Christianity not as Intolerant of Female Sexual "deviance" as it seems to be?
Many have this idea ( http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0226075923/002-1429980-4685624?v=glance&n=283155 ) that Christianity is and always has been unreasonably intolerant with regards to female homosexuality. Their argument is based on scripture and on their understanding of historical Christian doctrines regarding the matter. Their argument is flawed in the sense that a Christian's interpretation of scripture is not necessarily an accurate interpretation of scripture; and their interpretation of the words of Christians of the past may not be accurate.
The central scripture at issue in the debate is:
Rom 1:26 For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: Rom 1:27 And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompense of their error which was meet.
Here Paul, condemns: women who change from natural to anti-natural; men who abandon nature for homosexuality.
The women are condemned, for antinatural activity, the men are condemned for homosexuality. This implies a more stringent standard for men, since it is conceivable that there are homosexual acts that are not anti-natural (cf harem women). Looking at human history it is evident that due to a continual shortage of males female homosexuality is more natural than male homosexuality. Males can be more of a source of disease and violence than females.
Women and men are both condemned for changing from or abandoning that which is natural.
Translation: women should not suppress natural feelings of affection; they should suppress unnatural sexual conduct. They should not replace natural sexual conduct with less natural sexual conduct, conduct that is of given alternatives relatively unnatural.
This in the context of Christ's admission that men vary in terms of their sex drive and ability to handle celibacy, and the Old Testament's tolerance of polygamy and female homosexuality.
Modern science has verified Christ's idea that men vary widely in terms of sex drive; modern science has additionally found that women also vary in terms of sex drive.
Thus the question becomes, what should a woman with a high sex-drive, who is not married, do, when the sex drive in her builds up to the point where it's continued suppression interferes with the woman's ability to competently handle day to day life? What should a woman whose sex drive is not satisfied by her husband do?
My synthesis (what I fallible human being now think) of the various scriptures on female sexuality:
For both married and unmarried women:
Keep in mind that in the eyes of scripture, sexual thoughts are the equivalent of sexual deeds; thus the release of sexual energy could result in a woman being more psychologically chaste than she would be otherwise.
Do not despair that you are a hopeless case if you are a high sex drive woman--scriptural heroes such as David and Solomon were high sex drive, high testosterone level type persons who passed such characteristics on to their daughters.
A woman should make a good faith effort, to minimize sexual activity that is relatively unnatural. Women who indulge in relatively unnatural sexual conduct beyond what is necessary to so to speak put out of the fire, sin.
A woman could find herself in a marriage wherein her sex drive is not satisfied by the husband. The situation could arise wherein the pent up sex drive results in general dysfunction and or a mind that is more unchaste than it would be if the pent up sexual energies were released.
A woman's sexual decisions are a highly individual matter. Paul in scripture counseled some widows to remarry but he counseled other widows to not remarry
For unmarried women:
For women who are unable to handle celibacy such as the unmarried high sex drive type of woman the best solution is marriage.
Yet it is not always wise to rush into marriage. Scripture advises against divorce; men can be a source of disease and violence. Nowadays marriages are not arranged, women enjoy this liberty, marriage can reasonably be delayed.
Secondarily to initiating married heterosexual sex, for unmarried women it comes down to a choice between non-marital heterosexual sex, non-marital homosexual sex (the woman has sex with a woman who is not the husband's other wife), and non-marital masturbation (the masturbatory fantasy focuses on a man the woman is nt married to).
All of these three alternatives should be minimized by the unmarried woman. A valid scriptural argument can be made that none of these three alternatives is superior--thus which of these three alternatives is chosen should depend upon what is natural and wise given the individual circumstances of the woman in question.
For married women:
A married woman could find herself in a marriage wherein her sex drive is not satisfied by the husband.
In this event the choices become: marital masturbation (the husband is the fantasy figure); non-marital masturbation (someone other than the husband is the fantasy figure); non-marital heterosexual sex; non-marital homosexual sex (the sex is with a woman who is not another wife of the husband); and marital homosexual sex (the sex is with another wife of the husband).
A solid scriptural case can be made that the best alternatives of these are marital masturbation, and marital homosexual sex. Surprise! The marital homosexual sex scripturally speaking comes in ahead of non-marital heterosexual sex.
As to whether the marital masturbation or the marital homosexual sex route should be taken, a woman masturbating while thinking about her husband, and a woman being stimulated by her husband's other wife while thinking about her husband, would scripturally speaking seem almost identical; both of these alternatives would seem to be superior to sex with a fellow wife that is mentally speaking centered on erotic feeling for the fellow wife. Then again scripture besides opposing relatively unnatural alternatives, opposes the lack of "natural affection". The question is what is natural and wise and of conscience for the individual woman in question. Many would argue that sex with a fellow wife would be more natural and emotional than masturbation.
A wife deriving pleasure from being exhibitionistic in front of the husband would seem superior to the wife being absorbed in homosexual passion for another wife of the husband, but the husband has a legitimate interest in minimizing prurience within himself.
Now does that all sound so intolerant and unreasonable? It's all based on scripture.
@2006 David Virgil Hobbs
The central scripture at issue in the debate is:
Rom 1:26 For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: Rom 1:27 And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompense of their error which was meet.
Here Paul, condemns: women who change from natural to anti-natural; men who abandon nature for homosexuality.
The women are condemned, for antinatural activity, the men are condemned for homosexuality. This implies a more stringent standard for men, since it is conceivable that there are homosexual acts that are not anti-natural (cf harem women). Looking at human history it is evident that due to a continual shortage of males female homosexuality is more natural than male homosexuality. Males can be more of a source of disease and violence than females.
Women and men are both condemned for changing from or abandoning that which is natural.
Translation: women should not suppress natural feelings of affection; they should suppress unnatural sexual conduct. They should not replace natural sexual conduct with less natural sexual conduct, conduct that is of given alternatives relatively unnatural.
This in the context of Christ's admission that men vary in terms of their sex drive and ability to handle celibacy, and the Old Testament's tolerance of polygamy and female homosexuality.
Modern science has verified Christ's idea that men vary widely in terms of sex drive; modern science has additionally found that women also vary in terms of sex drive.
Thus the question becomes, what should a woman with a high sex-drive, who is not married, do, when the sex drive in her builds up to the point where it's continued suppression interferes with the woman's ability to competently handle day to day life? What should a woman whose sex drive is not satisfied by her husband do?
My synthesis (what I fallible human being now think) of the various scriptures on female sexuality:
For both married and unmarried women:
Keep in mind that in the eyes of scripture, sexual thoughts are the equivalent of sexual deeds; thus the release of sexual energy could result in a woman being more psychologically chaste than she would be otherwise.
Do not despair that you are a hopeless case if you are a high sex drive woman--scriptural heroes such as David and Solomon were high sex drive, high testosterone level type persons who passed such characteristics on to their daughters.
A woman should make a good faith effort, to minimize sexual activity that is relatively unnatural. Women who indulge in relatively unnatural sexual conduct beyond what is necessary to so to speak put out of the fire, sin.
A woman could find herself in a marriage wherein her sex drive is not satisfied by the husband. The situation could arise wherein the pent up sex drive results in general dysfunction and or a mind that is more unchaste than it would be if the pent up sexual energies were released.
A woman's sexual decisions are a highly individual matter. Paul in scripture counseled some widows to remarry but he counseled other widows to not remarry
For unmarried women:
For women who are unable to handle celibacy such as the unmarried high sex drive type of woman the best solution is marriage.
Yet it is not always wise to rush into marriage. Scripture advises against divorce; men can be a source of disease and violence. Nowadays marriages are not arranged, women enjoy this liberty, marriage can reasonably be delayed.
Secondarily to initiating married heterosexual sex, for unmarried women it comes down to a choice between non-marital heterosexual sex, non-marital homosexual sex (the woman has sex with a woman who is not the husband's other wife), and non-marital masturbation (the masturbatory fantasy focuses on a man the woman is nt married to).
All of these three alternatives should be minimized by the unmarried woman. A valid scriptural argument can be made that none of these three alternatives is superior--thus which of these three alternatives is chosen should depend upon what is natural and wise given the individual circumstances of the woman in question.
For married women:
A married woman could find herself in a marriage wherein her sex drive is not satisfied by the husband.
In this event the choices become: marital masturbation (the husband is the fantasy figure); non-marital masturbation (someone other than the husband is the fantasy figure); non-marital heterosexual sex; non-marital homosexual sex (the sex is with a woman who is not another wife of the husband); and marital homosexual sex (the sex is with another wife of the husband).
A solid scriptural case can be made that the best alternatives of these are marital masturbation, and marital homosexual sex. Surprise! The marital homosexual sex scripturally speaking comes in ahead of non-marital heterosexual sex.
As to whether the marital masturbation or the marital homosexual sex route should be taken, a woman masturbating while thinking about her husband, and a woman being stimulated by her husband's other wife while thinking about her husband, would scripturally speaking seem almost identical; both of these alternatives would seem to be superior to sex with a fellow wife that is mentally speaking centered on erotic feeling for the fellow wife. Then again scripture besides opposing relatively unnatural alternatives, opposes the lack of "natural affection". The question is what is natural and wise and of conscience for the individual woman in question. Many would argue that sex with a fellow wife would be more natural and emotional than masturbation.
A wife deriving pleasure from being exhibitionistic in front of the husband would seem superior to the wife being absorbed in homosexual passion for another wife of the husband, but the husband has a legitimate interest in minimizing prurience within himself.
Now does that all sound so intolerant and unreasonable? It's all based on scripture.
@2006 David Virgil Hobbs
posted by David Virgil at 3:47 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home