Women Being Slut Shamed, Virgin Shamed, or Celibate Shamed at The Doctor’s Office

Women Being Slut Shamed, Virgin Shamed, or Celibate Shamed at The Doctor’s Office

So, I saw a headline go through my Twitter feed a few weeks ago about a woman who says while on a trip to the doctor’s office to get a check up, she was “slut shamed” by a nurse practitioner at that appointment. (The link to that is towards the bottom of this post.)

I don’t doubt her experience, but I chipped in under that Tweet or another related to mention that as a chaste woman – I’m over 45 and still a virgin myself – I had the same exact thing happen to me, but in the reverse, when I was in my mid or late 20s and had to see a doctor to get blood tests done (over a non-sexual related medical issue).

The doctor I saw at my appointment sort of “Virgin-Shamed” me at that time.

We’re all the time hearing about “Slut Shaming” in our culture, but there is far more Celibacy- and Virgin- Shaming taking place than Slut Shaming.

However, I don’t very often see feminists discussing Virgin-Shaming nearly as much.

As a matter of fact, some feminists who are always complaining about “slut shaming” participate in Celibate-Shaming, or Virgin-Shaming (and sadly, other conservatives also participate in virgin shaming or celibate shaming as well, though many conservatives CLAIM to respect sexual abstinence – but they really do not).

The lady doctor I saw when I was in my mid to late 20s said in addition to running the tests I was in to see her for that day (and I don’t recall now what they were, only that the tests were not related to anything of a sexual nature), she also wanted to run sexually transmitted disease tests on my blood samples to make sure I did not have any sexually transmitted diseases.

I laughed and told her that would be a waste of her time and the lab’s time, as I was still a virgin.

Continue reading “Women Being Slut Shamed, Virgin Shamed, or Celibate Shamed at The Doctor’s Office”

Impure Motives Of ‘Purity Culture’ Critics by R. Dreher

Impure Motives Of ‘Purity Culture’ Critics by R. Dreher

Before we get to the link and excerpts to the page by Dreher, let’s talk for a moment about the liberal Christian and ex-Christian backlash against Purity Culture:

I’ve seen this as well, time and again from the “anti purity culture” brigade on Tweets and blogs:
They think that dismantling “Purity Culture” means rejecting all Christian sexual ethics, or the “rules” or specific morals of it they do not like, including the biblical teaching that fornication is considered a sin (some self-professing Christians are actually on blogs insisting that God doesn’t prohibit pre-marital sex, but they can’t point to verses that say that God accepts it, either).

But there is definitely a “throw the baby out with the bathwater” mindset among many of the “anti Purity Culture” adherents. They also tend to “look down their noses” at adults over the age of 30 who voluntarily sexually abstain – both liberals and Christian conservatives view adult celibates as repressed, weird, or as freaks.

I’m a woman who never married, was committed to the idea of abstaining until marriage, so I am still a virgin – and I’m currently in my forties. I mention that because one thing I’d like to make clear: not everyone who leaves the faith does so due to sexual considerations.

I myself am not quite Christian and not quite non-Christian – but I remain celibate. I’m now fine with the idea of having sex outside of marriage, but only in a committed relationship – but I arrived at this view years after my faith crisis began.

In other words, having sex was not a reason as to why I’m somewhat walked away from the faith – sex was not the cause or my reason.

So, if you are a Christian who tut tuts and shames people online for leaving the faith, please stop assuming that most who leave the faith do so because they are sexual libertines who want to have sex all over the place. That may be true for some ex-Christians or for some doubters, but it’s certainly not the case for all of them.

(Link): Impure Motives Of ‘Purity Culture’ Critics

Excerpts:

Matthew Lee Anderson (Link): makes a true and necessary point about Josh Harris’s apostasy and the subsequent critiques of Evangelical “purity culture.” Excerpts: [omit]

….As I’ve said before, I don’t have any direct experience with “purity culture,” though I have friends who are theologically conservative on sexual matters, but who say that they were damaged by it.

Their point, as I understand it, is not that traditional Christian sexual ethics are wrong, but that “purity culture” distorts them in a rigidly legalistic way that can harm the ability of particular believers to live out these ethics. I accept that this can be true. I have seen this kind of thing at work within non-Protestant religious circles too.

That said, Anderson is certainly right that whatever the problems with purity culture, they can never justify throwing out Christian sexual ethics, tout court.

Continue reading “Impure Motives Of ‘Purity Culture’ Critics by R. Dreher”

The Misguided Backlash Against ‘Purity Culture’ by G. Shane Morris

The Misguided Backlash Against ‘Purity Culture’ by G. Shane Morris

I agree with most of this editorial by Morris, but I have one slight area of disagreement, which I will discuss below the link and excerpts.

All in all, this is an excellent editorial, so you will want to click the link below to go to Patheos, where it’s hosted, to read it in its entirety, but please remember to come back to this blog post to read some of my comments much farther below.

(Link): The Misguided Backlash Against ‘Purity Culture’

by G. Shane Morris
December 2018

[Author Morris discusses an anti-Purity Culture, anti- I Kissed Dating Goodbye editorial by Abigail Rine Favale, and refutes some of her arguments.]

…But one thing I’ve noticed is how many of those complaints come from people who admit they never took Harris’ advice in the first place. Favale is one of them.

She confesses: “I opted for more conventional forms of kissing and bade farewell to my virginity instead.” Nevertheless, she claims, “the ideas in Harris’ book influenced me—if not my habits, certainly my sense of self.”

It’s not clear what she means by this, except perhaps that she felt guilty about having premarital sex. No one needs Joshua Harris to experience the prick of conscience, though. Which is why one detects in recriminations against “purity culture” by those who openly engaged in impurity more than a hint of sour grapes.

Continue reading “The Misguided Backlash Against ‘Purity Culture’ by G. Shane Morris”

The Unfortunate Anti-Virginity Fall-Out from Christian Misogynist Lori Alexander’s Wacky “Debt Free Virgins Without Tattoos” Post – The Problem is Not Supporting Virginity, It’s Complementarianism

The Unfortunate Anti-Virginity Fall-Out from Christian Misogynist Lori Alexander’s  Wacky “Debt Free Virgins Without Tattoos” Post – The Problem is Not Supporting Virginity, It’s Complementarianism

Updated:

Lori Alexander has posted this (unhelpful) clarification of her post (about “Debt Free Virgins with Tattoos”) on an ultra-conservative political forum:

(Link): Godly Men Prefer Debt Free Virgins Without Tattoos – by Lori Alexander, on Free Republic

Her new aspect is to add the word “Godly” prior to the word “Men,” as if that makes it less obnoxious or wrong, but it does not.

I used to lurk at the Free Republic site, back in my more conservative days, but I’m not surprised to see most of the posters under Alexander’s post on that site actually agreeing with it.

Of course they do.

I’m still a conservative, but I’m no longer off the reservation about it, as the Freepers are on some things, like on this topic.


The Unfortunate Anti- Virginity Fall Out Due to Lori Alexander’s “Debt Free Virgin” Post

If you’d like more background to this post, and an explanation for who Lori Alexander is, please see my previous post about it here:

(Link): Reflections On Lori Alexander’s Debt Free Virgins Without Tattoos

If you are new to my blog, a recap:

I am over 45 years of age and still a virgin.

I was reserving sexual activity for marriage. I’ve never had sexual intercourse. I was expecting to be married but never found Mr. Right.

I do have a libido.

Contrary to what Christians ASSUME about older virgins, Celibacy, being sexually abstinent for as long as I’ve been, is not “a gift” where God granted it to me and supernaturally removed my libido and makes it easy-breezy to cope with.

For many years, I was dedicated to remaining a virgin until marriage, due to Christian ethics, (these days I’m semi-agnostic), but also due to other reasons as well, which I shall not get into here but have explained in older posts on the blog.

In the last ten or so years, I’ve seen a disturbing trend where secular, liberal feminist views about sex have trickled into liberal Christian corners, where there is much railing against “slut shaming” and there is strong opposition to judging any woman for her sexual behavior or choices.

This trend became so common that these same views, disturbingly, began appearing on liberal Christian blogs and sites, whose progressive, feminist, Christian authors began writing editorials saying virginity is of no import, God only cares about your heart and spiritual purity, and God does not care so much anyone’s sexual behavior, (Link): intact hymen, or sexual past.

This anti- sexual purity thinking (which includes the down-playing, condemning, or mocking of physical virginity and adult celibacy) has even crept into mainstream moderate- to- conservative churches and Christian writing and thinking, unfortunately.

Continue reading “The Unfortunate Anti-Virginity Fall-Out from Christian Misogynist Lori Alexander’s Wacky “Debt Free Virgins Without Tattoos” Post – The Problem is Not Supporting Virginity, It’s Complementarianism”

Viral Virgin Brelyn Bowman Talks Purity Backlash From Christians, New Book ‘No Ring, No Ting’ (Interview)

Viral Virgin Brelyn Bowman Talks Purity Backlash From Christians, New Book ‘No Ring, No Ting’ (Interview) 

I agree that those Christians (or ex Christians) who are opposed to sexual purity (virginity) lifestyles or teachings have gone overboard with it – as have some secular liberals.

Women (or men) who, of their own freewill, choose to abstain sexually are mocked or ridiculed for abstaining. (I have links with examples to this under the “Related Posts” section at the end of this post).

I think it’s very hypocritical for people to champion all sexual behaviors or choices of women EXCEPT FOR staying a virgin until marriage. Celebrity women can yak all day long about their sexual conquests on Twitter or in interviews, and nobody raises a fuss – but the moment a woman makes public that she’s waiting until marriage (or a serious relationship) to have sex, she will be faced with a lot of ridicule and criticism. Even by so-called feminists, who claim to respect all sexual choices of women.

I have blogged about this woman previously (Link): here.

(Link): Viral Virgin Brelyn Bowman Talks Purity Backlash From Christians, New Book ‘No Ring, No Ting’ (Interview) by C. Thomasos – March 8, 2016

  • Brelyn Bowman says she wasn’t surprised that people in the secular world disapproved of her posting a gynecologist’s purity certificate on social media after her wedding day last year. But she was shocked by the backlash that came from Christians.
  • The 23-year-old wife of gospel singer Tim Bowman Jr. says she made the decision to honor God by abstaining from sex until her wedding day. Soon after she proudly announced to the world on Instagram that she had remained a virgin until her wedding day by showing the certificate she presented to her father, a number of Christians responded in anger.
  • Bowman told The Christian Post that she was mostly surprised that many of those who left negative comments about her decision to show her father the results of her gynocological exam that revealed she was still a virgin before her wedding day identified as Christians.
  • “That’s what I couldn’t understand. So it was kind of like, why do we, as Christians, bash one another instead of protect one another and spread the message of God to those who may not understand?” she questioned.
  • “It’s OK for a girl who gets pregnant out of wedlock to say ‘OK, I’m pregnant’ and we celebrate the baby. But it’s not OK to say ‘Hey, I’m a virgin.'” she asserted. “Maybe the certificate wasn’t right, but neither was her getting pregnant. We still celebrate the baby.”

Continue reading “Viral Virgin Brelyn Bowman Talks Purity Backlash From Christians, New Book ‘No Ring, No Ting’ (Interview)”

Some of My Thoughts Regarding ‘Why do evangelicals lose their faith?’ – Podcast by Unbelievable

Some of My Thoughts Regarding ‘Why do evangelicals lose their faith?’ – Podcast by Unbelievable 

The other day, I posted this (part 1 to this post):

I have re-listened to the podcast this evening and wanted to comment on some of what I heard.

In the program, there is a guy named Rodney who was once a conservative Christian, who drifted into liberal theology, and who now says he has a “deistic philosophy” and he says he is “agnostic about most religious questions.”

He says he has same sex attraction, and was put off to Christianity for (among other reasons):

How American conservative Christianity tends to over-identify with, or promote, the Republican Party (right wing American party), and that some preachers are too condemning of homosexual persons.

Rodney also says he does not accept the notion of an eternal Hell.

A few times, Rodney mentions that he has a deist- like view of God. He thinks all of us humans are rats, the earth is a big laboratory, and God is a scientist in a white lab coat observing us all but not intervening.

Rodney thinks if God is involved with human life, that God should do things like cause all members of ISIS (terrorist group) to drop dead of heart attacks. He does not believe that God helps people to pass school tests, find parking spaces, or cures diseases.

The show had a Christian author and guest on named Os, who replied to some of Rodney’s points.

_Some of my thoughts on the show and the topics Rodney raised._

1.) Politics and Liberal Vs Conservative Christianity

I am right wing politically and have been a Republican (GOP) my entire life.

I have very large misgivings about the GOP the last few years, though, so I’m not totally sure where I stand politically, though I do not ever see myself becoming a liberal or a Democrat.

I do agree with Rodney that too many conservative Christians conflate Christianity with the Republican party.

But then, a lot of liberal Christians or liberal Christian denominations entwine a lot of liberal beliefs and causes with the faith too, (such as support of abortion, the Democratic Party, liberalism, and homosexual marriage).

Continue reading “Some of My Thoughts Regarding ‘Why do evangelicals lose their faith?’ – Podcast by Unbelievable”

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)”

Women in Sao Paulo Must Provide Proof of Virginity to Be Hired as Teachers

Women in Sao Paulo Must Provide Proof of Virginity to Be Hired as Teachers

I’m over 40, still a virgin, because I wanted to wait ’til marriage to have sex but find myself still single. And yet even I, who would pass their stupid virginity tests should I take one, find this bizarre… (And how come the men applying for jobs don’t have to provide proof of virginity?)

Note that one woman, who is 27, said she felt “ashamed” to admit she was still a virgin at age 27 (she did not want to admit to a doctor she was still a virgin).

Lady, you should not feel ashamed for being a virgin at age 27, or 37, or 47, or 57, or 67 or until your death. You express your sexuality any damn way you please, and if that means choosing never to have sex, then that is your right.

And what about women who are not technical virgins because they were raped when younger? I wonder if this nation’s weird, sexist ruling didn’t take that into account? You’re not going to give a woman a job because some pervert raped her previously? Because that sounds like that would be the implication of this rule.

I’m also not clear why people in this country thought this was an appropriate rule? Is it a religious-based thing (is this a predominantly Roman Catholic influenced nation?), or are they just naturally sexist types, or what?

(Link): Anger in Brazil at obstetrics tests for jobseekers

      Aug 2014
    SAO PAULO — Women seeking education jobs in Brazil’s most populous state should not be required to submit to gynecological exams or prove their virginity in order to work, according to women’s rights advocates who denounced the practice on Friday.

The education department of Sao Paulo state requires female prospective teachers to undergo a pap smear in order to prove they are free of a variety of cancers, or to present a doctor’s statement verifying they have not been sexually active. Until recently, it also required women to have a colposcopy, a type of visual examination used to detect disease.

The department since at least 2012 has required the exams to show that candidates for long-term teaching positions are in good health and would not take extended or frequent absences to attend to health matters. Critics, however, decried it as an invasion of privacy.

“It violates women’s rights. It’s very intimate information that she has the right to keep. It’s absurd to continue with these demands,” said Ana Paula de Oliveira Castro, a public defender of women’s issues in Sao Paulo.

…The public management department for Sao Paulo said that all tests ordered follow the standards and recommendation of the country’s Health Ministry for public servants as well as state law.

….While the department requires other health exams, such as a mammography for women and a prostate test for men older than 40, the gynecological exams were criticized as especially invasive.

The issue came to light this week after a news site interviewed a 27-year-old woman who said she was ashamed to ask a doctor for a note declaring she was still a virgin to escape the other tests.

Last year, a similar incident sparked anger in the state of Bahia, in northeastern Brazil, when female candidates for police jobs were asked to take the tests or prove their hymens were not torn. The government subsequently asked that such tests be eliminated.

BTW – sometimes a woman can be a virgin and STILL have a torn hymen. Sex is not the only physical action that can cause a hymen to break, DERP. Idiots.

This goes along with ignorance about BCPs – birth control pills – many conservatives (and I am one myself, but regardless, a lot of conservatives) and many Christians, wrongly assume the ONLY reason women take BCPs is because they are having sex and trying to avoid getting pregnant. WRONG.

There are other, non-sex related, health reasons, why a woman might need to take BCP – sex has nothing to do with it. Men can be so stupid about women, women’s bodies and women’s sexuality sometimes.
———————-
Related:

(Link): Islamic Group ISIS Stones Women To Death For Not Being Virgins

(Link): Single, pregnant mother fired from church for not being married

(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): Christian School Fires Single Woman For Having PreMarital Sex But Offers Her Job to Her Single Boyfriend Who They Know Had PreMarital Sex Too (and similar news stories – Re Christian Employers and Sex)

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

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

Islamic Group ISIS Stones Women To Death For Not Being Virgins

Islamic Group ISIS Stones Women To Death For Not Being Virgins

I think the American church has become too lax on sexual sin, and they don’t support virginity, but I do think killing people for fornication in this point in history is extreme (which is an understatement) – if I remember right, death by stoning was the penalty for fornication in the Old Testament.

The news reports said at least one of the women was not a virgin because she was a widow.

(Link): Two Women Stoned To Death by Isis on Accusations of Adultery

    In separate incidents in a span of 24 hours, the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) carried out executions against two woman in Syria, sentencing them to death by stoning over allegations of “adultery”.

    Unconfirmed reports claim that in at least one case, the woman was sentenced to death as her new husband found that she was not a virgin.

    Both incidents of death by stoning have been reported from Al Raqqa Province.

    “The Islamic State carried out, for the second time in 24 hours, the punishment of Al Rajem (stoning to death for adultery) against another woman in the city of Al Raqqa in a square near the Municipal Stadium,” an official from NGO Syrian Observatory for Human Rights (SOHR) stated.

    The stoning, which was first reported by the SOHR, has also been confirmed by Al Jazeera which claimed that the first stoning took place in a public square in the town of Tabaqa on Thursday evening.

    The report noted that the woman was tried at the Islamic Sharia court, where neither the witnesses who made the allegation were identified, nor the man – who is said to be the paramour – was charged.

(Link): Woman Stoned In Syria For Not Being A Virgin Was A Widow, ISIS Threaten ‘Death By Sword’

    A woman stoned in Syria by ISIS jihadists in the northern Raq province was put to death for not being a virgin. But some reports are claiming she was in fact a widow.

——————————
Related posts:

(Link): Biblical Balance in Teaching About Sexual Sin – don’t white wash and downplay sexual sin, but don’t continually beat people up over it

(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

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

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

The analogy is way, way down the page. I might put it in a separate post in the future.

First, a word about terminology. This is a somewhat minor point I make in passing, but it’s recurrent on various Christian blogs I visit, it drives me nuts, so I wanted to point it out.

Other Christians are very confused about the phrase “sexual purity.” They want to argue that “sexual purity” is not the same thing as “virginity,” but in articles like this one I link to below, they go on to equate “sexual purity” to virginity themselves.

The lady who wrote the following insists that sexual purity is not the same thing as virginity, or should not be thought of as such, but then says that you are not damaged goods, or your sexual purity is not lost, over a single act (ie, having sex, ie, which is defined as, or understood as, losing your virginity prior to marriage).

So… authors like this one argues ( the symbol != is computer coding / scripting language for “is not equal to”),

sexual purity != virginity
But that
sexual purity = virginity

Christian authors who are trying to say that virginity is not all that important in the end scheme of things cannot themselves even stay consistent on the point of whether or not to consider
virginity = sexual purity (or as a sub-set of).

They flip flop on this point a lot. If you don’t believe that sexual purity = virginity, why bother lovingly patting the heads of fornicators to reassure them that losing one’s virginity before marriage is nothing to feel ashamed about?

Why not just write a big old editorial denying that sexual purity is the same thing as staying a virgin until marriage, or why not try to argue that the Bible does not prohibit pre-marital boinking?

The link to the odious editorial by a Christian publication (I have additional comments below the long excerpt):
(Link): Have We Made an Idol Out of Sexual Purity? Why purity is so much more than virginity. BY DEBRA K FILETA

Excerpts:

If you grew up in church, you’ve likely heard one of these horrific analogies somewhere along the way:

Your sexual purity, once it’s given away is like…

“Tape that’s lost it’s stickiness.”

“Paper that’s been torn.”

“Gum that’s been chewed.”

“A gift that’s been unwrapped.”

While I get the mentality behind these messages, my problem with these analogies, and in fact, this entire discussion, is that it presents “purity” as a one-dimensional physical act.

First you have it, then you don’t. Vanished. Gone. Over. Done with. In a blink of an eye, the prospect of being “pure” and holy has been wiped away.

This mentality is so dangerous because it fools us into believing that our entire worth as believers and as “eligible” bachelors/bachelorettes is wrapped up on this one, single part of who we are.

Please don’t misunderstand, I believe it is important to honor God with our bodies, but since when did our holiness have anything to do with who we are, instead of everything to do with who Christ is?

— end article excerpts—

I left a few comments on that page, including:

christianpundit commented…

No, Christians have not made an idol out of sexual purity, not even when using analogies about chewed up gum and so forth. I’m over 40 years of age, still a virgin, because I was waiting until marriage to have sex but am still single.

In the past several years, Christians (seemingly influenced by secular feminists and “slut shaming” rhetoric) have been criticizing virginity, virgins, and celibacy and mocking these concepts and saying they are unimportant.

We’ve now arrived at a situation where Christians (and Non Christians) demand and expect everyone to respect all forms of sexual behavior and sexual expression EXCEPT FOR virginity and celibacy.

Adult singleness is also under attack, from everyone from Al Mohler (who slams singleness in his interviews) to guys like pastor Mark Driscoll who blogs the unbiblical view that single people cannot and should not serve as preachers.

Driscoll also wrongly teaches in one of his blog posts that older, adult celibate adults lack sex drives because God supposedly, magically removed their sex drive (this is false; single adults over 30 still experience sexual desire).

Further, Driscoll holds the unbiblical, wacko strange view that if a person is still single over 30, that God has destined them for singleness, and at that, to martyr them off for spreading the Gospel in some deep jungle, in some remote nation. None of this is supported in the Bible.

Christians are attacking singleness, virginity, and celibacy; they are most certainly NOT making an idol out of any of these things, and I wish Christian bloggers, magazines, and authors would stop arguing otherwise.

Continue reading “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”

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 ?

Daddy Dearest: How Purity Culture Can Turn Fathers into Idols (Purity Ball Photos)

Daddy Dearest: How Purity Culture Can Turn Fathers into Idols
———————————–
One thing I’d also like to add that is damaging about these purity balls is that

1. The parents involved with these purity balls ASSUME their daughters will grow up and marry.

What if their daughters never marry?

2. Male virginity is not taught, stressed, or supported by these groups.

I’ve yet to hear of a “Male Purity Ball,” where sons are encouraged to “pledge their virginity” to dear old mom. Why the double standard? Why are women expected to be virgins, but not the men?

(Link): Daddy Dearest: How Purity Culture Can Turn Fathers into Idols

    Our pledges belong to the Heavenly Father, not our earthly ones.

by Gina Dalfonzo

When we see a man and a woman holding each other tenderly, wearing fancy clothes, we think wedding, marriage, romance. It’s simply instinctive. So when looking through a series of purity ball portraits—girls in white dresses, beside loving fathers—we’re seeing something very familiar, but in a very different context. This juxtaposition strikes as jarring at best, inappropriate at worst.

The blogosphere erupted with their reactions to (Link): Swedish photographer David Magnusson’s “Purity” series. “Thoroughly f—ing weird … striking and frankly terrifying,” opined Tom Hawking at Flavorwire.

Jessica Valenti at AlterNet called the pictures “beautiful [but] disturbing.” In message boards and Facebook groups and comment sections around the Internet, words like “creepy” and “strange” were thrown around. On the flip side, there were those who said you’d have to be “perverted” to think there was anything wrong with the pictures.

Continue reading “Daddy Dearest: How Purity Culture Can Turn Fathers into Idols (Purity Ball Photos)”

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

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

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

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

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

    by Russell Moore

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

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

    …Always Difficult

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

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

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

    …No Amendment

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

and similar things.

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

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

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

Notice: this post contains some adult, racy, salty language – and some raunchy, sexual content

—————————————
Link to the Facebook group:
(Link): The anti-purity movement

I do see one or two articles on the group I think I would probably agree with (just by going title alone, I have not read the pages), such as:

    But I need to ask, “Is it the purity culture that is to blame? Or is it the purity message?” A culture contains fallen humans and so any “culture” can become oppressive.

    I need to know if it is the purity message itself that is causing the harm. I want to address the factors that I think are causing the pain, but also look at the alternative.

    If we throw away purity culture, what will take its place and will the alternative be any better?

The person behind that group (the Anti Purity Facebook group) links to something on their Facebook group called:

“No Shame Movement” (noshamemovement), whose tag line is, “No Shame Movement functions as a platform to share stories of unlearning purity culture.”

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

Here is a page that satirizes the idea of virginity until marriage – the person at the “The anti-purity movement” Facebook group is very fond of this page; the group owner said ((Link): source),

    This is the best, snarkiest, most perfect post about “second virginity”, and the author wins the internet with it. Absolute perfection.

The page starts out ridiculing “secondary” virginity (which I’ve written about a few times on my own blog, such as (Link): this post and (Link): this post and a few others), in which they might have had a legitimate basis for critiquing, but, their opening salvo can also be applied to actual virgins – so I have to give them a big “fail” on the parts that can apply equally to true virginity.

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

A Female’s Virginity Belongs To Her – Not Her Father or Husband – Re: Christian Purity Balls

A Female’s Virginity Belongs To Her – Not Her Father or Husband – Re: Purity Balls

This story has been making the rounds the past week.

(Link): ‘You are married to the Lord and your daddy is your boyfriend’: Purity balls, in which girls ‘gift their virginity’ to their fathers until marriage, sweeping America, from The Daily Mail

While I do believe the Bible forbids pre-martial sex and supports virginity until marriage; and that virginity until marriage has been under attack from Christians the past few years (in addition from secular culture); and that a person’s choice to remain celibate should be respected by all (not mocked); that Christian parents or parents with traditional values have a right to instill Christian or traditional morals in their children, I do not support things such as purity balls.

One of my first problems with these “purity balls” is that they focus on female sexuality.

In these balls, the young ladies are forced to dress in white wedding type dresses, dance with their fathers, their fathers give them purity rings, and the young ladies pledge their virginity to their fathers.

As far as I am aware, there is no male equivalent, where young males are told to give their virginity to their mother and later, should they marry, their wife.

The Bible is clear that pre-martial sex is forbidden for all, for both genders, not just the ladies.

It is sexist and unbiblical for Christian parents to emphasize virginity only for female children.

I do not feel purity balls are appropriate for several reasons, but if one is going to hold one for females, one needs to keep things evened out by forcing males to participate in them as well, by having the males pledge their virginity to their mothers.

Growing up, I was very much turned off at the idea of marrying a non-virgin male. My preference is still to marry a virgin male.

I do feel that people who have pre-marital sex cheat their future spouse out of something that is rightfully theirs (ie, their virginity).

I know a lot of liberal Christians, emergents, and so forth hate that reasoning, but I apply it equally to males. I am grossed out at the idea of going on a honeymoon knowing the guy I have married has already placed his penis in some other woman’s orifices.

As I get older, I realize I may have no choice, because fornication is rampant these days – adult, male virgins are not exactly a dime a dozen. I’ve made peace with that.

At any rate, male virginity is not valued or upheld nearly as much as female virginity is, especially in religious circles.

I suspect one reason for this is that religious parents do not want to deal with unplanned pregnancies. Who gets pregnant from sex, males or females? Exactly.

I suppose Christian parents find it easier to clamp down on their daughter’s sexuality so as not to have to deal with birth control, abortion, adoption, and medical bills, so they up the pressure on the female children not to put out. One does not have to worry about a son becoming pregnant.

A woman’s virginity belongs to her and her alone.

At this point, I don’t even want to say one’s virginity belongs to God, though I suppose a biblical case can be made that a person’s body, sexuality and so on belongs to God (and there are biblical passages which indicate this), but God does not force Himself on people, their bodies, and their choices.

I have seen numerous testimonies by Christian women who admit to having had slept around many times over their life, and they suffered no ill consequences from that behavior.

God may call pre-marital sex a sin, but He does not enforce any negative consequences – in this lifetime- upon those who engage in such behavior, so far as I have been able to ascertain.

I actually see the opposite: I often see testimonies by Christian women on television programs who said they were big sluts, they admit they knew the Bible is against pre-marital sex, yet had sex anyway, they say they came down with some kind of awful disease as a result, but when they turned to God again, that God completely healed them of their sexually transmitted disease.

Still others said the only bad outcome of whoring around is that they came to feel empty or guilty due to said behavior, later stopped, and later met a great Christian guy who they married.

So, in spite of all the pre-marital sleeping around, they later got married, and now live happy, conventional, married, middle- class- American life styles.

Whether a female chooses to engage in premarital sex is her choice and hers alone.

I am not opposed to parents teaching their children to save sex for marriage and bringing up potential health problems involved of having sex, but in the end scheme of things, one’s virginity is one’s own, and one can do with it as one pleases.

(Note, however, the Bible does in fact teach that pre-marital sex is a sin. You can certainly have pre-marital sex if you so choose, but God does not condone that behavior.)

Forcing girls to attend faux marriage-like ceremonies where they have to devote their virginity to their fathers is distasteful, borders on incestuous, and places unrealistic, unfair pressure on these young ladies.

Give the young lady the proper moral guidance and health information she needs, and step out of her way; stop it with the purity balls.

I find these purity balls to be just as bad as the porn-i-fied culture we live in.

It’s the reverse extreme: usually in our society, people are pressured to have sex, have a lot of sex with lots of people and to start young. They are told their sexual choice to remain celibate is ridicule-worthy, shame worthy.

The virgin’s or celibate’s sexual choice to refrain from sex is often not respected. It is belittled. Virgins are shamed and bullied into acting like whores.

The purity ball is the reverse, but just as bad – pressuring young women into a sexual choice they may not want to make for themselves.

It’s telling them that their body, their virginity is not theirs, but belongs to someone else, either a father or a future husband.

I do believe one should save one’s virginity for a future spouse – so in a sense, I’d say yes, your virginity is owed to your future spouse – but at the end of the day, one’s virginity is still really and finally one’s own.

Your body is yours, not your father’s, not your future husband’s.

What I am getting at is that one’s choices should be respected. If you make all your kid’s choices for her, she will never be able to function as an adult. At some point, she needs to make choices for herself about herself, and that includes what to do when it comes to sex and her body.

Another reason these purity balls are so damaging: they make the job of all Christians (or semi- Christian, semi- agnostics with traditional values) who defend the Bible’s teaching on sex, (such as myself), ten times more difficult.

I already have an uphill battle defending celibacy and virginity as it stands, without these lunatic, crackpot fringe Christian groups holding these bizarre father and daughter virginity dances.

Staying a virgin until marriage does not guarantee great, regular sex, as many Christians like to maintain. I have numerous examples on my blog; just use the search box and type in “sexless marriage” for example after example of people who stayed virgins until marriage, but then their sex lives were terrible or dried up totally.

By the way, I am not fully on board with the “you are married to God” talk one sees pop up among some Christians. It sexualizes God and Jesus. I am an adult single – God is not my husband, and I am not “dating” Jesus.

See these links for more:

Do the people who throw these purity balls ever stop to consider that their daughters may never marry?

I was a Christian since I was a child, I was raised with the expectation that I would marry some day. I am still single in my 40s. No “Prince Charming” ever entered my life.

Continue reading “A Female’s Virginity Belongs To Her – Not Her Father or Husband – Re: Christian Purity Balls”

Joshua Rogers of Boundless / Focus on the Family Attacks Biblical Teaching of Virginity Until Marriage

Joshua Rogers of Boundless / Focus on the Family Attacks Biblical Teaching of Virginity Until Marriage

As I’ve said on prior occasions, far from Christians idolizing virginity, as some liberal, emergent, and even some conservative Christian bloggers and magazine writers claim, the biblical standards of celibacy and virginity have been under unrelenting attack by Christians over the past few years.

Most Christians these days no longer respect or value virginity but are seeking to diminish it if not do away with it altogether.

You can tell Christian thinking on the topic has gone downhill when we go from the 1980s message that says virginity is important and to strive for it, to the 2010 and onwards attack – by Christians – that says virginity is no big deal, so don’t beat yourself up when you have pre-marital sex.

Sometimes, Christians re-examining a view, teaching, or how they present it, can be a good thing, but I wonder about things when they start trying to downplay a standard that is taught in the Bible (ie, virginity and celibacy).

Christian culture has disturbingly gone from “Hooray for virginity!,” when I was a teen, to “boo, hiss, virginity, and everyone fornicate if you feel like it, because you are justified by Jesus, not your sexual choices, don’t feel any shame!” now.

It is now trendy in Christian culture to question virginity, and to shame adult Christians who are still virgins.

It is now standard by some Christians to say that virgins are either being “prideful” about their virginity, or are “worshipping” it, or to remind them they are not perfect, or to condescendingly remind them that it is Jesus who saves, not one’s “external sexual behavior.”

Case in point, this latest Virgin- and Celibate- Shaming editorial by Joshua Rogers at the Focus on the Family blog for 20 something singles, “Boundless” (yes, you will note that Focus on the Family ignores that there are many singles over the age of 30, 40, 50):

(Link): Stop Worshiping Your Virginity by Joshua Rogers

Excerpt 1:

    … The problem with female non-virgins going public with their sexual sins was that they ran the risk of being seen as damaged goods — I mean, if true love really did wait, then it was impossible for them to truly love the man who would be their husband.
    Apparently, they had already given away the truest expression of their love.
    So the best they could hope for was an understanding non-virgin or a “sexually pure” man who was very, very forgiving. For these women, the message was clear: God can forgive you, but you will be sexually disfigured for the rest of your life. Too bad. You shouldn’t have had sex with someone who wasn’t your husband.

    Now on the other hand, the male non-virgins didn’t seem to be quite as ashamed of themselves. They often talked quite frankly and openly about their sexual histories when giving their “testimonies” — especially if they were talking with other guys.
    In fact, if you didn’t know better, you might get the impression that they were even bragging about what they had done. But for some reason, these guys weren’t disqualified as marriage material — no way. It was actually endearing that these worldly men had made such a brave decision to walk away from the lusts of their flesh. You. Go. Boys.

    …If you’re a Christian virgin, you are no more righteous than anyone else (regardless of how long you’ve been wearing that promise ring). And if you’re not a virgin, you are no less righteous than anyone else — the only thing that makes you righteous is faith in the perfect blood of Jesus.
    Whatever you did (or didn’t do) in the past simply isn’t part of the Christian equation when it comes to your worth, so you can go ahead and stop obsessing over your virginity now.

    … People of Planet Evangelicalism, I have good news: This is not the Gospel.

    … Remember, Jesus “saved us, not because of works done by us in righteousness, but according to His own mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewal of the Holy Spirit” (Titus 3:5, ESV).

Call me kooky here, but I have never once heard any Christian imply that one is saved via being a virgin.

There might be some fringe, barely Christian group somewhere that teaches this perspective, but it’s not a view I’ve seen in my many years of reading about Christian teachings on sex. So I call “straw man” argument on that.

I’ve never once heard a Christian claim that one is made righteous and right before God by being a virgin, or that virginity was a component in the Gospel message.

Continue reading “Joshua Rogers of Boundless / Focus on the Family Attacks Biblical Teaching of Virginity Until Marriage”

Interesting Thoughts About Christian Views on Sex and Gender Roles at Sunshine Mary blog – also some obnoxious, totally wrong views

Interesting Thoughts About Christian Views on Sex and Gender Roles at Sunshine Mary blog – also some obnoxious, totally wrong views

Please understand that I do not always completely agree with all views of every blog or site I link to, and that would be the case here.

I do not have an irrational hatred or suspicion of secular feminism, for example, and that this Sunshine Mary person links to the Vox Popli blog, suggests that she might – but she has a few points in some posts I related to.

I am not a secular feminist, btw, and disagree with some of their views, eg,

As I’ve discussed before on this blog, Christians claim to be alarmed at the deficit of marriage among Christians.

Conservative Christians claim to support sexual purity and virginity, but in reality, they do not (see my prior blog post: (Link): No, Christians Do NOT Support or Idolize Virginity and Celibacy, they attack both)

I, like “Sunshine Mary,” do not understand why so many Christians keep maintaining stereotypes and views that are either untrue, stupid, or counter-productive to values Christians say they support (such as marriage and procreation).

Here are thoughts on this by Sunshine Mary:

✱ (Link): Why do Christian women perpetuate myths about attraction?

In that post, Sunshine Mary discusses attending class at her church where the people in the class gave the usual Christian stereotypes about sex and marriage:

    This past week was rough because the topic was sex. I just could not believe that all the things we joke about Christians saying were actually said.

    For example, one young woman actually used the women-are-like-a-crockpot crock of crap.

    This is not true, in case anyone has not figured it out yet.

    It does not take a woman, Christian or otherwise, eight hours to become sexually aroused.

    The idea that a man needs to spend eight hours giving her tender kisses, helping with the laundry, telling her how much he loves her, and bringing her flowers just to turn her on is wrong. She may like all those things very much, they may be nice things to do, but they will not make her sexually aroused.

    Why do Christian women keep telling men this? It’s like we’ve all succumbed to mass delusion.

I don’t support Sunshine Mary’s implication that because some survey or another she read says that males who do more housework get less sex than males who do not, that one should conclude from this that this necessarily means males should be permitted to abdicate from housework, or that it makes such males more desirable: sorry, Sunshine Mary, not in my universe.

Sunshine Mary goes on to say,

    Why do Christian women perpetuate these myths about attraction, thereby assuring themselves and their husbands a frustrating sex life? It’s certainly not Biblical.

    We could be really jaded and say they are just lying, but I don’t think that is the reason.

    It’s more that we hear this over and over again – that we want men who are always tender, gentle, and sensitive, that we need a deep emotional connection, lots of intimate conversation, and plenty of sweet romance before we can feel sexual attraction.

    This advice is pervasive: it’s on every Christian website, in our movies, magazines, sermons, and books, and thus we just come to believe it.

Given that Sunshine Mary talks about swallowing red pills (and that she links to Vox’s blog), I take it that she is supportive of the sexist “men’s rights” groups. She writes,

    I seem to have picked up a lot of new readers as of late, and if you are new around this corner of the web, you may have seen the phrase “the blue pill”. What this means is believing lies and choosing to ignore the truth because society has deemed the truth inconvenient or unacceptable for some reason.

Visit (Link): THE BLUE PILL on Reddit for an anti-dote to the men’s rights bull shit; they satire the Red Pill, ‘wah wah, society is so unfair to men, and feminism is at the root of all evil in the world, waaah!!!!’ groups.

Sunshine Mary writes,

    We are attracted to men who are leading and who quash challenges to their leadership.

It depends on what she means by that.

I personally would not want to be in a relationship with a man who falls on too far either side of the spectrum:

I don’t want a doormat (which is what she seems to be describing, but I don’t want to date a stoic, only cares about himself and what he wants never considers my feelings and needs Marlboro Man, either.

Sunshine Mary writes,

    Donalgraeme explains what women are attracted to: Looks, Athleticism, Money, Power, and Status – in other words, women respond with sexual attraction to men who demonstrate some degree of physical and social dominance.

Who the fuck is Donalgraeme and why should I care what he thinks?

Sunshine Mary writes,

    Just as teaching the lie of mutual submission in the marital hierarchy does not help us, so too teaching lies about what generates attraction between spouses does not help us.

Oh, Sunshine Mary wants to be dominated by her man, kinky – but that’s what SHE wants. I don’t want that.

Sunshine Mary must totally be into Doug Wilson, who wrote (in a criticism, or shall we surmise, bubbling- under- the- surface- frustration- and- jealousy, of Christian wives’ fandom of the Fifty Shades of Grey erotica novel):

    (by Doug Wilson):
    When we quarrel with the way the world is, we find that the world has ways of getting back at us. In other words, however we try, the sexual act cannot be made into an egalitarian pleasuring party. A man penetrates, conquers, colonizes, plants.
    A woman receives, surrenders, accepts.This is of course offensive to all egalitarians, and so our culture has rebelled against the concept of authority and submission in marriage. This means that we have sought to suppress the concepts of authority and submission as they relate to the marriage bed.

By the way, that is the same idiotic Doug Wilson who believes people, including Christians, cannot go without sex for three minutes:
(Link): Douglas Wilson and Christian Response FAIL to Sexual Sin – No Body Can Resist Sex – supposedly – Re Celibacy

See also:

From Sunshine Mary’s page,
✱ (Link): Feminism and the Progressive Principle: Christian edition

According to Sunshine Mary’s comments on that page, the Bible forbids women from teaching or preaching, as in all women, for all time – no, it does not.

Anyway, what I did find interesting on that page were these comments (I’m not saying I necessarily agree with all these views, only that I find some of them interesting):

    (by Sunshine Mary):

    Now let’s consider the elite covert Christian feminists.

    Men:
    Alpha male pastors, usually of mega-churches, like Mark Driscoll, who aren’t intentionally feminist but who enable feminism by training a legion of Christian White Knights to save women from suffering any temporal consequences for their terrible life choices.

    Also, some alpha male pastors, though it may not have been their original plan to do so, end up cultivating a nice little harem for themselves within their churches, if the number of pastors who eventually get caught in sex scandals is any indication.

    Women:
    These women are truly wolves in sheep’s clothing. They are often pro-life themselves, usually married mothers, but they are eager to remove from women all stigma associated with sexual sin.

    I’ve noticed many of these women are professors at Christian colleges (example: Karen Swallow Prior, a Christian professor, explains that God’s purity standard is impossible to meet and calls for a more “realistic” (i.e. slutty) definition of purity than virginity).

    They masquerade as conservative or traditional women, but they are not. Additionally, some mega-pastors’ wives who like their cushy lifestyle and high status might fit here.

The Driscoll commentary was just interesting, to suggest that a Cave Man such as Driscoll is aiding feminists in some manner.

Where Sunshine Mary does get things (partially) correct is under the second section, where she opines that even conservative Christians today don’t really support sexual purity.

Sunshine Mary also has a long section farther down that page pointing out how churches support unmarried women who are fornicating and having multiple children out of wedlock, while the single women who are remaining chaste are being hosed by the whole system -that is most certainly true and a point I’ve raised on my own blog in months past.

Continue reading “Interesting Thoughts About Christian Views on Sex and Gender Roles at Sunshine Mary blog – also some obnoxious, totally wrong views”

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?

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?

There are one or two people quoted in this article from Relevant magazine who defend virginity, but there are several sections that are heavy on virgin-shaming.

I would not say this is one of the worst anti-virginity Christian works I’ve seen, but it is rather bad in parts.

Basically, it’s the same ol’, same ol’ – that, supposedly, purity and virginity teachings need to go the way of the dinosaur because women today who are now 30 years old who had consensual sex when they were 15 or 20 years old feel just oh- so- icky and guilty when they hear positive, biblical messages about virginity, or, they say, when they heard such teachings when they were 18 years old and in Sunday School, or attending “True Love Waits” conferences.

The end result: once more, in the process, the concept and practice of virginity -by those Christian adults over the age of 25 who are still holding on to their virginity- are inadvertently shamed, or their actual virginity is disparaged or disrespected. I don’t think this is a winning strategy, nor do I find it biblical.

Where I do agree with some of the individuals interviewed in this piece is where they point out that evangelical Christian teachings about sexuality get carried into the extreme absurd, where young kids are told to not so much as kiss, hold hands, or go on dates alone.

What happens when you limit a kid’s exposure to the opposite sex to that insane degree and instill that level of paranoia of fornication, is you make kids socially awkward, they don’t spend enough time around the opposite gender and hence learn how to enteract comfortably with the opposite gender, and therefore, they never marry, or not until much later in life.

I have more observations below this long excerpt:
(Link): How the New Abstinence Movement is Trying to Reshape Our Views on Sex from Relevant Magazine

Excerpts:

Singer Joe Jonas Talks about Frustrations with Purity Rings

Singer Joe Jonas Talks about Frustrations with Purity Rings

(Link): Joe Jonas Talks About Relationship With God, Frustration With Purity Rings in Raw, Revealing Interview

    BY MORGAN LEE , CHRISTIAN POST REPORTER
    December 2, 2013|12:59 pm

    Despite growing up in a Pentecostal church that his father pastored, Joe Jonas no longer sees himself as religious, crediting part of his disillusionment to a scandal that rocked the congregation.

    “We eventually left our church, Assembly of God, when I was 14. A scandal had erupted involving stolen money, and it caused a big rift in the church. After that the concept of church really upset me for a long time,” Jonas shared in a recent interview with Vulture. “I mean, I believe in God, and that’s a personal relationship that I have, but I’m not religious in any way.”

    Jonas, who was formerly part of pop rock band The Jonas Brothers, also said that at an early age he felt the pressure of pleasing and conforming to others’ standards.

    “To some extent, I was used to growing up in public. I was a pastor’s kid, so eyes were always on me, even then. I sat in the first pew of the church, and I had to wear a suit every Sunday, because my parents wanted me to be this role model that I didn’t always want to be,” Jonas said.

    …In an exceptionally raw and frank interview, Jonas also mentioned that although he had made a good-faith, preteen, commitment with Christian abstinence organization True Love Waits to keep his virginity until marriage and donned a “purity ring” as an 11-year-old, he was overwhelmed when this became the focus of media attention when the band started to blow up.

    “The topic that dominated news coverage of us for a long time was the whole promise-ring thing. We couldn’t escape it,” said Jonas.

    “I remember this interview with this guy whose entire agenda was to focus on the rings. He kept pushing the subject, and when we insisted that we didn’t want to talk about it, he told us, ‘I can write whatever I want,’ which terrified us,” he added. “That’s the thing: We didn’t know any better, and we just wanted to make people happy. Now I know that I don’t have to answer any questions I don’t want to. Like, why do you even care about my 15-year-old brother’s sex life?”

    Jonas was increasingly frustrated when he felt that something that he did not want to be an issue, became something that fans were emulating.

    “People were coming up to us, saying, “Thank you so much, I’m waiting because you guys are, too!” And we just thought, No! That’s not what we’re about,” said Jonas, who noted that he lost his virginity when he was 20.

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

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

And the Rachel Helds Evans-es (well known Christian blogger) of the online community keep saying or implying Christians have made an idol out of virginity and sexual purity teachings, LOLOLOLOLOL! 😆

(I like Rachel Held Evans, I really do, but on this celibacy/ purity/ virginity topic, I do believe she and some other Christian bloggers who discuss wanting to do away with sexual purity teachings are a bit in error.)

It’s quite the contrary. Christians are trying to downplay celibacy and virginity, if not out-right attacking either or both.

Where is all this Christian worshipping of virginity or esteeming of celibacy going on, by the way, because I am not seeing much of it (outside of fringe, kook, cultic, Quivering type families and churches)?

I keep seeing these feminist, emergent, or liberal Christian women say on the internet that churches have idolized virginity, and some conservative males have said so, too.

Tell me where these churches are that have turned virginity into an idol, so that I may attend! 😆

I think I would enjoy a church community that values or respects that fact I am a virgin in my forties, instead of dismissing it or treating me like I’m a weirdo over it, or behaving as though I am a failure for not marrying and not popping out a litter of rug rats.

Another indication of failure is that this spokesperson in this article about TLW is assuming all Christian teens will marry at some point.

He repeatedly mentions marriage and the role of sex in marriage, as though he assumes all teens that his TLW campaign talks to will marry some day.

Yeah, hi, hello, so did I when I was a teen, totally thought I’d be married by at least my mid 30s, and yet, I find myself single in my 40s. My spouse that I was promised by Christians, as long as I waited, prayed, and sexually abstained, never did show up.

Christians need to stop falling for the error that “only a few are gifted with singleness,” or, “only a few are called to celibacy.”

Nowhere does the Bible say or promise that all or most Christians will marry, or that singleness over a lifetime is a rare thing. Christians just assume lifelong singleness is rare.

The Bible does not teach that “singleness is a gift” or is “a calling”: it is taught to be a personal CHOICE. God does not force or choose singleness or marriage on, or for, anyone.

(By the way, wanting to be married, and choosing to be open to marriage, does not guarantee that you will be: I wanted to get married but am still single.)

You’ll notice in this page linked to below that LifeWay T.L.W. employees do not present singleness or celibacy as being possible, positive, or admirable over a lifetime, or for adulthood.

Staying single as a goal or merely as a possibility is not even broached by TLW / LifeWay (ha ha, I accidentally typed that as “Lie way” at first).

Continue reading “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”