Are Christian men too wimpy? (Thanks to the reader who sent this to me):
At the end of the article, there is discussion about men liking pornography--and how they "may simmer in shame indefinitely, rather than ask for help to stop." It seems like a double bind here, first, the men are considered too wimpy and yet, they are also supposed to ask for help for looking at pornography. Huh?
Three hundred men — all Christian — gathered behind closed doors at a Tennessee mall trying to figure out the difference between being "nice" (which is not good) and being "good" (which is). They struggled in the dimly lit hall — after a Christian rock band handed it off to the comic in charge — to make sense of the message they were hearing from the stage: that church has been "feminized" and that the Jesus talked about in many modern churches is too wimpy and gentle.
At the end of the article, there is discussion about men liking pornography--and how they "may simmer in shame indefinitely, rather than ask for help to stop." It seems like a double bind here, first, the men are considered too wimpy and yet, they are also supposed to ask for help for looking at pornography. Huh?
posted by Helen at 5:40 AM
65 Comments:
Strange. I am not a churchgoer, but something positive I've noticed about evangelicals is their emphasis on the importance of men as men. Raiding the chapel late at night in Iraq, I was surprised how much literature there was on the subject, on the duties and pleasures of being a man. It was quite refreshing and encouraging to note.
Whadyamean? Do you mean--you don't understand why looking at pornography might be a problem in the eyes of the Christian churches or you don't think that the men who have a problem should ask for help?
I'm confused.
I don't think it should be hard to understand why Christians would think viewing pornography is a sin. I mean, I personally don't have a problem with pornography. I like it quite a lot and I'm a woman. But I think it's a fairly standard sense among many religions that you shouldn't be lusting after other folks. You can't help seeing a beautiful woman on the street but you can at least try to control your lust and going out purposely to look at porn would obviously be a problem. This hardly makes their men wimpy.
This ABC article has all sorts of gems. It says that nice is not good but good is good. Men need to be men and Jesus was too wimpy and nonconfrontational. But one paragraph caught my eye:
"The fact is," he told the gathering, "a meek and mild Jesus eventually is a bore. He doesn't inspire us." The same applies, he argued, to a meek and mild man. "Those men end up divorced," Coughlin said. "Their wives find them boring. They have no — I call it the 'jalapeno factor' — in them. There's no inner heat that causes them to actively, assertively go out and do what needs to be done as a man."
All right folks, aside from encouraging American men to have the 'jalapeno factor'(that sounds kind of scary), I would like someone to tell me in a few sentences what men need to do to go out and do what needs to be done as a man. All insights welcome.
Anonymous 8:07:
I understand that Christians may find pornography a problem. But it seems to me that if the point of these God Men is to say that the church is too feminized and Christian men are too wimpy, it seems a bit odd to then turn around and say that men should not be doing the very thing that most non--wimpy men do, look at pornography. And the other solutions, to work at a soup kitchen and memorize scripture are certainly all well and good, but again, how is this addressing how not to be a wimp? Perhaps I am missing the purpose of this group.
Helen -
They are looking to the Religion Of Peace™ and seeing how they get stuff done.
And let's face it, people take a table-upending Jesus way more seriously than they take a peacenik one.
Perhaps this group of men does not consider that looking at pornography is a non-wimpiness indicator. Perhaps looking at pictures of women IS wimpy. I would think that loving a real woman is less wimpy than fantasizing over pictures. Maybe we hang in different circles, Helen, but I know plenty of non-wimpy men who don't pay attention to porn.
Not being a wimpy could mean taking real action, and for Christians, feeding the hungry and learning about the Bible is action.
Now I'll go read the article and see if I'm even close.
And let's face it, people take a table-upending Jesus way more seriously than they take a peacenik one.
Which, ironically, is precisely the problem. People assume "might makes right" and "inaction means wimpiness" when one of Jesus' primary messages was that the meek shall inherit the earth, and that the last shall be first. Righteous anger may be necessary in certain situations, but it shouldn't be the norm and certainly shouldn't be the goal.
There is a book called, "No More Christian Nice Guys" which goes into the subject in detail.
Unfortunately, the author was raised by a pathologically abusive mother--you'd have to read the book to believe how bad she was and then you might not believe it--and a father who couldn't control the situation.
But the author blames wimpiness on the wrong view of Jesus--instead of Jesus being confrontational, forceful, suggesting people buy swords, sarcastic sometimes--being taught in church. While I agree that some portraits of Jesus look more like Breck commercials, the fact is that I was never taught to be a wimp on account of that's what Jesus was. I was never taught that Jesus was a wimp.
Gutting out the Crucifixion and refusing an anodyne was not the act of a wimp.
I would prefer the subject of wimpiness be addressed without that baggage and somebody raised as the author of the book was raised ought to recuse himself as being too close to the subject.
And, yes, porn is for wimps who are afraid of loving women.
If I had to condense the Christian good guy, as opposed to Nice Guy, it would be righteous leadership despite resistance. That would apply to family, community, with friends who are failing, or with oneself. It does not include passivity, especially when the passive person advertises it as "nice" and thus Christian.
Problem is, while we all know wimps, we hardly know enough of them to consider it other than a personal problem.
I think the issue that we (Christian men) have with porno is that it is a sin, and that engaging in a sinful behavior is a symptom of a lack of self control. Self control is not wimpy! Neither is self discipline.
In terms of being too wimpy, I think that is a problem for some of us that are too worried about fitting in and not worried enough about living a bold, loving life.
The boldness is in stating the truth of our lives and our faith in love. Recently, it involved a general saying that he thinks homosexuality is immoral and then NOT backing down from his belief. Contrast this with Hillary's inital statement of "protest" that was no stand at all.
I was not there at the meeting, but I wish I had been. Maybe the whole thing comes down to how to stand for your beliefs, state the truth, and not be an asshole.
Trey
Helen, looking at porn does not make one a "strong" or "real" (i.e. non-wimpy) man. Looking at porn and masturbating is easy; controlling one's lust is difficult. Consider alcoholism: you'd consider a man's going to AA a sign of strength. He has a problem with which he needs help, and he's working to fix the problem. Pornography is a little more insidious of a "problem"; it leads to masturbation and excess Kleenex usage, big deal. Except it is a big deal. What's glossed over is the opportunity cost of the time spent that could instead be spent on other people. Because Christianity focuses on the other guy, see.
In fact, the best anti-marijuana message I ever heard runs along those lines: pot isn't really that bad for you. But you might like it too much, and wind up spending a lot of money and time that you could use to do other things that you might like more later.
I think the whole point of Judeo-Christianity was to channel all that excess male energy into more useful projects, like raising children, growing food, building bridges, defending the tribe etc.
I am a woman who could look at porn too, but the urge to look takes on a compulsive quality and I have known too many women who are stuck with guys who spend their free time on the Interent with their pot, their porn and their borderline pedophilia. It gets only worse, as the guys start demanding certain sex acts because they want to act out finally, and/or hooking up via the web.
It's just not what a man is supposed to be.
I think that part of asking for help with an embarassing problem means being a stand up guy who is real. Not trying to look good, but being authentic and transparent. And that is adult, if not particularly manly!
Trey
Meek is considered to be a doormat nowadays. What the KJV translators were talking about was self-control.
In other words--The Self-controlled will inherit the Earth.
And just because he's such a good example of it--Insty is one of the primary examples of self-control I'd think of in the political sphere. But few mistake that for weakness.
But yeah, I associate porn with weaklings. Its the choice for guys who a)Aren't strong enough to stick to their vows OR b) aren't cool enough to be able to get the hordes of women they desire to act out their fantasies.
Both the honorable man, and the playboy should look down on the porniac.
Tennwriter
I don't need any help looking at pornography. I'm pretty good at it, actually. Don't see what all the fuss is about.
I don't think "Gentle Jesus, Meek and Mild" is an accurate portrayal of the Saviour. Obviously, he wasn't Rambo. But he must have had enormous inner strength to defy the Roman and Jewish authorities and ultimately to suffer and die for his mission. He also must have had charisma - some sort of 'it factor' - that made people want to believe and follow him. His disciples, a number of whom were blue-collar types, certainly didn't think he was a wuss. Just because he offered up his flesh like a sacrificial lamb in the Old Testament, that doesn't mean he was personally lamb-like.
The business about not looking at naughty pictures is part of the larger practice of turning away from the World and turning toward God. Religions tend to go on about sex because it is our strongest instinct - and therefore the greatest distraction from the spiritual life. A sin isn't just some rule God or somebody made up to make your life less fun. It's anything that turns your mind and spirit away from God.
That's my theory, anyway...
The whole point oif Christianity has nothing to do with channeling anyone's energy into any earthly "more useful project". Jesus was pretty blunt, over and over, about how little family or any other earthly project mattered in the Kingdom of God.
The problem Christianity has with porn is that it lust in general objectifies the person you are lusting after.
What is feminizing is hyping sexual lust as s in above all other kinds of objectification. Chritianity doesn't denounce women who compare and rate men by income or accomplishments half as loudly.
P.S. - It's just theory because I don't claim to be a good Christian. I would not presume to give someone else advice about their religious practice. Not my area of expertise.
"It seems like a double bind here, first, the men are considered too wimpy and yet, they are also supposed to ask for help for looking at pornography."
Asking for help to overcome a sinful behavior that you have become mired in takes someone with real courage. So many Christians struggle with sinful desires/behaviors alone because they are afraid of asking for help. If these men are encouraging each other to not be wimpy, and to not worry what other people think of them, that would free them to ask for help.
Pornography addiction is a serious problem, not only from a Christian perspective. It leads to all types of sexual dysfunction, not to mention the damage to relationships and the self-esteem of the man's partner.
That stuff is pretty common knowledge.
Yeah, Helen. I think the problem is you're relying on some really silly comic-book definition of a "strong" or "non-wimpy" man.
I mean,
looking at porn = strong, non-wimpy
and
not looking at porn = wimpy?
Or
working at a soup kitchen = wimpy
and
don't need no stinkin' soup kitchen = strong, non-wimpy
Really?
As someone who enjoys advocating for men, don't you think are many ways for men to be strong and powerful? Or do you really have a "boys don't cry" perspective?
Anonymous 1:50:
The gist of the God Men, from what I understood of the article, was to say that the church is too "wimpy and feminized," yet the examples of their solutions to "fix" that "problem" are exactly what women would want them to do--work at a soup kitchen and refrain from looking at porn. So what is the point of the group? Women for the most part, I dare say, would agree with them. What beef do they have that the church is "too feminine" since the very solutions they advocate are the very ones that a "feminized church" would advocate. I don't see the purpose of the group unless it is just to get men together.
I would recommend Paul Coughlin's "No More Christian Nice Guys", as long as you ignore the unfortunately substantial and continuing references to the incorrect characterizations of Jesus' character as the major cause of wimpiness.
His other insights are sometimes interesting.
Still, as I say, wimpiness may be a problem for a guy and his wife if he has one, but I don't see enough of them around to see it as a general problem.
I'm having trouble with the idea that soup kitchens are women's work, Helen. I grew up in a church where men ran the pancake breakfasts and soup suppers. Looking around, this time of year, I see men running the Lenten fish fries all over town.
I read the article, and my sense was that men were being asked to take an active part in the church, whether it is Bible study or the soup kitchen--or something entirely different, as long as they are increasing their involvement in church. I didn't feel that those were the only opportunities that men were welcome in. As for the porn, perhaps that was just the most colorful part worth writing about. I wonder if other addictions were mentioned at the same time.
Helen:
I still think you're taking a myopic view. Women aren't just wimpy, ball-less men. And "wimpy" men aren't women with inexplicable gonads.
They are talking about pornography because (and this is said pretty much flat out in the article) that this is an area where men in particular struggle. (And I mean, Christian men, because obviously it's not a "sin" for others.)
As for the soup kitchen idea, I don't know why you think this would be an activity that would appeal to women. Unless you have some ridiculous noion of
women = liberals = soup kitchens.
Finally, I think the article was pretty clear that these were tangential matters and that the heart of the group is about Christian men taking strong positions, not being passive about their beliefs or about injustice, etc.
Hmmm.
What an absurd bit of tripe.
What's next? The Christian Men Tarzan Bonanza? Find your true Christian male self by wearing leopard skin bikini briefs whilst doing the Tarzan yell?
I must say that this whole uncertainty about the central tenets of their faith is frankly silly.
"The problem Christianity has with porn is that it lust in general objectifies the person you are lusting after."
That sounds like a more recent therapeutic twist on the sin of lust. Where did the apostles talk about "objectifying" people? Granted, my church signed on to that term. Anything to rationalize discouraging modern people from an ancient sin.
the 'jalapeno factor'
LOL
I view the wimpy church as the one that says God loves you no matter what. Hell is just written off. (As far from Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God as possible) It's the church that says, hey, whatever you wanna do, do it. Jesus will be here in the morning. Love. Peace. Joy. No demands, no sacrifice. Maybe send $50 to some poor people in Africa, but nothing really difficult. Maybe it's just my experience with the Catholic church, but I don't think they're alone.
Anyone Eastern Orthodox? I've heard they're less effeminate.
Non-wimpy men look at pornography? Hmm.... I've always had the idea that the guys that frequent strip-clubs and are buried in porn have problems in relationships with real women and people in general. That doesn't make them non-wimpy to me. That makes them kinda pathetic.
I'm a regular church-goer. Most of the men are not of the wimpy variety. In fact, none of them are of the wimpy variety. The local yoga studio on the other hand.....
Not that I'm against yoga.
i always thought god didnt do too bad a job of creating women, he must have made them to be looked at, or he wouldnt have made them look sexy.
he would have made everyone asexual or hermaphroditic, or like the amoeba, god must have made men and women to look at, its obvious. if god didnt want us to look at women, then he shouldnt have made them look so good.
Looking at pretty women is to porn as aspirin is to injecting speedballs.
Hey Helen, I am not on their mailing list, but they are very close to me. I will check out a meeting and get back to you.
My initial take is that this is part of the men's movement of the 80s and 90s in a religious context. So the idea would be to get the men together, and that they will contribute more to thier family and society as a result. At least I think that is the idea.
More to follow.
Trey
Good for them. As long as they realize that their opinions stop at my body, life, and property all that is great.
I don't see much wrong with softcore porn. Mostly just women with good bodies, not too different from modeling. Hardcore may be different, as it can involve women with substance abuse problems, histories of abuse, other coercion, etc.
I don't see the problem a lot of women have with softcore porn. I think it may be rooted in jealousy and insecurity. Then you have many of them complain about how often men want sex at the same time they're complaining about porn. Maybe they'd be better of with a hamster rather than a relationship. Or a guy that will be a doormat enough to let them run and control him.
While porn is associated with wimpiness, it is not the whole story, nor even the most important part--generally.
Society, as well as families, need people who will take care of business. Wimps cultivate an air of "niceness" as an excuse for bailing. Don't want to offend people. Martial arts are too mean. Confrontation never solves anything. Not exactly true, but non-confrontation is an even worse problem-solving technique.
They don't help the wives with disciplining children, and it takes a man to raise a boy.
And they don't impress their wives.
Porn is only part of this.
My only problem with the wimpiness issue is the assertion that it stems from erroneous teachings about Christ's character. That doesn't help us with wimps from other traditions.
Problem is, what does lead to wimpiness and what can be done to reduce the influence.
And is anybody going to defend wimpiness.
Just for fun, read Crabb's "Men, Women; Enjoying the Difference". It will make your teeth hurt. But it will be educational to deal with his points rationally. Tearing the book to shreds and jumping up and down on the scraps while screaming profanities--which often passes for scholarship in some fields--doesn't count. Deal with his points using facts and logic.
See if you can. If you can, you're pretty well educated.
Yes, well, to all of those commenting: do PLEASE get back to me on the whole porn issue just as soon as you've taken a demonstrably acceptable public stance condemning croutine and ritual male genital mutilation, AKA 'circumcision'.
[crickets chirping]
Yeah. . .that's about what I figured.
And looking at you in particular, Richard Aubrey.
To me, the group is a complete oxymoron. You feel the your faith is making you wimpy so you attend a "seminar" where your to talk about your feelings, told you just aren't exciting enough and encouraged to take up assignments that in no way demonstrate strength, independence or fortitude. The guy running this is a comic, are we sure it isn't a sick joke?
As far as the pornography, I'm sure everyone who remembers what happened wimp in chief, Jimmy Carter, confessed to "lust in his heart" just aches to announce that in the sanctuary. Was anyone ever considered more of a girlie man? So now I guess you suppose to 'talk" about it. The 'jalapeno factor' comes from acknowledging your weaknesses but standing on their honor and keeping their vows.
As far as I can tell there are several problems with this movement and its corresponding viewpoints.
- there appears to be a strong connection to the now common concept that ALL marriage problems stem from the husband and that due to this, all marriage problems are solved by blaming and shaming the husband.
- there is a FAR too strong dialog about male responsibility to all and no dialog at all about female / world responsibility to males.
- IF I have a duty to protect my wife in the areas in which she is weak THEN she has a duty to protect me in the areas in which I am weak: These men reject the second part of this concept.
I must reject hard-right Christianity every bit as much as I reject hard-left Christianity and for EXACTLY the same reason ... the size and scope of the misandry within the two movements.
acksiom.
Get back to me when you have spent a couple of hours concentrating on the concept of non sequitur.
Has anyone considered the possibility that porn is simply better than women?
Porn won't divorce you and take all your stuff. It won't turn your children against you. It won't file false sexual harassment or rape claims against you.
What's the downside again?
acksiom -
if the present medical consensus bears out under scrutiny, male circumcision might become more common, not less. Seems that it decreases the spread of AIDS. Of course, the same radical Christians that are against the HPV vaccine will suddenly stop circumcising their sons to give them another reason to not have sex.
A thoughtful anon wrote: "Good for them. As long as they realize that their opinions stop at my body, life, and property all that is great."
Opinions stop at your body? That is a very curious phrase. Are you talking about making porn illegal? Everything I saw on their website was about self-control, not a word about political activism.
Trey
Hey Brian, porn better than women? Really?
Porn never took care of me when I was sick, never made me muffins, never gave me a wonderful child to raise, never touched me, never rocked my world sexually, never made me grow as a person, never made me thank God.
I could go on, but you get the idea.
Trey
ref trey vs. brian:
Presuming Brian is being serious, I mean.
That's a difference between wimps and real men. Real men take risks. Real risks entail a real possibility of loss. But real men think the goal is worth the possibility. Wimps are more afraid of the possible loss and never strive for the goal, which is infinitely better than living a life without risk.
"risk" recently has become denatured. One is encouraged to take risks without possible loss. So it's not a risk. It's an amusement park ride.
So, without judging porn as moral or immoral, one can say it distinguishes one type of man from another.
Having said all of the above, porn is a minor issue in wimpiness.
As an active member of the men's movement, let me share this thought with you:
There are a lot of folks out there trying to define "manliness," but I think that the reality of the defnintion has more to do with one's brain-wiring than anything else. If you're a male and you feel like painting peach-colored roses on teacups, then do, do it well, and be proud of it. If, on the other hand, you enjoy fast cars, pretty and scantily-clad women, and hunting, then seek those things and seek them well. And be proud of them. Don't look for someone else to define manliness for you. You'll find the definition probably doesn't fit you well.
But in practice, there are definite differences in men and women, and when each acts true to themselves, the differences become obvious.
Let them be as they are. Respect them. Exploit them. 'Cause in the end, they are synergistic.
richard -
As an engineer, I am trained to mitigate risk. There is acceptable risk, and there is unacceptable risk.
I rate women higher risk than I do riding a motorcycle without a helmet.
If I wreck the bike, I'm only dead. If I pick the wrong woman (and there's really no way to know) I'm far worse off. I've seen far too many friends destroyed by women that they were certain were "the one". I learn from other people's mistakes.
Oligonicella said...
Pornography, on the other hand, is constructed just for that purpose and you're not impinging on anyone.
Well you're putting your dollars toward an industry that encourages young women in financial need to pretty much sell their bodies rather than make an honorable living.
No harm there, of course.
Actually, I think controlling your lust would mean not drooling over the beautiful woman on the street and fantasizing on her as you leer.
While this is not exactly respectable behavior, it's clearly not as harmful as the above.
What most Christian men don't understand is that the sin in pornography lies much more in the harm you do to the women than you do to yourself. After all, by every dollar you spend, you are just encouraging more women to enter the industry.
richard aubrey-
There is nothing "weak" about porn. If you feel porn is wrong and are therfore "weak" if you look at it that is your opinion.
tmink-
Opinions stop at your body? That is a very curious phrase. Are you talking about making porn illegal? Everything I saw on their website was about self-control, not a word about political activism.
Just a general statement that your opinions end where my body, life, and property begin. Kind of like "your right to wave your arms around ends at my nose".
With some people, especially the very religious, this line appears to be blurred. They seem to think they have some kind of justification to commit crimes and torts against people that engage in legal behavior they don't agree with - like consensual sex outside marriage, drinking, viewing porn, etc. They are wrong. When you commit crimes and torts on the basis of your religious opinion it is just as illegal and tortious as any other crime or tort.
So: Your opinions, including your religious opinions, end at any part of my body, life, or property.
jayjay-
Well you're putting your dollars toward an industry that encourages young women in financial need to pretty much sell their bodies rather than make an honorable living.
It depends on the degree, that's why I distinguished between softcore and hardcore. Women who pose in Playboy, for example, still go on to careers in modeling, acting, other fields, etc. Therefore it's not much different from regular modeling. Other porn is different.
Acts are either honourable or dishonourable, moral or immoral.
Whether they are masculine or feminine strikes me as being irrelevent from a moral point of view.
BTW - Am I the only person who thinks that the name GodMen sounds utterly ridiculous?
I have some traffic issues to cope with kids.
Wretched stuff. Barely legal.
Sigh...
Should I wear briefs or boxer-briefs, you think? The magistrate is male & I'm only 34 & my age exceeds my waist 34 to 30.
He must be gay. Dark side of the Force thing.
I'm just practical.
Like the lady said:
"I used to enjoy sex."
Fire for effect.
"When you commit crimes and torts on the basis of your religious opinion it is just as illegal and tortious as any other crime or tort."
Agreed. But where are you getting the crimes from? Nobody was talking about bombing abortion clinics. That is indeed a crime and a reprehensible act of terrorism at that.
But I failed to read any mention of other people's behavior on the website. It was about SELF control. Maybe you are just a little nervous around religious people.
Trey
Women who pose in Playboy, for example, still go on to careers in modeling, acting, other fields, etc. Therefore it's not much different from regular modeling. Other porn is different.
Of course, I hardly think the men in question are struggling over an addiction to playboy magazine. :)
But even with Playboy, you're still helping fund Hugh Hefner's harem. Worthy cause, that one.
tmink-
But I failed to read any mention of other people's behavior on the website. It was about SELF control.
I realize that. I was referring to other groups.
Maybe you are just a little nervous around religious people.
Well like I said, some don't realize they have no business forcing their beliefs on others. Those that focus on improving themselves and non-coercive good works are commendable.
I have not read the artice and I'm only going by this post and threat here. Many men, Christian and non-Christian, have issues with pornography. If anyone has ever attended a big men's church fellowship seminar, you will know what I'm talking about. Many Christian men will step forward asking for prayer because they are addicted to pornography on some level. Them stepping forward is not wimpy but simply a realization that they want to conduct their lives according to their deeper convictions and not as the men who don't possess those same Christian convictions. I would say it takes a pretty strong man to want to look deeper within and figure out a more constructive way to live. Just my opinion!
I am with brian on this one.
First, circumcision is medically safer than non-circumcision, and is better if done before you are active and remember anything. It lowers your risk of AIDS and minimizes other problems you might have later. I have known a few guys that needed circumcision for medical reasons later in life (post 3 years old) and it was extremely traumatic for them. Better to do it early and avoid the pain and risk. Low risk. Low pain. What is the problem?
No one complains when we remove our wisdom teeth. Men need the foreskin about as much as we need wisdom teeth.
I was shocked when I went to the first-child classes at the hospital how circumcision had turned into a part of the culture war. What is even stupider was that all the women were against it and the men for it. What the F would women know about it? The best stupid argument against was "It makes you less sensitive". Yeah, because we know every guy would like to be more sensitive and cum quicker. Really, that is just a women projecting her issues onto a male topic. Lasting too long really isn't a problem men have.
Female "circumcision" is so different that it really shouldn't even be called circumcision. ou are just taking 2 unrelated issues and mashing them together
I'd also like to agree with brian that porn in many ways is safer than an actual women.
I am married but I still view women as unsafe. I wonder if it is a generational thing. My generation, GenX, got told all the time from a early age that all men where abusers and rapist, and that "they" were going to get us, usually financially (it was a social justice thing). That 110% of the responsibility in the relationship fell on our head.
I admit I don't even know how to approach a woman at work without being afraid of sexual harassment claim. I had a boss that got a sexual harassment complaint filed against him for admonishing a female worker for talking on the phone (I kid you not. The complaint was dismissed because 3 of us witnessed the incident and took his side. Really all he wanted her to do was some work instead of socializing.) Also, every time I had sex prior to marriage, you wondered if this was the time she wakes-up and files a rape charge (in which her name is protected and yours isn't) or if this was going to result in a child support claim (you can never trust her to have really taken birth control, and a condom can always break; we desperately need better male birth control). Even without the rejection and ego issues, every date was a high risk situation.
Is it any wonder that some of us have decided not to play the game.
I was stunned when I got out of college and of the 6 of the new guys at my job, 3 of them had basically given up on dating. The other 2 of us were just too horny to stop dating (and the 6th guy was gay ... Muslim and gay, BTW). Those 3 guys just decided that dating wasn't a game they could win and stopped playing it.
What puts it in perspective for me is viewing it from the position of being a dad. I have two beautiful daughters I love very much. I can't even imagine either of them posing as underwear models in a J.C. Penney catalog, much less anything else.
A man and a woman committed to each other, truly in love (an unpopular prospect in this day and age) have at it with reckless abandon. If a healthy relationship, both partners can, and hopefully do, blast off into orbit. There have been times I banged my head against the moon. To me, that's what sex is for, besides pro-creation. Shared. Humans are the only ones who seem to indulge in sport sex.
I have read many articles, a couple books, and more posts and comments than I can remember on variations of this subject. I have also made a few comments.
All I really know is something is radically wrong, and not getting any better - or clearer. Men and women are in trouble with one another. Such a shame. It is my view we Americans have the largest problem with it all.
I have been through some crap, and have realized one thing. Life is way too short - and fragile. If it is easier and more enjoyable to be alone (not lonely, mind you) then that is how I will stay. I have friends and acquaintances of both sexes, and three great kids. Copulation is not that important at my age. But I admit I do miss it. Even though the female form can take my breath away, I view delving into porn as twisted thinking. Any consuming lust for that matter.
God made us to enjoy relationship, something that porn does not qualify as...it is false intimacy and that is one reason why it is sin. Not to mention, the lust factor (Jesus said if you lust after a woman that you are guilty of comitting adultry.) Also, I don't think they were saying Jesus was a wimp, but instead that the Christian Church as a whole has lost some of the perspective of what masculine means. Jesus was very masculine. Sin is not. If you are struggling with sin, and can't seem to stop on your own, it is your responsibility to ask for help, regardless of your fear of rejection, shame, or pride. (which some may consider "wimpy") AKA get a spine.
Dr. Helen, I don't know if you monitor comments this old (3 days in Internet Time is like an Eternity on Earth) but you asked a question which was not covered by the article in question. Why do they refer to the Church as becoming more feminine?
I recommend this book:
Wild at Heart
This is an excellent book about masculinity in general, and masculinity within the Christian church specifically. So, honestly, the answer to your question is longer than a simple comment on a blog can contain :P However, if you are truly curious, it's a very fast read. I highly recommend it. (Also, you'll note on that page another book that I have not read but heard good things about, Captivating.)
Just thought I'd mention it.
I think the less-than-masculine aspect of this is only in part the porn angle and in part the sort-of "group hug" to help conquer his addiction thereto.
In other words, wouldn't our paragon of masculinity decide for himself about porn (informed by his religion, to be sure) and then, having made up his mind, act accordingly?
Isn't it the culture of victimhood which seems so effeminate?
Yeah, Blake. That and passivity.
In the grand scheme of things, sometimes things have to be done. People who won't do them are no earthly use.
Sometimes that's diapering babies and sometimes that's duking it out with a tiger and sometimes that's facing up to fear of rejection and approaching the boss for a raise or a woman for a marriage.
One would think that evolution would select for decisiveness and a modicum of courage.
Dunno what happened.
Oscar had it right: "I can resist anything except temptation."
Porn false intimacy?
OK.
However, one must consider that sometimes it is the only thing you can get.
We really need to be more accepting of our biology.
m. simon,
So when you get the real thing, are you willing to put the magazine down? Or are you sneaking online when she's in the bedroom slipping into something more comfortable?
I am the reader that suggested this article. Thanks for turning it into a post!
I do read that some people have posted comments about what Jesus has said, I of coarse am not going to read this whole article as it would take much time. In light of that I would like to post my comment about what I think on this subject. Jesus did state that if you look at a women with lust in your heart then you commit adultery. Hold on. That is BOLD. Jesus also says that someone cheating on another is grounds for legal devorce... Jesus also goes on to say about our eyes and what we look at and see that if we look at good things then we will be filled with light or bad things we will be filled with darkness. Note that in scripture in some instances light is symbolic of good knowledge. An apostle also said we should think on those things that are good, and holy, hmm... Well I know why I look at porn and that is because I don't get enough sex with my wife. Christ came to give me life and life more abundantly and GOd said that if I ask in Jesus' name God with give me more than I could hopeful or dream well it aint happening so it is the devil who is trying to limit me and would me looking at porn filling my self with lusty darkness help? No that would give the devil more of a foot hold in my life... So I need to keep praying to God until I get a break through and telling God what I need when I pray becuase If I ask for bread God wouldn't give me a scorpion...
aa免費看aa免費看aa免費看aaaaa片俱樂部影片aaaaa片俱樂部影片景城影像景城影像光華商場光華商場光華商場85cc免費影城85cc免費影城85cc免費影城85cc免費影片85cc免費影片85cc免費影片85cc免費影片觀看85cc免費影片觀看85cc免費影片觀看85cc免費影城85cc85cc免費影城85cc85cc免費影城85cc
Post a Comment
<< Home