What about marital sex?

There is so much written about fundamentalists and premarital sex, purity and so on. There is also much about purity within marriage in the sense of “don’t read romance novels”, “be available” and so on. And recently I started to wonder… what about actual sex in marriage? What about that??

Now, I’ll admit that I have not been married to know about sex in fundamentalist marriages first hand. I was also not sat down by my parents to have “that talk” about what’s ok in bed once you’re married. I figured I would put together a little series of posts in which I want to look at some debated things in the conservative Christian marriage beds. Not to lecture you, but to ask you to think with me about some things. I hope, if you are not shy about it, you can share some ideas/input/experiences with effects of fundamentalist teachings on married sex/whatever comes to your mind!

My first interest in this issue was raised by “Meet Mr. Smith”. This is a Ludy book that I actually bought after I moved here. Don’t ask me why, I don’t know why it stuck out to me.

Now there is this one little note that got my attention. There’s a question and answer section, and one question was whether oral sex before marriage was ok. Of course it is not, but let me quote what they say about oral sex in general:

You will not find oral sex among the beautiful expressions of physical intimacy in God’s perfect pattern, as outlined in the Song of Solomon. So if you are wondering if oral sex even after marriage is appropriate, let that be your guide! We can never improve upon the way God designed a man and woman to express their love – our own methods will only warp and degrade it. (p. 184)

What the Ludys do here is basically formulating an overly lengthy euphemism for “no”. So, let’s get past that awkward moment of pity for both of the Ludys (cough) and into some serious questioning that passage.

First off, I call wrong theology on this one. Actually, I call a lack of proper reading skills. Song of Solomon 2:3: I delight to sit in his shade, and his fruit is sweet to my taste. I know there are more hints in it, but I do think this very clear example settles my case. Let’s be honest here: What else could the fruit possibly be? His tongue? Maybe. But considering the overall metaphorical language of the book, I highly doubt a relatively harmless formulation would find its way in.

Now besides oral sex being mentioned in the SoS, there’s another problem: They refer to it as “our own methods” which “warp and degrade” sex. And that is exactly where my train of thoughts comes in.

I figure that kissing is beautiful and God-intended (otherwise, what’s the fuzz about that first kiss?). You kiss people you love. Have you ever had a child? If yes, have you kissed the tiny little feet? The precious little fingers? Their noses when they sleep? Yes? Do you have a wife or a husband? Have you ever kissed him or her on the forehead? On the neck? Kissed his or her fingers, or even her breasts? Yes? I suppose none of that is sinful. So… where in the bible do I find that ominous passage which areas of a loved person’s body I may kiss, and which one are off-limits? Is there such a thing as a nono-area?

You might argue that kisses from love are different from kisses which cause lust (which is essentially what oral sex does). But then would French kisses in marriage which cause lust not be sinful? Kisses on the neck as foreplay? And again, you could possibly argue that oral sex is not just “kissing” but involves more “action”, well, do French kisses still not count?

Either way, the point I’m getting at is that I have a feeling which tells me that there is an imaginary red area on our bodies, and that is our genitals. Everything within that area counts as sinful if it is kissed. And here’s where the “warped” part comes in: Are you seriously, seriously and with a straight face, going to tell me that this pattern of a “red area” is not a warped view of sexuality? Do you want to make me believe that God designed us with non-kissable areas on our bodies?

On a side note: Oral sex is probably cleaner than touching an elevator button. Especially if you just showered. So don’t even try.

Just for the giggles: When I spell checked my post, I realized I had called the book “Meet Mr Sith”. Freudian slip? Maybe. But definitely worthy of a cookie for all the Star Wars fans among you!

Relationships after the purity cult

There are so many thoughts on the damage of the purity culture out there that I decided to evaluate some of my behaviour.

I think one of the major problems with purity culture is not necessarily that it suppressed sexual feelings in general but rather how these sexual feelings are ignored, and how that leads to devastating results.

Feeling sexual attraction toward someone is actually pretty bad in the purity culture. Of course they’d never admit that – they don’t tire of stressing how important physical attraction is, but what they actually mean by that is not necessarily sexual desire but beauty. Men are encouraged to look for someone they find beautiful. Women are encouraged to make sure their match is handsome, physically and characterwise. And that is exactly the problem. Beautiful and sexually attractive are not synonyms.

I don’t know about you, but there’s plenty of people I find beautiful, but not all of them are sexually attractive to me. And it works the other way around too; people whom I find sexually attractive aren’t necessarily beautiful to me.

Hence, while it may work out for some, marrying someone whom you deem beautiful does not tell you whether you will find him/her sexually attractive in the long run. As a matter of fact, I feel that sexual attractiveness is something that is systematically labelled a ‘bad thing’ in courtships.

As both men and women are encouraged to flee from sexual immorality, they actually flee from those people whom they find sexually attractive. A woman will do her best to kill all her desires for a man they sexually desire and end up rejecting them on a regular basis. This goes as far as interpreting advances by those men as attempts of the devil to succumb to sexual immorality. Likewise, a man will try to keep his ‘lust’ out of the picture, systemically avoiding women who cause him to lust – which is nothing more than a clear sign of sexual attractiveness. Instead they will seek for a woman whom they might find beautiful, but who also draws them closer to Jesus – a popular euphemism to avoid those women who are actually sexually attractive to them.

Of course, a sexual desire may be present in all of these people initially, considering that those are their first chances to gain sexual experience, the feeling of new and unknown, of absolute intimacy and, not to forget, the promise that everything will work out heavenly because they waited and fled from all sorts of sexual immorality. But initial attraction needn’t always last for years to come. When, after a few months of marriage, this promise of perfect sex is not fulfilled and the spouse loses the initial sexual attractiveness of the opposite gender in general, they may end up hitting rock bottom with the realisation that while their partner is beautiful, he or she could not keep the promise of ultimate sexual attraction.

Back to myself – I do not think that I would have ended up with a man like my boyfriend if I still followed the purity culture. He causes me to do things which are generally only permissible if you are a man. Fantasies, undressing him in my thoughts, looking at him and not seeing the (obvious) beauty of his face, his eyes, his expression, but instead lusting for whatever lingers a few inches lower, which is a body which many people might not consider objectively “beautiful” but rather as an average man. A body which I would not have permitted myself to find beautiful because it is tightly packed with tattoos. No, he might not have that objective perfect beauty of a six-pack and a flawless body, but neither have I and that’s something I can totally live with. Because I know that this person is extremely sexually attractive to me, and so am I for him despite my obvious flaws of a small chest and a body so skinny you might just mistake it for a boy’s. And fyi, I don’t even feel bad about it because I know that when he looks at me, he doesn’t see those flaws, neither does he think “well she has a beautiful face” like a good courtship boy should. No, I know that he lusts, and to be quite honest with you, I like it. I like seeing in his eyes that he can look at me and lust despite what I consider imperfect. I learned to appreciate the difference between being told “You’re beautiful” and “You’re hot”.

That doesn’t mean that you always feel this way, and it is by no means a guarantee that it will always stay this way. Of course I can still see all the other great things about him, and likewise he can see whatever makes me special to him. But I feel a good deal safer knowing that I am not with someone who has to kill all sexual desires for me in order to even deal with my presence.

I guess that the moral of this story is that if you put a ‘sin’ label on sexual attractiveness, don’t be surprised if you end up with a spouse you do not desire. I feel a lot of anger towards those in the purity movement who withhold this information from young couples, setting them up for a lifetime of self blaming and guilt.

It’s time for us to be Hobbits

One Ring to rule them all, One Ring to find them,
One Ring to bring them all and in the darkness bind them.

Once upon a time there were two little hobbit girls, a blonde and a red-haired one, living next door. Their land was beautiful and every day was filled with joy.

Then, one day, their hobbit parents met evil Lord G, who gave them the order to give each girl The Ring. The parents did as told. They said to the girls: “You must guard this Ring with all your being. This will give you power. This will make you special. Without it, you are nothing.” And, despite the fact that the girls didn’t really know what the fuzz was about, they accepted the Rings and proudly wore them.

They grew older together, and their friendship was still strong. And finally, one day, a handsome young man hobbit asked for the blonde hobbit girl’s hand in marriage, and for her Ring. At first the hobbit girls were excited, but it didn’t last long.

As they sat together, one day at the lake, the blonde hobbit girl expressed her grief to her friend: “I do not want to give this Ring away. It makes me strong and powerful. It makes me special. It makes me …. better than everybody else.” The red-haired hobbit girl was shocked. What was her friend saying?

You see, the blonde hobbit girl was blinded by the power the Ring gave her. She enjoyed walking around with it, people staring at her hand, people telling her how strong she was for taking the burden to wear that Ring. The red-haired hobbit girl felt the burden constantly. She did not like that people stared at her Ring, knew what it implied. She liked what it stood for, but she could not understand why she would need a Ring to be the person she wanted to be.

The closer the wedding day came, the worse the blonde hobbit girl acted. She was angry and mean, and she started to despite her hobbit fiance, who would soon take her Ring away. “My precious” she started to hiss, “it’s mine. Nobody can take it from me!” Oh yes, the hobbit girl was acting real strange.

The red-haired hobbit girl realized that she did not want to be this way. She decided to run away at night to destroy her Ring, so she could be free again. Free to do what felt right, without needing a Ring to signify it. So she packed her bags and left.

Soon after leaving her family, she came into deserted land, burned soil and a raging war and, far away from a high mountain, a looming eye watching her each and every step. And she knew the eye would soon send troops after her, to bring her back, to make her keep the Ring.

“I need a sword”, she realized. Lucky enough, she found a group of Elfs who were willing to help her. And even though she was imitated by their beauty and strength, she decided to follow them. And she realized that hobbit girls who had gone before her probably had not had the Elfs to help them. Yes, she was very lucky to have found a new group of friends.

Their travels were long and exhausting. Through deserts and over mountains they travelled, until they finally reached the volcano were she could destroy her Ring. And as she stepped into it, the flames bursting next to her, she realized that this was it.

The second the dropped the Ring into the fire, she finally felt its spell lift off her. She finally felt free. And even though she knew she could never return home, she was eager to see the new life waiting for her.

The blonde hobbit, meanwhile, got married and never forgave her husband for stealing her Ring. From time to time, on those lonely evenings, she sits and stares at the Ring in her hand, angry at the world and herself for not being honorable enough anymore to wear it. “My precious”, she hisses then, “you will be worn again – soon.”

________________________________________

I think it’s time for all of us to be little red-haired hobbits. It’s not about abandoning values, it’s about abandoning structures used to rule over you, used to control you, used to make you feel bad. It’s not easy to just let go and give up things that are important to you in order to live a self-governed life.

If you are a young woman still struggling, I highly encourage you to reevaluate the tools used to keep you in control. If you already threw your ring into the fire, don’t tire of being an Elf – aka helping the other hobbits along the way.

Yes, I have a great passion for Lord of the Rings. Watch it! If you haven’t seen it yet, watch it asap! If you already have, watch it again asap!

Is Sex good or bad?!

I want to talk about a major problem I’ve always had ever since my parents put strong emphasis on the purity teachings – when I was old enough to understand that I had to “protect” my purity.

All of the purity teachings have a potential to make sex look really bad. It is something that will break your entire being, body, mind and soul. If you give it away, you will lose a large portion of everything you are to a person who eventually does not value it. Sex and everything around it becomes an enemy you have to fight.

Now, of course none of the P/QF folks, neither adults nor teens, have a supernatural power that allows them to block all their sexual desires at all times unless they’re appropriate. That’s because they’re just people (Who would’ve known?). As you probably already guesses, I had those desires too!

While you mostly dream of a faceless Prince Charming, a completely asexual one, as a young girl, these images change in your teens. Just like every other teen, I dreamed of kissing my Prince Charming and holding hands and getting flowers and so on. And further in my teens, I started wondering what it would feel like to get more kissing than just a peck on the lips. And even further, I started to wonder what having sex with him would be like. For certain periods, this Prince had the face of a boy I knew, other times he just looked like how I imagined a really attractive man (tall, dark, slightly curly hair, brown eyes…. I’m a walking stereotype!).

And all of this was a sin. I was mentally cheating on my future husband. I think it’s partially to stop young girls from these dreams that makes people teach negative things about sex. How it’s disgusting, humiliating and cheap.

And then, there were these two specific teachings which I could never manage to make sense of. Each individual teaching makes sense on its own, but combined they stop making sense to make.

First off, while sex outside of marriage is dirty, cheap, humiliating and dangerous, within the boundaries of marriage it’s sacred, beautiful, holy and good. God made sex, so it’s good. It’s the most beautiful thing about marriage. So far so good.

Second, a wife must understand that her husband’s need for sex is much larger than her own. Refusing him is a sin. If a woman does not enjoy it, she must overcome that and do it anyway. She must act like it’s fun to satisfy her husband. She is supposed to say yes whenever he asks because her body belongs to him. It’s a “fact” that women don’t crave sex as much and that it’s not as enjoyable for them as it’s simply not a part of their design. Men on the other hand see sex as the most important thing in a relationship, so since he’s your head, you’re to submit to him, support him and fulfill his desires.

So wait a minute, on one hand it’s awesome in marriage, on the other hand you still have to force yourself?

I love spaghetti and, no joke, I could it eat literally every single day. Twice! I do not like pork and if someone put it in front of me, I’d have a hard time swallowing each bite.

It’s either awesome, or it’s not. It can’t be both a blessing and a burden at the same time. I fully understand that you might not want sex every single day, but there’s a fundamental difference between something that’s enjoyable and something that is done out of obligation.

Until this day I do not know how to categorize “sex”. Good or bad? Fun or burden? Enjoyable or obligation? I always felt like these teachers were only trying to force people into abstinence first by telling them how terrible sex before marriage is and how awesome it is in marriage, but once the women get married, you have to make clear to them that this might not be true for everyone, but now it’s too late and you have to do it any way. If you’ve been taught to view sex as something terrible for your entire life, chances are you won’t enjoy it that much. This image will stay in your head for the rest of your life, if you’re unlucky.

The “in marriage it’s great” blabber just doesn’t cut it! People are supposed to suppress all off their sexual desires, to feel ashamed for having them in the first place, until they say “I do”, which is exactly the moment where the girls are supposed to throw their clothes away, put a hot strip-show on and act like sex-maniacs. And men are likewise supposed to be able to perform at any time of the day. Going from beating themselves up over looking at a pretty girl’s butt to lusting after their wife as much as they please. Can you give me a sexual dysfunction?

I really wish I’ll be able to figure this one out in this life, because I certainly don’t want to end up like one of those wives who deny themselves every form of joy because that’s how they’re supposed to act.

Onan the Barbarian and my version of “the talk”

Warning: Embarrassing, mature content ahead. I did it again – I abused a movie title, twisted it up and used it as the headline for my post. I learned how to do this in my Dad’s bible study. I have not seen Conan the Barbarian, but somehow I deemed this a suitable title for this post.

In my last post I talked about the extreme standard of purity me and many other girls in the different fundamentalist movements have to live up to (and usually fail, which causes deadly guilt in them).

Under the covers it looks quite a bit different. There’s a whole lot not-so-pure things going on.

Which, at this point, brings me to masturbation. I remember when I was a kid I was taught all about purity for ever since I can remember. But my parents missed the point a bit there: They never explained to me acts that would make me impure. So, while I strongly believed in purity, I just didn’t know that I could do impure things with myself. A kid of 10 years is too young to learn about these things, I guess, because once you get started talking about masturbation, you better expect the kid asking more questions about sex in every version of it.

So the point I’m getting at: Of course I did things my parents would sent me to the prayer closet for. And I didn’t even know that I wasn’t supposed to do it. I didn’t know of “masturbation” in the sense of it being a sexual practice and not ok, hence why I never really considered the actual act as that “wrong”. It took me a while to realize that I couldn’t do that, my parents would freak out about it. I must’ve been about 12 or 13 when I could sense what all of the fuzz was about, but I was yet somehow too silly to connect it with the fact that I was actually doing it myself occasionally. It didn’t occur to me, this connection. Can’t tell you why. I think I was like 14 when I finally made that connection and realized: “Oooops. That’s not supposed to happen!”. On I went, into the prayer closet, apologizing to God for the sodomy and stuff. But deep in my heart I couldn’t see the big deal. I didn’t see how it was adultery to my future husband – I didn’t think or fantasize about men at all!

However I want to point out that I didn’t know the “technical” side of it. I didn’t  know what an orgasm was (though I had had one at some point, I’m guessing) and I also didn’t know how sex between a man and a woman worked. My best friend and I had a talk about my upbringing in the area of sex and the idea that I didn’t come to some sort of conclusion how it physically works on my own was oblivious to her. First I thought I was a bit dumb for not realizing it on my own until I found out why I never connected male and female genitals to their actual purpose: I think as a girl, you need to know that a man can have an erection to connect this. I never knew about that. Can you imagine a woman  in her 20s and how she reacts upon finding out? “What?!?! How’s that working? That’s like… magic!”.

This and others I found out when my friend bought a book for me. It was a book on sex for teens and it was just the basic knowledge really. At first I acted like I didn’t need or want to read it but I crept into the kitchen, secretly, late at night, to get it and read it in bed. On almost every page I had a wow-moment. Not only did I learn about men for the first time in my life, I also learned about women.

I didn’t know about how pregnancies worked, or how the female body worked to begin with. I didn’t know that having your period actually had a physical function! I thought it was about being unclean and had something to do with growing up. I didn’t know the eggs business! I believed that a woman was just an incubator and that the babies were actually supplied only by the man! Part of this is due to the teaching that sin (and therefore the soul) is transferred to a child only by the father – which is why Mary didn’t give birth to a sinful, human child. She couldn’t because she was an incubator, like every other woman.

I was really shy about this topic, but my friend figured that me not knowing about it would make life in the real world harder for me. After all, I needed to know what I was getting into in case I wanted a relationship. And I guess she was right because the rate of unwanted pregnancies because people just don’T know how it works is pretty high.

A few months ago my roommate and best friend declared that she wanted to have “the talk” with me. She’d get some others to join in and explain to me what’s it all about. I was nervous, refused, yelled at her that she was stupid and embarrassing and I didn’t need her help at all. But deep inside I was excited to have this opportunity. She gave me a few days to make up my mind and while I felt like a stupid kid at first, I was so curious to find out so many new things. I decided that I wanted her to talk to me about it. So a few days later she asked me if I thought about her offer and I replied “I guess, if it makes you feel better…” with clear annoyance in my voice and excitement in my heart.

As I came home two days later, it was early evening and I had been at work, she was in the kitchen, cooking dinner with two male friends and another female friend of hers. I didn’t realize that it was the day of the talk. We ate together and afterwards had a glass of white wine. Finally, my roommate initiated a conversation about her experiences with love and sex. And then one of the guys went and everybody ended up discussing and exchanging. I thought the talk would be horribly embarrassing, but that actually felt natural and fun. I wasn’t demanded to ask questions or answer things. I could just sit and listen. They described a lot of different situations. Like how they reacted when their boyfriend wanted to have sex but they weren’t ready. How their first times went. What they felt about it in general, how important it was to them, what they find acceptable and so on. Especially interesting for me was when one of the guys talked about his experience with a one-night-stand (something I didn’t know but do now!). I expected him to be happy about it and show off, because we all know men are sex-obsessed monkeys, but the opposite was true. He felt it wasn’t for him, he had regrets about it because he felt he had disgraced himself and the girl and he feels like love is most important to have sex.

I was baffled. Everything I learned about sex and love was questioned that night. Could it be true that having sex before marriage doesn’t always break a person? That love sometimes doesn’t last a lifetime? That society doesn’t see sex as something cheap and easy but as sacred and special? That worldly men thought such a thing?

I still don’t know much on the subject, only what I have read and been told by my friends so far, but that didn’t make me go out and sleep around. I’m doubting that the abstinence only and purity movement is the only way to teach a responsible sexuality. But I’m really glad that finally, after over two decades of not knowing what this purity deal was even about I have at least a tiny idea of what’s going on between men and women.

In retrospective I have to say that I believe my wedding night would’ve been a traumatic event for me. So many things I didn’t know, I wasn’t taught about. How shocked would I have reacted, being thrown into that situation? Would it have messed up my view of sexuality? I’m pretty sure it would’ve had tough consequences for me and my entire life and I’m so glad I saved myself from something I couldn’t even grasp back when I ran away from it.

Do Amish girls have nice tits?

Yesterday I logged into my stats page here on WordPress to find that somebody used the following terms in the search and ended up on my site: do Amish girls have nice tits. I thought that was a strange thing to ask. Very strange. But since I don’t think that person found an answer on WordPress, I decided to answer this question.

Amish girls, just like every other girl on the planet (or women, for that matter), have a normal female body. And I’m guessing while some might not live up to the western standard of beauty (like some among the worldly ones), they all have one or the other nice body feature.

The fact that somebody asks this question proves to me that the Amish, or any fundamentalist christian group for that matter, have succeeded in hiding their daughters away from the world. But it proves another thing: While preaching modesty to a point where it comes out of your ears, they succeeded in making their daughters an objects of sexuality and sensuality, much more than worldly girls and women might be. Doesn’t it show that this person is terribly aware of the sexuality these girls and women still show about them, even through the many layers of dress? Modesty is supposed to hide the things that could cause a man to lust. However, exactly this way of dressing makes the women and men equally aware of sexuality in general, and the sexuality hidden by extreme modesty.

Fundamentalist girls and women are much quicker aware of any body part which could be considered sexually attractive. Long legs, a fit and attractive body shape, attractive breasts and so on. When I walk around outside, I still point out the features on a woman I see which she should be covering. And it doesn’t stop there. My mind keeps on making up stories what could happen just because a woman is showing her long legs. How a married man might see her, lust after her, go back home to his short-legged wife and be thinking about the other one when he is with his wife. That she is pretty much forcing him to commit adultery.

And likewise, boys and men within the movement have a sharp eye for looks and dress as well. An immodestly dressed woman is blamed for the lust these men feel. She is no better than any prostitute out on the streets: She is damaged goods even if she’s a virgin. You need to understand where this is coming from: If she causes men to lust, she is in their fantasies. They might have sex with her – in their imagination. But that’s no better than actually having sex with all the men. If you’d marry this immodest woman, you’d marry a woman whom many other men have seen naked, even if they didn’t actually see her naked. A woman who had sex with many other men, even if she’s a virgin. They like to argue that modest dress is to protect men, but in reality, it’s just to satisfy the movement’s men’s craving for the absolute, the perfect virgin in every aspect.

For a long time after leaving, I have considered keeping my modest dress up. The fact that I was taught to save everything for my husband, even the glimpse of skin, was rooted deeply in my whole being. It took me quite a while to realize that, by the movement’s standards, I’m already damaged goods. It didn’t matter that I always dressed hypermodestly. I held hands with Harry, and that was an emotional as well as sexual connection I had with him. Harry and I actually kissed once, too, so there’s another aspect of my sexuality damaged by a man who is not and will never be my husband.

I’m at a point where I have no problem wearing jeans and knee-length skirts (that’s very short for me). I wear tank tops. I even own a bikini, and I have worn it, but never put it to use. When going swimming with my friends, I just couldn’t get myself to actually take of the beach dress I keep wearing and go swimming. I stick to wetting my legs in the shallow water and watch the others… sad but true haha. Many times I feel like I’m too immodest for the movement, but too modest for the world, I’m happy with where and who I am in this. And maybe I’ll end up swimming at some point.

What HE must be.. if he wants to be a tyrant.

Fundamentalists love stereotypes and patterns. They have a whole bunch of them, and if you don’t fit in, it’s certainly because you’re not a very godly person. Many blogs talk about how women are forced into them but the last two days I’ve been thinking about men. I watched the men I saw around me and I came to a conclusion: Men are just as much forced into a role as women are.

So what do these “godly” men look like?

They are/have…

A leader-personality, a strong personality, physical strength, mental strength, emotional strength, spiritual strength, courage, a “maker”, a good job, problem solving skills, skills to fix up pretty much everything around the house, has the guts to lead his family, doesn’t get fooled by anyone especially not wife and kids, can voice a strong opinion, is a sexual person, faithful, loving, gentle, knowing (and controlling) his emotions, generous, can talk about his feelings with wife and kids, a great father, a great worker, a great preacher, a great husband, a great lover, a good friend, helpful, ….

I could go on and on and on but you get the point. Now where’s the bakery cause if I want a man like that, I’m sure I’ll have to bake him myself.

Fundamentalists blame feminists that they’re making pussies out of men. Yet, fundamentalists demand men to be both a manly man and an emotional genius with their wives.To be a hard worker and a great dad. To fix up the whole house and give the wife the time of her life in bed afterwards. To be courageous, yet vulnerable.

They want men to be leading a family, but not be bossy. That’s a very thin line. That infamous, so-called “servant-leader”. I’m not saying it’s impossible to be both a good friend and a good leader. But men are constantly asked to walk to line between two extremes in every aspect of life. They aren’t permitted to have a hard day emotionally. They aren’t allowed to just trust their wives and relax from all the decision-making. They must be the bread-winner for 10+ kids and still be the fun, awesome dad and amazing lover and friend for their wives.

I suffered what the fundies expected of me in the movement. And now that I’m looking back, I’m not really surprised that men suffer too. Fundie-girls ask for the perfect man. And the guys, they struggle to be the best they can, and if they dare to have a single worry in their lives, they don’t trust god, are emotionally unstable and not marriage material.

I’m not surprised that men turn into tyrants anymore. Even though both the manly and the emotional skills are expected of them, no person can fulfill both. So they chose the skills the others can see – leadership, strength, “courage”. They rule their house with a hard hand and heart in order to prove their manliness to the world. Nobody can see if he’s a gentle man, a good friend to his wife, a vulnerable servant at home. And it doesn’t even matter, because which godly person believes the blabbering of a rebellious wife trying to talk her man down?

Though men are expected to have amazing emotional skills with wife and kids, the fundies “admit” that still sex is the most important thing for a husband. Men are reduced to their sex drive. Actually, a man is nothing but a leader with a sex drive in some places. This goes as far as reducing men to beings that can hardly be called animals, unable to practice self-control. They would jump anything immodestly dressed if it wasn’t illegal – which it shouldn’t be cause hey, the slut in a short skirt had it coming her way! And yet again, practicing self-control is a female task. Control of emotions (her own), sex drive (of any men), of opinions (cause you can’t have one), of dress, of knowledge, of the ability to live on your own, the list continues.

I heard that men have two ways they should use to control their women: The rod and the phallus. Both are used to make clear to the woman that she isn’t in control of her body, but her head, the husband, is.

How would I act if I grew up learning that? That my sex drive and my bossy attitude are the two central skills that make me a man? That I should be ready to die for the woman I love, but most importantly, need to control that bitch cause I’m being held responsible by God for everything she screws up? Would I be better? Would I not be a tyrant? Would I not enjoy my private slave? Would I not be angry to be pressured into feeding her and the brood? Would I not go crazier and crazier by ignoring even the last bit of emotional life that I have left?

I think I’d be a tyrant, too.

O ye daughters of Jerusalem

I’ve been thinking about the song of solomon lately and there are things I just don’t understand. Help me out

Growing up, I was told by my parents that the bible is the LITERAL word of God. There are no interpretations. There are so symbols or metaphors unless clearly stated, such as in the gospels. Everything, including the psalms, proverbs and the song of solomon was literal.

I was not allowed to read the whole song of solomon until very late in my courtship. My parents said it would stir up feelings inside young people and it would be bad for my purity. My parents did not believe that the song of solomon was a picture of Jesus and the church. Like many others, they believed it was about sexuality in marriage.

If you have read the song of solomon, you know that it’s full of references to different practices between a couple. But it also tells a love story of a couple.

Now, let me explain what my problem with it is. As far as I understand (literal that is), the two lovers meet outside:

Behold, thou art fair, my beloved, yea, pleasant: also our bed is green. (1,16)

Clearly a reference that they’re not holding hands out there, but most likely in the grass together.There are other references to sexuality as well, for example chapter 2, verse 3. They are obviously embracing too, see 2, 6.

Now let’s take a look at chapter 3, 1-4:

By night on my bed I sought him whom my soul loveth: I sought him, but I found him not. I will rise now, and go about the city in the streets, and in the broad ways I will seek him whom my soul loveth: I sought him, but I found him not. The watchmen that go about the city found me: to whom I said, Saw ye him whom my soul loveth? It was but a little that I passed from them, but I found him whom my soul loveth: I held him, and would not let him go, until I had brought him into my mother’s house, and into the chamber of her that conceived me.

If we’re being literal here, then it doesn’t make sense. Why is her husband not sleeping in her bed? Why isn’t he even in the house? And why would she bring him into her mother’s house? Don’t we know that a man cleaves his wife and she leaves her mother and father? Then, why, just why would she do that?

Chapter 5, verse 6-7:

I opened to my beloved; but my beloved had withdrawn himself, and was gone: my soul failed when he spake: I sought him, but I could not find him; I called him, but he gave me no answer. The watchmen that went about the city found me, they smote me, they wounded me; the keepers of the walls took away my veil from me.

Again, he isn’t at her house. Why? And why would he come in the middle of the night, and then leave quickly? Why would she get beaten by the watchmen and be unveiled, which was a shame, if she was just looking for her husband? Again, makes no sense to me.

Chapter 7, 11-12:

Come, my beloved, let us go forth into the field; let us lodge in the villages. Let us get up early to the vineyards; let us see if the vine flourish, whether the tender grape appear, and the pomegranates bud forth: there will I give thee my loves.

Ok now, they either have something to hide or have a major thing for sex in the fields. Either way, I find it strange that they are constantly outside.

Chapter 8, 1-3:

O that thou wert as my brother, that sucked the breasts of my mother! when I should find thee without, I would kiss thee; yea, I should not be despised. I would lead thee, and bring thee into my mother’s house, who would instruct me: I would cause thee to drink of spiced wine of the juice of my pomegranate. His left hand should be under my head, and his right hand should embrace me.

Alright, that’s just a plain weird thing to wish for your husband. I can imagine 100 different things that I wish my husband would be, but being my brother is not one of them. I realize that there might be a cultural difference, but the Thora tells us clear rules whom we shouldn’t marry, and your brother is one of them. If the girl in this song knew this and I have to believe she did, there can only be one reason why she would wish for such a thing: Because her lover is not her husband.

And that’s really the biggest question that I have about this book. To me, it’s clear they aren’t married. She still lives in her mother’s house, they meet out in the vineyards under the trees, he comes at night to see her but leaves quickly (maybe got caught?), the guards beat her for walking around at night (an unmarried woman, possibly a prostitute to them, that might be why she’s unveiled by them), her wish that he was her brother so she could officially show affection.

I don’t know, maybe I’m just way too stupid and whatnot to get it, and this frustrates me. If everything the bible says has a literal meaning, then why is there a book about a couple that has sex before marriage? Or am I just not understanding it?

This goes only for the literal reading. Interpretations will of course bring different results.

Either way, I’m puzzled. Comments and suggestions what I’m doing wrong are more than welcome!

 

Giving pieces of your “heart” away

Caution: Explicit language.

When discussing dating and courtship, one of the most popular lines to defend courtship is the belief that when dating, you give pieces of your heart to each person you date. This belief is again based on a belief that all forms of dating mean that you “fall in love quickly”, that you end up having physical or sexual contact on the very first date and that you are certainly not finding a suitable spouse by dating.

Now obviously, the godly courtship doesn’t face any of these struggles – yet another belief. When courting, you’re not supposed to fall in love. It’s ok if there is a “spark”, but anything more wouldn’t lead you into a courtship simply because the danger of giving a piece of your heart to the “wrong” person is so big. So essentially, you should not be or fall in love with your courting partner.

I was raised in this belief and I was very strong in it. I was obsessed with guarding my heart, hoping it would please my parents, especially my dad. If I had to draw a picture of myself for you, imagine I’d be the princess sitting on a throne in a spotless white dress. My dad was a strong knight, guarding the gates to my castles, slaying every man who wasn’t clean enough for his taste. And even once he let somebody in, he was eager for the man to stay at the opposite side of the room, not letting him anywhere near me or my heart.

Only when the time of engagement comes a courting couple is allowed to actually try to start feeling something. But in some groups (not all of them), you’re still not allowed to touch. You can tell these couples by looking at them – a lot of times, they use some kind of device, like a stick or a piece of fabric, that they both hold on one end, as a replacement for holding hands. Every form of physical contact with the opposite gender is feared to “give something away”.

Now I can tell you from personal experience, the term “heart” is just a cover-up for something entirely different. Heart stands for virginity, better yet, for hymen. Essentially all the big fuss boils down to that. Any form of touching the other’s body is considered a harm to the girl’s heart/hymen.

As a young woman growing up, I had some “female problems”, nothing bad really but I felt like I should see a doctor just to make sure it’s all normal. My mother had huge issues talking to me about it, I couldn’t ask her a thing. I approached her with a lie, saying that I felt something was very wrong and I needed to see a doctor, knowing she wouldn’t let me go for the real reason. And yet, she denied me to see a gynecologist. I asked her why that was, and her answer was that there can’t be anything wrong “if the seal isn’t broken”. That was her euphemism for hymen. My seeing a doc would only lead to my “seal” being broken. And then what would I tell my husband? It would make me look like a liar. Every girl who’s not a virgin tells her husband that she isn’t “sealed” because of sports, the doctor or something else. Every guy knew that was the typical excuse. This conversation scared me. I was honestly afraid I had already broken my hymen by accident and would look like an adulteress. It cost me some sleepless nights and long prayer sessions.

I know they all say that the hymen isn’t what makes a girl a virgin. But while they say that, they mean the opposite.

Years ago I overheard a story my dad told my mom. It was about a guy and a girl who had just gotten married and were very unhappy. On their wedding night, he didn’t feel any resistance when breaking her “seal”, and neither was there any blood. The man felt robbed of this experience and was sure his wife actually wasn’t a virgin before marriage. He even thought of getting a divorce on the base of adultery. My dad felt sorry for the man, agreeing that he has a good enough reason to be divorced from his wife.

I started thinking about it and realized that it really wasn’t about the heart. All the planning of a wedding boiled down to defloration. What the bride should wear, something that was easily accessible and sexy at the same time. The fact that our weddings end at 10PM. That the place we spend our wedding nights at is usually in maximum half an hour distance. The fact that no christian fundamentalist man cares about planning the wedding, only about when and where the wedding night will be. I felt exploited. Back then I was courting Harry and I realized that the biggest virtue I had to offer wasn’t my meekness, my simple mind, my godliness, my biblical approach, nothing of that compared to my biggest virtue: I had an intact hymen.

At the end of the day, dating vs. courtship isn’t about the heart. It’s about the man opening a woman like a can of diet soda. If he doesn’t get to do that, it’s like somebody spit into your can of soda: You don’t drink it, you throw it away.