-
Re: Born-again virgins: does anyone else find this dishonest and disturbing?
Thu, March 29, 2007 - 8:49 AMI am always creeped out when they try to cover up conservative stuff with female empowerment.
I like our idea around here of Man Hiatus better. Because if it's really about facing yourself and not some creepy christian thing about not having sex till your married their focus is all crazy. They didn't say anything about not dating or being involved with boys/guys/men all of the time. I think usually it's alot more about being wrapped up in the idea of being with someone then it is about the sex. Though of course some people some people abuse themselves with sex.
It sure seemed like it was only about girls...if it was really about "facing yourself" then why wasn't it more balanced toward everyone?
bleh I don't believe in marriage before sex. I think it's wrong. -
-
Re: Born-again virgins: does anyone else find this dishonest and disturbing?
Thu, March 29, 2007 - 9:01 AM<<bleh I don't believe in marriage before sex. I think it's wrong.>>
Hmmm... that seems like an awfully black and white statement coming from you, SV. I suppose there is a place for black and white. What I believe in is the power of choice. And the responsbility we have to face the consequences of our choices. And the need there is to sometimes live with consequences for which we are NOT responsible.
I don't think it's fair to fault someone for holding back, as long as they can live with the consequences of that decision. The reverse is also true; you can't fault someone for choosing to have sex, as long as they are willing to face the consequences of that decision. Problems arise not from the choices themselves but from our attraction to the Victim inside us that tells us the world is out to get us. -
-
Re: Born-again virgins: does anyone else find this dishonest and disturbing?
Thu, March 29, 2007 - 10:05 AMmaybe it would be more accurate to say I am against the concept of marriage before sex. I totally accept whatever decisions people make for themselves. But I think that sex is like a magifying glass for relationships, personalities and connections...so I can not see how telling people not to have sex(and by have sex I don't just mean penis in vagina sex, but sexual intimacy and connection) before making what is supposed to be a life long commitment to someone is irresponsible IMO.
so individuals make your own decisions whatever they may be, but I think teaching the concept that sex before marriage is bad is wrong. I can't really think of any reason why someone on their own without indoctrination would wait till they were married for sexual intimacy(remember I'm not limiting that to PIV sex) that wouldn't be a problem during the marriage. But maybe I'm not thinking of something...and in the end my most basic belief is that people need to think for themselves and do what they need to do. So of course even if I don't understand it I would respect someone making that decision for themselves.
-
-
-
Re: Born-again virgins: does anyone else find this dishonest and disturbing?
Thu, March 29, 2007 - 8:49 AMDishonest: not necessarily. I think there are people out there who have made choices in the past and are now wishing to take an honest look at those choices and maybe choose differently in the present. Taking a good honest look at sexual choices is, from my humble perspective, a really healthy thing to do.
Disturbing: yes. Why is the focus on women and not on men? Furthermore, I DO find it disturbing the emphasis that is placed on virginity. In any context. I have done a lot of thinking about that and Christianity has elevated the state of virginity to a place it really does not deserve. To equate virginity with purity is a crock. To elevate virginity to a pedastal is to deny the beauty and wonder of sex, and that is exactly what relgion (and not just Christianity) has done.
The movement to reexmine and adjust our sexual choices does not need to be about virginity. We can honour and respect a person's decision to hold off until they are really ready for intimacy without being pious about it. Or so I think. :) -
-
Re: Born-again virgins: does anyone else find this dishonest and disturbing?
Thu, March 29, 2007 - 10:20 AMKaren. I find it dishonest in saying to young women who have had sex: you haven't really had sex if you do what we say. It is dishonesty in service of an agenda. The original virginity campaigns haven't been successful, so they are allowing women (and men) to be repeat offenders. Of course I don't believe having sex is an offense. This smacks of dishonest manipulation of teenagers. -
-
Re: Born-again virgins: does anyone else find this dishonest and disturbing?
Thu, March 29, 2007 - 12:17 PMOkay, personal stuff first so you understand my perspective: I am a recovering evangelical. So I grew up with all this crap. I did not have PIV sex until I was married (the rest of it is a long-ass story I posted elsewhere already). I don't really regret that decision, most days. Some days I do, or I think it was a joke because like SV pointed out, there's a lot more to sexual intimacy than PIV.
I have *almost* no use for evagelical Christianity at all anymore. That said, I'm actually going to play Devil's Advocate (ha ha ha) and tell you their side of the story because I know the story and I lived in it for a long time.
Evangelicals believe that sex before marriage is wrong, as in sinful. They also believe that sins can be washed away by the forgiveness that Jesus bought for his followers when he died and rose again. (Oh I can't believe this is all coming out of my mouth -- er, fingers). That idea of washing sins away is big. What you did in your past is not supposed to be held against you in the present. However, where virginity is concerned, once you've "done it" you can't physically undo it. But if it was a sin, you should be able to get rid of it, so... enter secondary vriginity. I don't THINK it's about pretending or dishonesty as much as it is about claiming your right to be forgiven for your past. The message I got during my teen years is that if you HAVE had indescriminate sex it's never too late to reclaim your values, beliefs, choices, whatever... certainly in other cultures women who had lost their virginity out of wedlock were/are treated as spoiled goods. This moevement, believe it or not, was and probably still is intended to overcome that. The message is: you are not spoiled. There is always a second chance to do the right thing.
The kicker, I suppose, is in the definition of what the "right thing" is. They think they know, so that's what they go by. I see things differently now but I still "get" the intended message. And I kind of like it. I like second chances. I like knowing that a mistake does not have to haunt, spoil or be a black mark on me over for life. I can pick up, learn, move on. Believe it or not, that's a message I got from the evangelical church. The difference now is that I think that gift is there for every single human being, not just pretty white people who profess Jesus as their Lord and Saviour.
My earlier post also states what I think about the church's take on virginity. So I hope you will be able to see what I AM defending and what I am NOT. I do not defend the movement or its message, but I think I can defend the (albeit misdirected) intent behind it.
One of the reasons I got out of the church was because I got sick of people judging people. So it pains me just a little when I see people outside the church acting a lot like people inside the church, making blanket statements and judgments. Letting go of judgment has been a huge part of my journey "home". I'm only just beginning.... and second chances have saved my life. :)
Thanks for reading! and for making me think... -
-
Re: Born-again virgins: does anyone else find this dishonest and disturbing?
Thu, March 29, 2007 - 10:10 PMKaren. You've given me something to think about. Thank you. I respect that.
-
Re: Born-again virgins: does anyone else find this dishonest and disturbing?
Fri, March 30, 2007 - 10:58 AMGood explanation Karen.
It reminds me of some of the cross-cultural training I had, minimal though it was. Certain cultures eat with their mouths open. Drives me nuts when exposed to it.
As we learn to be more accepting of cultural differences, we also have to get better at identifying what a culture is. And there's no doubt that the evangelicals are a culture all to their own. And in this case, as explained by you, they really are practicing forgiveness and compassion in a way that doesn't compromise their culture.
And while my own feelings are that they should just say "you are forgiven" and not stick the Grade A Virgin stamp on someone's forhead, I can understand that they, like the rest of us, are just doing their level best to muddle through.
-
-
-
-
Re: Born-again virgins: does anyone else find this dishonest and disturbing?
Thu, March 29, 2007 - 12:30 PM"Born-again virgins: does anyone else find this dishonest and disturbing?"
As long as they don't turn into leopards after sex, I don't care WHAT they call themselves. ;)