not afraid to go after it anymore. I lost baggage. I would actually make a healthier martial partner now than when I was in my 20s or 30s.

Quoting Phineas:

    This is nothing different that hasn’t been seen in the culture. Women go off and do their own thing, usually career, but other ministry things, too. They do these things with the expectation that they can find marriage at any time they would like in their lives.

    It is well known that the available pool of candidates for marriage decreases considerably as one ages. Marriage is just not a priority for these women, but when it comes time that they find that there just aren’t candidates out there.

    Or they are so set in their ways and their own desires, that they just can’t find anyone to go along with them and get bitter and angry because they couldn’t have their own perfect romance like all the other women around them.

    Then they always have more chance to get baggage that would keep them from getting married.

It is simply the nature of American culture (and likely British, Canadian, and Aussie culture) that people no longer marry fresh out of high school or early college years, like they used to do. Women should not be blamed for this situation, but they are, as you can see in Phineas’ quotes above.

It’s not so much that women deliberately chose to remain single in their late 20s, mid 30s and older.

Honestly, a woman today has no choice but to go out and live life and hold a job down to be able to pay rent.

What do bloggers such as Phineas expect a woman to do, marry at age 18? I was too insecure and in some ways, too immature, to be married so young. I’m not the same person I am in my early 40s that I was in my early twenties. Had I married back at age 18, I seriously doubt such a marriage would have survived to my mid 30s.

If the woman cannot find a partner at age 18, is she to curl up in a ball in her closet and hope that God magically sends her a spouse?

What do you want a woman who is still un-married at ages 23, 27, 35, to do, just sit at home all day? Should a single woman (or man) not be living life in the meantime, while waiting and hoping for a spouse?

I did not get my first boyfriend until around age 27. I had fully expected to be married by my late 20s to mid 30s. Up until I got my first boyfriend at age 27, what would Phinease suggest I have done, sit about all day doing nothing?

Phineas writes,

    Given this trend, it seems the proper course is for “woman-up” rants from the evangelical feminist preachers, not man-up rants. It seems women are just expecting marriage to be there when they are ready for it, after running after being an “empowered woman”, and then are rushing the offices of these people when they aren’t finding it, complaining how men aren’t there to marry them. Then you get the man-up rants out of them because it could never ever be the chaste sinless women’s faults.

Phineas needs to realize that many of these women, the single Christian ones who are upset they arrive at age 30 to 40 still single, are not feminists who bought into “girl power” or “empowerment” messages.

Concerning marriage, Christian women are conditioned by Christian culture and preacheres to be passive and wait on a husband to appear. These Christian women are simply doing as they were taught by church, family, and preacher; they did not opt for feminism or career over husband.

I have seen population statistics which indicate that for about every unmarried Christian man at age 40, there are three or four unmarried Christian females.

In other words, there is only one male to go around for every three or four women.

Complaining and bitching about feminism and so on does nothing to change the numbers. Even had all those age 40 women been willing, able, and ready to marry a man when they were at age 21, there were NO MEN IN EXISTENCE FOR THEM TO MARRY.

I was raised to be a “gender complementarian” from the time I was a girl. I honestly tried to buy into the traditional gender role nonsense, but rejected it by the time I was in my late 30s or so.

In my teens and twenties, I knew if I married, I’d do my best to be the stereotypical June Cleaver, Christian submissive wife that the anti-feminist Christians constantly lecture at women they ought to be.

So, even though I was a sweet, submissive, nice, lady-like Christian girl – who was a virgin and still am a virgin – I did not get a husband.

Most churches I went to did not have single Christian men my age.

I was never on a feminist power trip, and neither are many of the other Christian women who find themselves mid- thirties or older and still not married.

The entire Christian, female gender should not be blamed for an entire cultural shift, much of which took place before we were born or while we were children.

Further, we Christian ladies are raised from girl-hood to believe in ‘Magical Marriage,’ this is, that if you are good, pray to Jesus, and have faith in God, that God will simply send you your Christian husband in a timely fashion.

I was told that nice Christian girls wait on God’s timing for a spouse, that Christian women do not pursue men, that we are to wait passively (though I did go to singles events at churches and so on).

Christian women are told to pray and wait for God to provide a spouse. But then, no husband ever arrives. This is painful for a lot of Christian women who were sincerely trusting God for a spouse – but here Phineas is lashing out at such women on his blog, as though they are at fault, when they are not.

If Phineas is angry at man-bashing preachers, such as Mark Driscoll, he needs to save his vitriol for Driscoll, instead of blaming, shaming, or complaining about single Christian women.

Phineas wrote,

    2. Unrealistic expectations from women for the perfect man for them are not challenged by the feminist preachers.

    …So given this, it seems women are rejecting men that are “good enough” in the sight of God to be her husband for the absolute perfect man, who does not exist.

And that could just as easily read,

    2. Unrealistic expectations from men for the perfect woman for them are not challenged by the gender complementarian preachers.

    …So given this, it seems men are rejecting women that are “good enough” in the sight of God to be his wife for the absolute perfect woman, who does not exist.

I’ve said it before, but a lot of single Christian men, despite being ugly, dweeby, dorky, poor, weird, stupid, socially awkward, fat, or bald, all expect to marry a skinny pretty movie star look-alike, and Christian preachers uphold this unrealistic entitlement attitude by telling women in their congregations things such as, “men are visually wired and like sex, so ladies, be sure to stay thin and pretty and act like a minx in the bed room!”

One never hears preachers saying, “Remember men, women like buff, hot, muscular men with a full head of hair, so attend the gym weekly, get a “six pack,” and use some Rogaine.”

Preachers refuse to acknowledge that women have sexual desire, which I find insulting… well, they will acknowledge on occasion that un-married women have a libido, as they assume (insultingly and incorrectly) that all single women are harlots who fornicate regularly and who are just dying at the chance to bed married men.

Preachers assume that married women, though, are as pure as the freshly drive snow, or are totally un-interested in sex, because, they feel, married women only want “emotional intimacy.”

The bottom line is that both genders face insulting stereotypes from each other, from preachers, from Christians, and in society. Both genders face hurdles in the world of dating. Neither men nor women have it easy in getting dates or spouses, and it is neither wholly the fault of women, men, or feminism.
—————
Related post this blog

(Link): Trends in male employment may not bode well for marriage (article)

It’s Okay To Call A Guy Creepy (article) / Little Sympathy for Ugly Single Guys

It’s Okay To Call A Guy Creepy (article) / Little Sympathy for Ugly Single Guys

Before I get to the “It’s Okay To Call A Guy Creepy” article, I wanted to comment on all the guys out there who perceive themselves as being ugly- to- average looking who are angry at women who they feel only want to date really good-looking guys.

I have little sympathy for most of these men, because women in American culture have been heavily judged on their looks alone for many, many decades, and they still are.

There are times I will defend un-married males on this blog where I feel they are genuinely under attack from whomever, but other times, I feel their complaints are unfounded, whiny, or grossly exaggerated, and this is one of those times.

When I was growing up, I (and I am a female) went through a “tubby” phase around junior high school age (ages 11 – 13), where I also had acne, wore thick glasses, and had frizzy hair. Both genders let me know at that time of life I was ugly. But the males in particular were very cruel to me about it.

I never got dates in my teen years. Boys did not flirt with me or ask me out. They would spit on me, pull my hair, gather in circles around me on the bus ride home to tease me with cruel put- downs until I cried, and then make fun of me for crying.

Men are total unreasonable, unrealistic jerks when it comes to judging women on their looks. They really are – from the time they are teen-agers to grown men, males will dismiss women on their looks alone.

All men, Christian and Non, from the scrawny, un-muscular, geeky, dorky guy, to the sloppy, fat, obese, 956 pound bald male, all feel entitled to a thin, gorgeous, movie star Megan Fox look-alike.

When on dating sites, the only criteria men care about – even the so-called “Christian” ones – are what women look like.

Men look at a woman’s profile photos on dating sites but never read the damn profiles, where you, the woman, mention what your favorite band is, what your hobbies are, and so forth. All the men care about is your damn physical appearance.

Female politicians get hammered for their weight, hair styles, and wrinkles in the media and from everyday commentators on sites, but the male politicians seldom get scrutinized or criticized for their fat bellies or balding heads or wrinkles.

Teen-aged girls and women are judged harshly by men in the area of looks.

I was just told by a sexist Christian idiot on another site about a week ago that now that I’m in my early 40s that the “bloom is off your youthful beauty,” so no man will want me now, according to this guy. I’ve seen that same view by Christian men (and on occasion by married women) on other sites or in books about singles.

Most dating advice books and blogs aimed at women, even the Christian ones, wrongly assume that the reason women remain single is that they must be ugly or fat, so women (or teen-aged girls) are told in such material to lose weight, diet, have long hair, wear lip stick all the time, and look pretty.

I have never really seen males get instructed by other males in dating advice sites to stay thin, work out at the gym, use Rogaine (if they are balding), etc. I suppose you could cite an example or two, but by and large, I have not seen men advised to shed extra pounds, get in shape, or get a toupee.

Historically in American culture, males have had no where near the pressure to look beautiful that females have.

But it is true that women love good-looking, built men. This is a fact that is over-looked by conservative Christians.

I’ve blogged about this subject many times before, such as (Link): Superman, Man Candy -and- Christian Women Are Visual And Enjoy Looking At Built, Hot, Sexy Men, (Link): Atlantic: “The case for abandoning the myth that ‘women aren’t visual.’” and (Link): Women Are Visual And Like Hot Looking Men (Part 1) Joseph in Genesis Was A Stud Muffin.

We women get the message from preachers and Christian dating blogs that we’re not supposed to be too picky when selecting a Christian mate. We single ladies are not supposed to care about the guy’s money, the guy’s looks – but, rather, that he reads his Bible daily and hands out rice on yearly missionary trips to Africa, and so on.

You Christian men (and the Non Christian men) are let off the “stay in shape, exercise, and diet” responsibility hook, but women are still expected to be youthful, pretty, and thin if they hope to get a spouse.

Even though most women are visual, some of them are willing to date an ugly- to- average looking guy, if he has some other feature they find compelling, such as he’s very funny, sweet, wealthy, attentive, interesting, or romantic.

I seldom see hot- looking (or even ugly or average looking) men willing to date ‘ugly- but- sweet,’ or ‘average-looking but funny’ women. Many women are more willing more often to bend their criteria in the ‘physical appearance department’ when it comes to who they date, than men are.

Women have a right to be attracted to whomever they are attracted to; they are under no obligation to date men they do not consider physically attractive or men they find odd or dorky. Men have had this right for ages and ages, but women are expected by most Christians -and all ugly men themselves- to date ugly or average-looking men.

(Link): It’s Okay To Call A Guy Creepy

Excerpts:

    by HUGO SCHWYZERJUN
    June 27 2013

    What SNL [television show Saturday Night Live] played [the situation of good looking men scoring with women while the ugly men are regarded as creepy by women] for laughs, many men (and some women) took – and still take – seriously: Some men can’t win with women, these people believe, no matter what they do or say.

    This attitude is best observed in the recent backlash against calling men “creepy.”

    “Creep is the worst thing you can call a man,” wrote Jeremy Gordon for the Hairpin, pointing out it’s an impossible charge for a guy to disprove.

    As Gordon writes, “creepy is a vibe you can’t define… you just know it.”

    Others argue that “creepiness” connotes something specific: male homeliness.

    Men’s rights activist Robert Lindsay titled a post “Creepy” is Woman Speak for “An Unattractive Man Who Shows Interest In Me,” while Thought Catalog’s Johanna de Silentio wrote that “there are also a lot of guys who are labeled ‘creepy’ just because they happen to be really unattractive.”

    I often hear something similar in my gender studies classes. (It was in a “Men and Masculinity” course years ago where an anguished young man first drew my attention to the Brady skit.)

    Whenever the subject of sexual harassment or “creep-shaming” comes up in class, someone– almost always a man– makes the case that SNL was right: the only way for straight men to safely express sexual interest in women is to do so while following the skit’s three rules.

    With almost invariable bitterness, these young men complain that unless a guy has won striking good looks in the genetic lottery, he’s doomed to be rejected and seen as overstepping his boundaries, no matter what he does.

    …A society where people are judged by the content of their character rather than the color of their skin, he [a male student of Schwyzerjun’s] declared, should also be a society where men are judged “creepy” solely on the basis of their words and actions rather than their looks. He got cheers from several other guys in the classroom.

    … My student’s mistake is an obvious one: Enjoyment can’t be coerced. Congress can’t pass a law requiring people to be delighted by the advances of others they find unattractive.

    I can get my children to eat broccoli by alternating promises of rewards and punishments, but I cannot do anything to make my daughter love vegetables as much as she loves ice cream.

    Similarly, no law can compel “Ashley,” a barista at the local coffee shop, to feel the same way about the advances of an older co-worker whom she finds repellant as she does about those of the young hottie who joins her on the opening shift.

    Until recently, however, few women could make sexual choices based primarily on physical desire and emotional attraction.

    In a world where few women had the opportunity to prosper without a man’s protection, marriage was about survival. The more educational and economic opportunities women acquire, the more opportunity they have to choose based on what they want rather than what they need for survival.

    As Daniel Bergner’s bestselling What Do Women Want? argues, once you level the economic playing field, women are just as likely as men to make sexual decisions based on desire alone.

    … Men’s rage about sexual harassment regulations and “creep-shaming” may well be rooted in an unwillingness to accept these cultural changes that have given women unprecedented power to say “no” to the lecherous and the predatory.

    Complaints that unattractive, socially awkward men are unfairly labeled “creepy” miss the point. “Creepy” describes having “the creeps;” it’s a word that centers on women’s own feelings.

    It’s no more “unfair” for Ashley the hypothetical barista to be “creeped out” by the advances of an older, unappealing co-worker than it is for her to be excited by the same approach from the man to whom she’s attracted. In that sense, the SNL sketch got to an important truth: Women’s subjective experiences and instincts matter.

    The freedom to act on those instincts doesn’t just lead to romantic fulfillment. In his indispensable 1997 bestseller The Gift of Fear, Gavin de Becker encourages women to rely on their own intuition to keep themselves safe from violence.

    There are few things more risky, de Becker argues, than overriding one’s own sense of real danger (“the creeps”) for the sake of preserving a relationship – or simply being “nice” to a stranger.

    Crucially, de Becker points out that people-pleasing and the urge to avoid causing offense put more women in danger than acting on sexual attraction.

    Women are more likely to be assaulted because they were too polite to someone whom they sensed was creepy than because they were too responsive to the charms of someone who turned them on.

    When men complain about being “creep-shamed,” or insist that the Tom Brady sketch accurately reflects reality, what they’re really lamenting is a culture that is increasingly willing to honor women’s right to be sexual — and women’s right to be safe.

Goodness knows I was judged harshly by males as a teen girl, then, when I lost the weight and the acne cleared up, I was lusted after in my 20s and 30s in person by men who I found to be CREEPY, dorky, ugly or weird, or, in a few cases, by guys that were attractive and okay, but I was just not interested in them romantically.

I’m on dating sites now, and I am still getting judged on my appearance by men of all ages, from their 20s, 30s, and some in their 60s and 70s, who want to date me.

Women are routinely judged on their looks alone by males, all through their life, from their girlhood to their senior years, so no, I can’t feel sorry for the dorky, scrawny, ugly, or fat guys who are upset that some women turn them down for not looking like Brad Pitt.

I used to get turned down for not looking like Megan Fox or Angelina Jolie, but I don’t quite hate the entire male gender for it. I accepted it and worked on my looks – which worked, because guys began asking me out. I do think males need to consider other qualities in a woman other than her looks, however.
—————–
Some guy left a post replying to this one; I did not approve it to appear, but wrote about it here:
(Link): Follow up: Bitter Guy Replies to ‘It’s Okay To Call A Guy Creepy (article) / Little Sympathy for Ugly Single Guys’
—————–
Related posts this blog:

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

(Link): Nice Guys – the bitter single men who complain women don’t like nice men

(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

Misogynistic Christian Single Guy Blog – Keeping Singles Single Re Frank Swift of Geek in the Wilderness

Misogynistic Christian Single Guy Blog – Keeping Singles Single | Re: Frank Swift of Geek in the Wilderness Blog

The individual who heads the blog “A Geek in the Wilderness,” who writes under the name “Frank Swift,” laments the situation of singles in the church, but his views on marriage, singleness, and genders are not only contributing to his own lasting singleness, but his are some of the same mindsets the church at large has as well, and which are making marriage for Christians more difficult.

In other words, Mr. Swift is himself supporting the very marriage and prolonged singleness problems he is so upset about.

Before I continue further, the blog in question is located here:

(Link): A Geek in the Wilderness ( http://geeksjourney.com/ ), and again, the guy’s screen name is “Frank Swift.”

The tagline of his blog is

    “One geek/nerd hybrid journeys through history and the world in an epic search for truth, justice… and great pizza.”

I like pizza, but I can tell you after exchanging a few posts with this guy, he is not very interested in truth.

Swift does not seem open to having his views about gender roles and women questioned. A guy who is in search of truth would be open to re-examining his views, I would think.

Swift keeps parroting the same unproven, unfounded, unbiblical assumptions about women over and over in his replies to me.

I’ve directed him a few times to the (Link): Christians For Biblical Equality site (see Resources > Free Articles) and a few others, such as (Link): Under Much Grace.

I do credit Swift with initially allowing a few of my posts to stand on his blog (I myself don’t do that too much with this blog, since I use it to vent, not to debate).

I was polite in my initial batch of posts, despite Swift’s insufferable, obnoxious sexism on display. He has since replied to a few of those posts and has injected ad hominem into the replies (more about that below).

Mr. Swift’s blog first caught my attention when I was searching for material about Christian singles.

One of his pages turned up in the results, and it was this one:

(Link): How churches today abandoned the Christian single

Aspects of that page were interesting, but some of his views were troubling, such as this (Link): (Source):

    A marriage and family successfully functioning as one cohesive unit provides the skillset needed to run a church as one cohesive unit.

One does not have to be married to have have the skills or competence to “run a church” as “one cohesive unit.”

Some churches have in fact hired un-married men who are in their 30s who successfully ran the churches, though an un-married serving as pastor is very rare, as most churches are heavily biased against unmarried people. But it has happened on occasion, and the un-married were successful in their position.

The Bible does contain commentary along the lines that if a man is married, that he ought to have but one wife and other such qualifications(*), but the Bible does not exclude singles from leadership positions, as Swift believes.
*((Link): What does the “husband of one wife” phrase in 1 Timothy 3:2 mean? Can a divorced man serve as a pastor, elder, or deacon?)

The Bible places singleness on the same level of acceptance to God, and the same level of importance of singleness, as it does marriage, and at some points, the Apostle Paul writes singleness may be preferable to marriage because an unmarried person has more undivided attention than a married person.

None of that is to say that a single who wants to get married is sinning.

There is nothing sinful or selfish about wanting to get married, and other Christians need to stop discouraging and shaming Christians for wanting to get married, by saying things such as, “stop making marriage an idol,” “Jesus is all you need,” and so on, and by refusing to pray for singles, and such.

I explained to this Swift guy in one of my posts on his “Geek in the Wilderness” blog that the church has turned marriage and the nuclear family into an idol (with the “nuclear family” being an invention of 1950s American television programming; it is not quite a “biblical” presentation of family).

I gave Swift Bible verses on his blog where Jesus Christ said that Christians are not to put flesh and blood family before spiritual brothers and sisters in Christ.
(I have many blog pages about this topic, such as these two: (Link): The Bible Does Not Teach Christians to “Focus On The Family” – The Idolization of Family by American Christians (article), and (Link): If the Family Is Central, Christ Isn’t)

This all seems to fall on deaf ears with this guy.

He, like a lot of conservative Christians, continue to make secular feminism into the “boogey man” and the root of all ills in American culture, which it is not.

I am only surprised that Swift did not drag up the other favorite scapegoat and punching bag of evangelicals and conservative Christians: homosexuals, or the legalization of homosexual marriage.

To recap for anyone who is new to this blog: I myself am right wing, vote Republican, am a social conservative (and so I do not support homosexuality). For many years, I was a devout Christian. (I am by no means a left winger who embraces all views of secular feminism or the Democratic Party.) You can read more about my background and views on this blog’s “About Me” page.

Where Mr. Swift got rude, sexist, and very obnoxious with me was in this thread (I have not yet checked to see if he left me comments in the other thread):

(Link): Single ladies, I’m ready to provide, are you ready to cook?

In that thread, and a few others I glanced over, he continually makes all manner of unfounded assumptions about about women in general, such as this quote:

    Women likewise are more effective caretakers and nurturers because of the experience of raising their own children…

The Bible simply does not rigidly define gender roles or say that God designed women to be “nurturers” and males “leaders.”

Women have been socialized by secular society, parents, and churches, to be passive, sweet, submissive, cookie bakers; it’s not they these qualities are necessarily intrinsic to women.

I am a woman, but I was always a tom boy growing up. I preferred climbing trees, wearing converse sneakers, and watching Bat Man.

I hated pink clothing, wearing dresses, playing with Barbie dolls, and sitting around quietly as a kid. I wanted to go on adventures and have fun.

I had little interest in taking on Biblical or stereotypical “feminine” roles – which equated to being quiet, passive, sitting still, and playing with Barbie dolls.

People do not neatly fall into gender-defined boxes and patterns, no matter how badly you want them to.

I cited, for Swift, examples from the Bible of women who were ordained by God to lead men and women, to teach men (such as Apostle Junia, Deborah in the Old Testament, etc).

I at first was going to link to Mr. Swift’s page about singleness with a recommendation for it.

However, Swift, who makes himself out to be a Christian single, he is very sexist, Misogynistic, anti-singlehood, rude, condescending, and bitter (really, he is – I know a lot of married Christians try to shut down singles who want to air legitimate grievances by calling them “bitter,” but if you read through this guy’s blog, particularly his comments to me, he comes off as quite bitter).

I’m not sure of Swift’s age, but he seems to be in his early or mid 20s, very little life experience is evidenced, very narrow views of how life and relationships ‘should’ be, or how he thinks women “should” be permeate his thoughts.

Here is the first thread of Swift’s blog where I left several comments last night – initially, all my blog posts on his blog went through instantly, but now he has them set to moderation:

(Link) Single ladies, I’m ready to provide, are you ready to cook?

As I explained in a post on Swift’s page (“Single ladies, I’m ready to provide, are you ready to cook?”), I suppose there is nothing wrong with a man having a personal preference for a more demure, passive type partner…

Nor is it necessarily wrong, I guess, if both a man and a woman fully consent to enter a marriage based on a 1950s “Ward and June Cleaver” model, where the husband works all day and the wife stays at home all day baking bread.

However, these days, that sort of lifestyle is not achievable for most people; it takes two incomes, the man and women working, to pay the bills.

Anyway, my problem with this guy is mostly his tone. He demands that all women every where, or any women who enters his life, live by his very rigid gender roles.

He comes off as being very controlling.

I tried to explain to this guy that if he does not re-evaluate and re-consider his attitudes towards women, he will either

1. remain single a very long time (or forever), or

2. will attract only emotionally damaged women

And usually, in scenario 2, such women may develop severe depression and anxiety, and a divorce by either spouse may be a result.

Women who have depression (and / or anxiety) often cannot function. They cannot perform daily chores or tasks, or so much as get out of bed daily and brush their teeth, let alone dust the furniture, cook, do laundry, etc., because their mental health problems prohibit it.

As people grow older, they change over time: their personality, or desires in life, or goals. This is a FACT of life this guy denied, if I remember right.

The person you are when you are at 40 years old is not the same person you are when you were 20. (I’m not even the same now as I was just three years ago.) This ‘changing with age’ business is especially true FOR WOMEN.

That is, you can start out a marriage when you are 25 years of age to a submissive, passive wife, but as she grows older and gains more life experience, she may change her mind about various things – including you.

She may tire of playing the submissive role and demand a change, or she may just decide to divorce.

In a comment to another woman on his blog, Swift said he is advocating submission for any woman he marries, not slavery or being a doormat.

I told Swift that his views on “submission” read the same to me as sexism or slavery. I honestly did not see much of a difference and still do not.

This guy is so incredibly condescending towards me and other females who visit his blog, he will never get a girlfriend, much less get married.

Continue reading “Misogynistic Christian Single Guy Blog – Keeping Singles Single Re Frank Swift of Geek in the Wilderness”

Article: I’m Overweight and My Boyfriend’s Not. Big Freaking Deal

Article: I’m Overweight and My Boyfriend’s Not. Big Freaking Deal

Link – I’m a Fat Chick dating a skinny guy

    By Gloria Shuri Nava as told to Lori Majewski
    Tue, Jun 18, 2013

    My boyfriend Ali is 5’10” with friendly blue eyes, a dimpled smile and a fit, muscular body. He’s someone you’d expect to see with a really hot, thin woman…not an overweight girl like me.

    We’ve been dating for 18 months, and wherever we go— whether we’re walking hand in hand through the mall, airport or down the street in his hometown (Glasgow, Scotland) or mine (San Jose, California)— we get confused looks that say, He can do better than her!

    (Link): click here to read the rest and see photos of the overweight woman with her thin boyfriend

I’ve heard that some men have a “fat fetish” and want to date overweight women.

I find this story interesting on another level, because Christian women get hit with a message from secular culture and from churches that “men are visually oriented,” so if you want dates or a spouse, you must diet and lose weight (and look like an ageless, cellulite- and wrinkle-free air-brushed fashion model) at all times.

But occasionally, I will see stories like this about average -looking guys who don’t seem to give a rip about societal standards of female beauty.

My own views on the topic: I am square in the middle.

People are going to care about looks, and I think the fact remains, that the story above is an exception to a rule: most people don’t want to date or marry someone who has a severe weight problem.

Continue reading “Article: I’m Overweight and My Boyfriend’s Not. Big Freaking Deal”

Southern Baptists on Boy Scouts and Homosexuals – Misplaced Priorities

Southern Baptists on Boy Scouts and Homosexuals – Misplaced Priorities

I am a social conservative, and I don’t support homosexuality. I probably wouldn’t be too opinionated about homosexual marriage either way if not for the homosexuals who are absolutely militant about their lifestyles and try to sue the crud out of anyone who doesn’t agree with it, or bakers who, due to religious reasons, (Link): don’t want to provide cakes for homosexual marriage ceremonies.

I also realize that militant homosexual groups are very vocal and active in trying to cram their views down the throats of all Americans, which annoys me to no end. I don’t particularly care if people are homosexual, as long as they’d get off their soap boxes about it and stop forcing the matter.

However, many conservative Christians, and certainly the Southern Baptist Convention and series of churches, remains abnormally fixated on all things homosexual (and on other aspects of secular culture), as well as too keen to try to push Christian agendas via politics.

At the recent SBC (Southern Baptist Convention) held in Houston, Texas, here is one consensus they reached:

(Link): Southern Baptists condemn Boy Scouts over admission of gays

Excerpt (by the way, this article incorrectly refers to Southern Baptists as “Protestants”. Southern Baptists are not Protestants):

    The nation’s largest Protestant denomination stopped short of calling for its member churches to boycott the Boy Scouts, but voiced strong opposition to acceptance of gay scouts – with a top church leader predicting at the annual gathering of Southern Baptists that a “mass exodus” of youths from the program that has been a rite of passage for more than a century.

Instead of being preoccupied by those outside the church, Christians are supposed to help fellow Christians first and foremost ((Link): Galatians 6:10), and primarily judge those who are within the body of Christ, not obsessively focus on judging Non Christians in secular culture:

    What business is it of mine to judge those outside the church? Are you not to judge those inside? (1 Cor 5:12)

Southern Baptists and a lot of other Christians claim they are concerned about the inroads homosexuals are making in culture, not just with the BSA (Boy Scouts), but concerning the erosion of “traditional marriage.”

The deterioration of traditional marriage by homosexuals does not really matter all that much, when there is currently a sizable section of Americans, particularly unmarried Christian hetero-sexual women, who desire marriage, but there are no marriage partners (single Christian men of comparable age) for them to marry.

Continue reading “Southern Baptists on Boy Scouts and Homosexuals – Misplaced Priorities”

Link Roundup 1 – Abusive Mothers, Christians Shaming Singles For Desiring Marriage, Family Fixation

Link Roundup 1 – Abusive Mothers, Christians Shaming Singles For Desiring Marriage, Family Idol Fixation

Instead of breaking these topics into separate posts, here’s one big post covering two or three recurring topics that my blog here is all about.

>> Topic 1. Conservative Christians think that unmarried and/or childless or child-free individuals are less mature, godly, or responsible than their married and/or parental counterparts. False. Another example of parents behaving badly:

(Link): Mom arrested after 10-year-old son found in street drunk and naked

    A Florida mother was passed out from drinking while her 10-year-old son was found wandering their neighborhood naked and intoxicated. Local police officers arrested Nedra Byrd, 31, on neglect charges on Thursday night. Amanda Roesch, a neighbor who took the boy in dressed him, and put him to sleep, told reporters that she had walked over to the boy’s home.

>> Topic 2. Christians who guilt trip or shame singles who want marriage, making us feel bad for wanting marriage, telling us we’ve turned marriage into an idol, and we “want marriage too much”

(Link): Making Too Much of Marriage, from Christianity Today

Okay, so, if I understand this right (see Mefferd links below), Christians are worried that Christian singles aren’t getting married, but when we say we would really like to be married, we are told we are “making too much of marriage.” Which the hell is it, Christian culture, speakers, and preacher? Do you want us singles married or not?

If you married Christians (or you (Link): “shiny happy” single Christians) feel we singles who are not totally thrilled 100% of the time being single are “idolizing” marriage just by merely desiring it at all, then shut up with the blame and insults, such as, “you single Christians should WANT TO get married, but you do not get married because you are lazy, selfish, immature, irresponsible, or fat/ weird/ socially retarded and you must secretly HATE MARRIAGE and desire to be single FOREVER.”

>> Topic 3. Fixation on Nuclear Family / Fixation on Gay Marriage, anything but Christian singles past 30 who desire marriage but marriage ain’t happening

>> Topic Example 3. 1.

The online paper, The Christian Post, was running yet ANOTHER editorial bemoaning the encroachment of homosexual marriage about a week ago:

(Link): Is Your Church Ready for the Marriage Revolution?

    I have argued for years that our churches aren’t an embassy of biblical ethics in a land of sexual revolution. The embassy is aflame, and the sexual revolutionary flag is waving atop our consulate. We’ve surrendered on marriage in too many ways: on its permanence, on fidelity, and even too many times on its nature rooted in sexual complementarity. Just because we’re not marrying two grooms or two brides, yet, doesn’t mean we’re standing firm on marriage.

    And we’ll talk about practical matters your people will ask. Is it okay to attend a same-sex marriage since Jesus ate with tax-collectors? Should a Christian florist deliver flowers to such a wedding?

>> Topic Example 3. 2

I sent Janet Mefferd, radio host, an e-mail sometime in March or April of this year (2013), in response to one of her programs, where she and a guest were lamenting about the phenomenon of delayed marriage and declined birth rate.

I explained to Mefferd what I’ve said on this blog before: it is a falsehood that most Christian singles are deliberately choosing to forgo marriage or are intentionally choosing to hold off marriage until their late 30s or later.

See posts at this blog:
(Link): Never Married Christians Over Age 35 who are childless Are More Ignored Than Divorced or Infertile People or Single Parents and
(Link): The Netherworld of Singleness for Some Singles – You Want Marriage But Don’t Want to Be Disrespected or Ignored for Being Single While You’re Single

I believe, if I recall correctly, that I also mentioned to Mefferd in my e-mail to her that this subject needs more attention from Christians, that Christians spend far too much time as it is “defending traditional marriage,” worrying about homosexual marriage, and just going on and on in general about marriage and parenting, and that this extraordinary amount of attention on marriage and parenting is very alienating and has negative repercussions on singles who desire marriage.

It’s possible Mefferd did not see my e-mail I suppose; maybe she gets hundreds per day. My message was sent via her site’s e-mail submission form. But ever since I sent it, I’ve noticed in the one or two months since, she has done several more shows about homosexual marriage, traditional marriage, homosexuals wanting to join the Boy Scouts, about abortion, and so on.

All this fixation on homosexuals and related matters is doing nothing to help the plight of mature (i.e., over age 30) Christian singles who want marriage. The church’s attention and energy can be better spent on other areas, such as actually helping people, rather than sitting around condemning secular culture.

The church needs to be doing something concrete and constructive to help singles get paired up, for those who want marriage – “eHarmony” dating sites are NOT the cure-all, either. Churches need to be hosting more social events where singles can meet and mingle and that sort of thing. They need to be mentioning the topic of older (as in age 30 – 59) singles from the pulpit, on radio shows, and in magazines.

Continue reading “Link Roundup 1 – Abusive Mothers, Christians Shaming Singles For Desiring Marriage, Family Fixation”

The Types of Christian Singles Who Annoy Me

The Types of Christian Singles Who Annoy Me: The Perpetually Sunny Happy Christian Single Who Is Totally Thrilled With Singleness; The Condescending Single Who Brays “Jesus is all you need, your earthly happiness doesn’t matter”; or the Single Who Is Too Spiritual About Singleness

I. The Perpetually Sunny Happy Christian Single Who Is Totally Thrilled With Singleness And Doesn’t Understand Why You Can’t Be Too

To clarify something: there are times when I feel relieved about being single, and there are other times it bothers me. I’m not wholly on one side of the fence or the other.

I was just saying (Link): in a post yesterday I get very pissed off and annoyed over these sunny attitude, Rose-colored- glasses- wearing unmarried women (sometimes men, but it’s normally a woman) who go on and on in their editorials for Christian singles about how they are golly gee whiz happy-happy to be single, they love living for just Jesus by golly!, and they say they cannot wrap their heads around singles who think that singlehood sometimes sucks. They think everyone should be as happy-happy with singleness as they are.

The fact is, some of us are not always happy with singleness 100% of the time, and your constant sunniness about it is unrealistic, irritating, doesn’t acknowledge the pain some of us go through at times, and by being so dang chipper about singleness, you’re sort of denying how most churches and denominations ignore or belittle singles.

II. The Super Spiritual Christian Single Who Likes to Say Over and Over: “Jesus and My Bible is All I Need and To Want Anything Else is Inappropriate, Especially In Church” (Single Who Is Too Spiritual About Singleness)

These are usually the ones who pipe up in blog comments in articles for singles who say church is for worship of the Lord and Bible devotions only, that’s all THEY want when they go to a church, they say they are deeply offended when “Brother Hank” or “Sister Sally” tries to play match- maker for them.

And, they say, singles should not be using church to find a mate, because that’s turning church into a “meat market.” And remember, according to them, church is for worship and Bible reading and study only, nothing else.

If you are the kind of single who wants to view church as a Bible study only, fine for you, but don’t sit there and lecture myself and Christian singles that it’s wrong for another Christian person to use church to meet a mate.

There are other reasons for the creation of the church besides worship, Bible reading, the Great Commission, and helping African orphans.

Continue reading “The Types of Christian Singles Who Annoy Me”