Tags
biology, biscuits, churchian culture, humor, lust, opinion, repression, shame
I have a smattering of comments strewn about the internet, a bit like a chef salad that’s been tossed haphazardly across the counter, but they all revolve around a common theme that is perhaps worth mentioning, an effort to delicately explain the concept of “lust” to some people who are doing a rather poor job of it. Did I mention the part about attempting to be delicate?
Trust me, it’s rather comical sometimes, in the way that might cause one to just descend into a fit of giggles. I am keenly aware of the fact that I am attempting to “womansplain lust” and how very awkward that can be. Let me reiterate that part about how some people are doing a rather poor job of it. Like, I wouldn’t say a word, but you happen to be the pastor of a very large church with a huge internet following and you have now gone and totally eviscerated the truth of human sexuality in way that is very shaming towards both men and women and also runs counter to biological reality and biblical truth. If you cannot even see the nature of your own self in your obvious doctrine of “me, myself, and I” why in the world should we trust you on any other matter…….
Go ahead, I dare you to attempt to phrase a truth like that in a gentle manner. Also, be delicate about it.
Above all else, totally resist the urge to just forward all the violent pornography and death threats you have received that week along with the words in all caps, LISTEN UP MORON! It seems as if men might have some sexual issues of their own. Enclosed please find the evidence that clearly demonstrates human sexuality is not a simple matter of “Eve cursed, Jezebel cursed, Potiphar’s wife cursed……so just to be safe, avoid the obvious evil of ALL women’s cursed, but quite tantalizing, fluffy biscuits.”
You’ll be quite pleased to know I have never done any such thing. Or at least if I had, I would have politely left off the part about being a “moron” and “women’s fluffy biscuits.”
I have however, sent dozens of polite comments into the internet abyss that actually do demonstrate the truth of what I have been trying so desperately to communicate for years, and perhaps they tell a story that is worth pondering.
So here are some comments I’ve made:
“For the record, I despise the way we as the church, try to equate lust with shame, as if God somehow designed men wrong. Lust is not simple attraction, it requires envy and coveting, also reviling and contempt.”
“Men have been blaming women since the dawn of time for their own sexuality and refusing to take any responsibility. If a bazillion people are telling you are unable to exercise any sexual control, at some point you’ll probably start to believe it…”
“We have created this strange culture of sexual entitlement that is all infused with rage against women which can be observed by spending about 30 seconds reading an incel subreddit. Constant reference to Jezebel do not help improve matters.”
“There is actually nothing wrong with my “lusting” after a woman’s shoes. There is something wrong with believing I am entitled to whack her over the head and steal her shoes. “Lust” in all it’s translations is about contemptuously coveting what is not yours, not healthy sexual desire.”
And this one I left for Pastor Doug Wilson directly, who perhaps quite wisely, is no longer speaking to me,
“Pastor Wilson, the man who is lusting after his coworker is free to do as the bible instructs and just pluck out his own eyes. That is actually biblical. Have at it! Or he could address his heart, realize he is simply admiring the scenery as he was designed to do, and it is good.”
You may notice these comments are very much against shaming men for well, for being men. The problem with sexual shame as a form of social control is that it always makes the story go just like this, shame, repression, sin, toxic secrets….covertly accessing violent pornography and sending it to random women on the internet.
I jest a bit here, but I am quite serious about this matter. Shame and repression around human sexuality is a toxic brew. “The church,” of which I am a part, has done a great deal of harm by conveying the idea that the biggest sin of all is sexual sin, therefore anything related to sex is sin. Unfortunately the very thing that tends to just fuel more human brokenness and perversion, is actually shame and repression. In this case, the cure is actually more dangerous than the disease itself. A huge motivator behind human behavior is actually forbidden fruit.
Camilia Paglia actually once wrote quite a good article about homosexuality, about how many gay pride parades actually involve the idea of forbidden fruit, BDSM and assorted other perversions. She brought up the fact that the more a society normalizes homosexuality, the more it becomes “boring.” It is one thing to have an illicit SS affair that society frowns upon, it is quite another matter to be trapped in a SS “marriage,” driving an old mini van, and faking a headache like all the other lemmings in the world.
We understand how human behavior works when it comes to porn, too. It progresses. It accelerates to stave off teh boring. That is how we go from looking at French post cards displaying a woman’s ankle to the ever more violent, graphic, and downright ugly. Before you know it, movies like Fifty Shades of Grey are mainstream culture, chick flicks. We hunger in a downward spiral, always seeking something edgier and more bizarre.
A big part of the problem can be laid squarely at the feet of Christian culture and the way we have so often convoluted healthy sexuality with shame, repression, sin, and alleged biblical truth. “Alleged” because it isn’t true at all. Not only does the culture at large clearly see how we are all full of coconut candy and hypocrisy, we do damage to innocent relationships between men and women, and we harm marriages, too.
And, perhaps inadvertantly, we tend to create a culture that makes men hostile towards women, fearing our fluffy biscuits, perceiving us as the root of all evil, desperate to just pass the much resented, fear, power, and control on down the pecking order. Abuse, it leads to abuse. It leads to domestic violence, sexual abuse, violent pornography, pedophilia, and women so broken and confused they now dream of Christian Grey.
It is why men and women “cannot” be friends, as Amy Byrd’s book dreams of. We cannot truly be “friends” until we find away to relieve the contempt and fear so many men have towards women. One way to help with that process is to stop equating normal sexual attraction with the sin of lust, as if being attracted to women is the precise same thing as being contemptuous, resentful, and reviling towards us. Ironically, many feminists are also busy sending the precise same message, all masculinity and male sexuality is toxic.
Combine this with a frequent churchian perception that women’s fluffy biscuits are inherantly tainted and evil and you have just created and unholy alliance between the church and feminism, each one fueling the other in a perpetual race to the bottom.
Doug said:
This is why I follow you, btw.
Now.. about these fluffy biscuits thing………… got a url? (but don’t tell anyone I asked.)
LikeLiked by 2 people
supernaturalsnark said:
“Or he could address his heart, realize he is simply admiring the scenery as he was designed to do, and it is good.”
…The problem with this is that while men are naturally more like to ‘admire’ women at work, it hardly ever stops there.
It goes beyond lust and enters the realm of disrespect.
I’d also argue that men can be men, but perhaps that’s not an excuse in certain settings. Not blaming men doesn’t mean we can’t hold them accountable for their actions and how they make other people feel.
LikeLiked by 1 person
insanitybytes22 said:
It goes beyond lust and enters the realm of disrespect.”
Exactly! Or perhaps worse, it actually soon moves from disrespect and into outright contempt, disgust, hatred, and reviling. That is not the nature of “men” at all, that is learned behavior. Yes indeed,we do need to hold them accountable. That cannot happen in a Christian context that is going to insist on just blaming women and claiming that men are just victims of their own biology.
LikeLiked by 1 person
myquirkyfriend said:
Exactly! And thank you! This makes me think of pastor and author Troy Brewer. He talks about God creating everything and speaking through every. And as Christians we do need to pay attention to everything around us, not just the bible and church services. God will therefore also speak through things like, gasp, the star and even numbers (though not as numerology or astrology). Yet, Troy points out, the church has abandoned looking to the stars or numbers to hear from God just because the devil, through people, made something evil out of those things. Troy points out how the devil also turned sex evil in many untold ways, yet the church hasn’t abandoned sex. And I don’t see that happening anytime soon. Although, as you so accurately described, they have perverted sex through their distorted teachings on the natural course of attraction and lust. Thanks for another great post!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Tricia said:
Good stuff as usual IB. God created sexual attraction, it’s nothing to be ashamed about or be shamed for having.
That’s all me and my fluffy biscuits have to say on the matter….;)
LikeLiked by 2 people
Doug said:
My mother warned me about blogs like this.
LikeLiked by 3 people
authorstephanieparkermckean said:
Brilliant. Thank you.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Citizen Tom said:
@IB
I don’t think there is a uniform incorrect “Christian” teaching about sex. There is the Bible, and then there various interpretations, some quite odd.
I don’t think the screwy Bible interpretations are really a Christian problem. Lust has always been a problem. Unfortunately, some Christians focus too much on our fallen nature. They forget that the Bible speaks of Adam and Eve, joined as one and righteously unashamed.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Doug said:
I have no issue from your moral position you just stated, Tom. But this is exactly why I really can give political evangelicals very little credibility when they so easily look the other way on sexual morality when it comes to Trump.. simply for the expediency of liking his politics. In my view you’ve compromised your own moral identity.. surrendered to a devil that has convinced you his morality is ok. Huge double-standard, Tom… and I truly fault every Trump-loving evangelical.
Now.. if you want to defend yourself as simply being human and saying “I know supporting Trump is morally in opposition to my belief system, but I love his politics because I believe he will do more good than bad.”… sounds like the influence of the devil to me.
LikeLike
Citizen Tom said:
@Doug
Supporting Trump is not in opposition to my belief system. It is apparently in opposition to your belief system, but not mine.
We don’t elect perfect people; we elect the best person on the ballot. Jesus was not on the ballot? If He had been, would you have voted for Him? That’s the test, not a choice between The Donald and the Head of the Bimbo Eruptions squad.
You don’t like Trump? Then why do you want the government to have so much power? That does not make any sense.
I would be perfectly happy to keep Trump from being a great nuisance in your life. However, when you vote for people like Obama and H. Clinton, it complicates matters. The politicians you don’t like end up having far more power than they otherwise would.
LikeLike
insanitybytes22 said:
“But this is exactly why I really can give political evangelicals very little credibility when they so easily look the other way on sexual morality when it comes to Trump.. simply for the expediency of liking his politics….”
Somewhat amusing to me Doug, I have always resented the hypocrisy of “political evangelicals” on sexual morality. I cannot abide it when they get caught preaching purity on Sunday and toe tapping in the men’s room the rest of the week. I much prefer Trump’s kind of honesty, his admission of guilt and sometimes…. not guilt. I find it hysterically funny that he is being sued by a porn star for…..defamation of character. Hers! How in the world do you damage the reputation of a porn star??
So I suppose I am a “political evangelical” in a way, but I am quite certain that supporting
Trump is not in “opposition to my belief system,” because for many years I’ve been fighting for an end to sexual hypocrisy, for us to drop the masks and start being honest about who we are. While I may hold onto traditional values, I know perfectly well that the vast majority of us fall way short and that sexual sin is a real thing in the world. Sexual sin has never made me faint, but self righteous hypocrisy, lying, and cover ups sure can.
Also,Trump has supported all of his ex wives, cared for all of his children, and never tried to lie about his affairs or totally demolish and slime the women he has slept with. Let me tell you, there are more than few evangelicals who could learn a thing or two about integrity and honesty from, gasp, President Trump himself.
LikeLike
Doug said:
As much as I admire and agree with your stance on religious sexual hypocrisy, somehow your moral justification that “at least he’s taking care of all those he’s had affairs with, children spawned (that we know about and don’t know about), yada yada.. ” is pretty much a moral cop-out actually. He’s ok because he’s somehow paying for his immoral sexual sins by acknowledging them? Not for me to judge Christian sexual morals in the least… and if you are an exception to the “average” Christian evangelical, that’s your thing. I am just saying that in the past evangelicals were somehow catered to during campaigning for the moral center they preferred to be displayed by candidates… and given it’s not important to them anymore given their accommodating turning-the-other-way with Trump.. I personally could care less what they think on the political stage anymore.
LikeLike
lovelifeandgod said:
Fluffy biscuits, ha! Never heard that one before. 🙂
I agree that lust is different from attraction. I am pretty sure you can be attracted to someone of the opposite sex without disrespecting them, which is what lust is. Treating someone as solely a tool for your own satisfaction, like a piece of furniture, and objectifying them – that’s lust. I like what you said in the comments about “enjoying the scenery;” that’s certainly a healthy expression of sexuality. Wanting something more than that outside of the committment of marriage and you enter lust territory.
I think the ball-and-chain narrative we’ve got towards marriage is also part of the problem since it goes hand in hand with the sexual repression message. Maybe we need to romanticize healthy marriages? Though not in the perfect Disney-esque way since that’s a recipe for failure.
LikeLiked by 1 person