views and thoughts on topics, especially ones pertaining to christianity – with an emphasis on how most christians either ignore or discriminate against unmarried christians – and how christians have turned marriage and parenting into IDOLS and how there is no true support for sexual purity, virginity, or celibacy among christians – this is a blog for me to vent; I seldom permit dissenting views. I don't debate dissenters ————-
Did Hell Freeze Over?: Liberal Rag Promotes Idea that Celibacy is Acceptable, and a Valid Life Choice / Re: 2016 Study Says Millennials Aren’t Having Much Sex
The following editorial comes from left wing site Salon, known for publishing pieces by left wing feminist Marcotte, who likes to insist everyone respect women’s sexual choices except for virginity and celibacy – she thinks it’s okay to mock those (see this link and this link for more on that).
Most of the time, liberals are loathe to admit that it’s okay for adults (or kids) to be virgins or celibates. They often portray the state of being abstinent as being sexually repressed or weird. They get all judgey-judgemental about it, but at the same time ask us not to “slut shame” the people, especially women, who boink around like dogs in heat.
So, I was quite surprised to see this liberal editorial defending the idea that it’s okay for people to be chaste, and that people need to stop pressuring everyone to have sex. This sort of editorial from a left wing site is very, very rare.
Everyone calm down and stop judging young adults for “missing out on a good time”
….While the study’s findings are of cultural interest about changing sexual practices, an unfortunate side effect is the concurrent media sex panic. To wit: a Washington Post headline asked if this means “(Link): the end of sex?” while (Link): The Cuttouted “Millennials Confirm That Sex Is No Longer Cool.”
WashPost Columnist: ‘Ghostbusters’ Haters Are ‘Virgin Losers’ – (via NewsBusters Site); Both the Right and Left Wing Get Some things Wrong About This
This story comes from NewsBusters, which is discussing a column written for Washington Post newspaper by columnist Kristen Page-Kirby about the new Ghostbusters movie.
The original Ghostbusters movie, released in the 1980s, contained four male leads. The reboot version of the movie, which was released July 15, 2016, contains four women leads instead.
Unfortunately, over a year or more ago, when news came out that there would be four women leads in the film, some of the sexist jerkwads who inhabit the internet started lambasting the movie all over You Tube, Twitter, and where ever else – not because the move was bad (it wasn’t even released yet), but because they were incensed that Hollywood was cramming some form of feminism down their throats.
Interestingly, I didn’t see as much backlash over the main character of the new Star Wars film, “Star Wars: The Force Awakens” being a woman – Rey.
At any rate, I will be discussing two or three different topics in this post that are related to this new film, or mentioned by the conservative essayist at the NewsBusters site.
This is another story where I am in the middle. I can’t say as though I’m completely on one side or another in regards to some aspects of this story, depending on what is under discussion.
I am currently a moderate right-winger (I used to be more to the right than I am currently. In the last few years, I’ve been reconsidering if some of my former political and Christian beliefs are wrong.)
I’ve been more open the last few years to hearing the criticisms and views of liberals and Non-Christians – which is not to say I agree with everything I see left wingers and Non-Christians espousing or arguing in favor of.
I sometimes think secular, liberal feminists have good points on some topics, but I normally disagree with them.
As far as the Ghostbusters film reboot is concerned, I do think some of the backlash against the movie does in fact stem from sexism. But then, I do think some people may honestly feel that the movie is genuinely bad due to having a poor story line, or what have you.
I have not seen the movie yet. I don’t go to movie theaters that much anymore.
I usually wait until movies air on cable television; I’m willing to bet that this Ghostbusters reboot will probably be shown on F/X channel, or SyFy, or some other cable network in the next two years, and I have cable television, so I don’t know if I want to invest my time and cash into driving down to a theater to see this, since it will eventually be on television.
I saw the original Ghostbusters in a movie theater when it was in theaters in the 1980s. I was a kid at the time.
The original was okay, it was quite enjoyable and plenty of fun, but it was no movie masterpiece, so to all the men online who were griping about the reboot featuring all women leads: get the hell over it already.
And yes, you were, or are, being sexist douche bags about it. I don’t buy for a moment that ALL male griping about the film is based on non-sexist reasons, like shoddy trailers, or supposed poor CG work.
The vast majority of the professional reviews (and I have read a ton of them) for the new Ghostbusters film have deemed it “okay.” -Not terrible. Not great. But just “meh.” It’s so-so, most reviews have said.
What I don’t appreciate is that the columnist for WaPo who was discussing male backlash about the movie is using virginity as an insult.
Remarks like Leadsom’s go far beyond the usual cut-and-thrust of the political arena and reveal how (Link): childless women are still viewed with innate suspicion. This, in spite of the fact that women in their mid-40s are now almost twice as likely to be childless as their parents’ generation. One in five women born in 1969 is childless today, compared with one in nine women born in 1942.
But there remains a taboo, a retrograde belief that (Link): we are in some way unnatural for not fulfilling our biological destiny. How else to explain the fact that the first question many people ask when I meet them is whether I have children, followed by an uncomfortable pause when I say that I don’t. “But why?” I can see them thinking. “What’s wrong with her?”
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.
The ad gives a brief description of Brooks, including a photo with the disclaimer, “I look just like my picture, except I now have grey hair.” The “About You” section states applicants “Will be attractive being height and weight proportional.” It also goes on to say that applicants should be prepared to have children with Brooks and also be a stay-at- home mom.
He said his father has been ill and wants a grandson to carry on the family name.Brooks compared his father to Larry David’s character in the TV series “Curb Your Enthusiasm,” saying he “thinks he does the right thing, and then it all blows up in his face.”He said he’d never buy an ad like this himself, but “it’s worth a shot. Can’t hurt.”
…While we all know that TV portrayals [of adult singleness] are a far cry from reality, cultural influences like these—combined with the voices we pick up from church and our communities—all manage to creep into our expectations for what single life is really like.
But singleness is never as black and white as caricatures and stereotypes make it out to be. And the truth is, every person’s experience of singleness is going to look a little different. There are times when singleness provides freedom and flexibility that we know we’ll never experience in any other season, and it’s thrilling.
But there are also moments when singleness leads to feelings of disenchantment or disappointment, as men and women wonder how their individual story fits in with the bigger picture of God’s plan.
[Myths of Singleness]
1. If you’re single, then your dating life is public domain.
2. If you’re single, then you’re selfish.
3. If you’re single, then you’re not really an adult.
Throughout my early and mid-twenties, I frequently related to Pinocchio. He wanted to be a real boy—I wanted to be a real adult.
But, in many instances I felt like I wouldn’t be able to earn the respect of a fully grown adult until I tied the knot.
I’ve talked to many single men and women in the church who have felt the same way.
I’m Not Pining for a Long-Lost Love. I’m Single by Circumstance by S. Reed
I wish more articles addressed the “single by circumstance” situation as the one I am linking to in this post does.
Unfortunately, I don’t see too many articles about that topic, and in the meantime, a lot of conservative Christians who rail against delayed marriage, or declining marriage rates, assume that most or many single women are intentionally avoiding marriage.
So, these conservative Christians (and sometimes secular conservative groups or people) scold women for being single, and they engage in fear mongering, where they do things like tell women they will supposedly die sooner or live miserable lives if they don’t have a husband (Bella DePaulo has refuted many of these types of claims, and I have a few posts about her work on my blog).
Many single women – such as myself – wanted to get married and still want to – and I find it either hurtful, frustrating, or absolutely insulting and infuriating to see these articles (usually by conservatives) who assume I’ve remained single by choice, so they then shame or scold single women such as myself, or they feel they must argue me into getting, or convince me to, get married. However, I don’t need to be “sold” on marriage.
I don’t need to be convinced that marriage is nice. I’m already sold on the idea or marriage.
However, the fact remains that wanting something like marriage does not magically make it come to pass.
Then, you have conservative authors (such as (Link): this one), assume I could easily get a boyfriend or husband if only I made myself weak and stupid to attract a man (or dropped a hell of a lot of standards).
You see, it’s supposedly that pesky feminism or that stubborn insistence that I have self-confidence, or be independent, (or that a guy feel like a good match for me), that is keeping me from landing a man (*roll eyes* at all the backwards thinking and sexism in those assumptions).
The simple truth is, you can be a great person – smart, funny, attractive, and have a host of other great qualities – and just not be able to meet a comparable person you would like to partner with. Nor should you dumb yourself down and become clingy and needy in the hopes doing so will attract a partner.
Speaking of all that, like the author of this article does, I too tire of societal assumptions that if you are single, or have not married past a certain age, it must necessarily mean you are horribly flawed in some way. You can be a good person and a good catch but simply never run into anyone decent, or not anyone who is compatible with you.
….Countless movies, books, televisions shows, musicals and operas teach us to believe there’s someone out there for everyone: Just wish on a star, or get a makeover, or take a chance and boom! True love will find you. So if you haven’t found that person — or lost him somehow — people have trouble understanding why.
….For some, that glaring absence can be explained only by some horrible flaw I must possess or a love gone wrong in my past. Although I have many faults, I’ve never noticed that folks who are in relationships are perfect. And when I look back at my romantic history, I think: “That’s a lot of bullets dodged.”
I find that a lot of Christian-written material for adult singles is too sickeningly sweet.
There is an absence in most Christian-penned material for singles that honestly, really gets into and grapples with, how hard, painful, or disappointing it can be to be single into your 30s and older, when you had really expected or had hoped to marry.
Yorgos Lanthimos’s allegorical rumination on finding a mate is witty, cruel, and deeply unsettling.
…Thus opens The Lobster, the stunning English-language debut of the Greek director Yorgos Lanthimos. A black comedy laced with moments of shocking cruelty, the film is a dystopian allegory about the human need to find a mate—a brilliant, if morbid, meditation on relationships in the age of the dating app.
Seven Truths About Marriage You Won’t Hear in Church by F. Powell
I first saw this link Tweeted by Jory Michah’s Twitter, who got it from Relevant.
My blog stalker, (Link): John Morgan will now probably blog about this on his blog (without crediting myself and/or Jory Michah), or, he’ll probably leave a comment on this blog post at Relevant that I am citing in my post
Most of the page is pretty good, but as you know, I don’t accept the “Equally Yoked” teaching, which the author of this page advocates.
First of all, there has been a Christian man shortage in America for decades now, leaving Christian single women with no recourse but to marry Non-Christian men.
Secondly, I have (Link): news story after news story on my blog of professing Christian men who have been arrested for using child porn or for beating or murdering their wives – such being the case, a woman is just as well-off marrying an ethical, kind atheist man as she would taking a chance on a Christian single man (provided she can even find one).
2. There is More Than One Person Out There You Could Marry.
4. A Spouse Does Not Complete You.
Jerry Maguire has brainwashed a generation of people to believe a lie. Spouses do not complete people. I bought this lie, and it wasn’t until I let go of any notion my wife could fill some void that I was able to truly love her. I had been expecting Tiffani to do something only God can do.
Abstinence advocacy groups say a new (Link):study criticizing virginity pledges misses the point of abstinence education.
The study, “Broken Promises: Abstinence Pledging and Sexual and Reproductive Health,” published on the website of the Journal for Marriage and Family, reports that the vast majority of virginity pledgers break their promise to save sex for marriage.