Recently my hubby read an article to me off the Internet about a Victoria Secret model who is proudly and vocally a virgin and plans to remain so until marriage.
For the sake of this blog, I didn't look up her name or any more details because my goal is not to impugn her, but take this concept of virginity and purity deeper.
One the one hand, I commend this model for her boldness and desire to live purely. On the other hand, the irony is a blaring neon sign. Contradiction!
While she promises no man will touch her goods until she's married, she parades around half naked before millions of men.
Men are visual. Men struggle with lust. And while this Vic Secret model has refrained from physical sex, she's mostly likely stirred mental sex with millions of men.
Jesus said if a man looks lustfully on a woman, he's committed adultery.
Just because we don't do the deed doesn't mean we are pure. I always had a beef with the wording of the True Love Waits pledge: "I'll remain pure until marriage."
Like after marriage you can be impure? Purity is a life long virtue. One that has to be maintained with vigilance - before and after marriage.
To this fancy underwear model, I'd ask, "So, it's okay to cause the husbands, fathers, brothers, boyfriends, cousins, uncles, and friends of the world's women to lust in their hearts, even for a second, because of the way you display yourself?"
No, it's not. Raise the bar, ladies. This model might feel protected and untouchable at her high level, unaware of what actions she causes. It's the chain reaction, the trickle down lust effect.
She feels safe and secure in her purity stand, but down at the common every day level, some man in a bathroom with his wife's/mother's/sister's Vic Secret catalog is... well... not keeping it so pure. (Catalog sales were 400 million at one time.)
Men I know desiring to walk in purity refuse to have a Vic Secret catalog in their homes.
It's not one or the other, ladies. How we behave, dress, flirt is also part of purity. Not just keeping a man out of our drawers. Men, how you act and behave impacts your purity.
If Jesus words are true, and they always are, millions of men have committed adultery with Vic Secret models.
If this one really wants to be an example for young women, she might consider not walking around in her underwear. The other trickle-down effect is millions of young women wanting to be like Vic Secret models and buy these soft, sexy underthings for showing off to... um... who? Boyfriends?
Let's be honest, we live in a world where a school board voted in birth control for 11 and 12 year old girls. The fight against purity and virginity is raging. It can't be maintained without constant vigilance.
You can't walk around showing the goods and expect young women to be pure. Shopping for sexy underwear only makes a woman want to show them off. Sooner or later, some dude's going to see them, sooner or later, he'll coax them off.
The title of the blog is to get us thinking. Jesus said if our eyes causes us to stumble, take it out. If we steal, cut off our hand. If we hate, we've murdered. His point?
We're all guilty! We've all fallen short of God's glory. Sin is serious business. I've got to up my level of holiness! How about you?
After all, we are His favorite ones. I want to love Him like I am favored.
Showing posts with label Sexual revolution. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Sexual revolution. Show all posts
Friday, October 19, 2007
Tuesday, July 31, 2007
Ah, yes, the sexual revolution
Recently, Nona Willis-Aronowitz posted an article "The Virginity Mystique" on The Nation web site.
Willis-Aronowitz challenges authors like Wendy Shalit (A Return to Modesty: Discovering the Lost Virtue) and other conservative authors, like Laura Sessions Stepp (Unhooked), Dawn Eden (The Thrill of the Chaste) and Lauren Winner (Real Sex: The Naked Truth About Chastity) about their call for women to return to modesty.
While Willis-Aronowitz recognizes Paris Hilton NOT to be a good role model for young women, she can't seem to find the balance or the reason why.
She insists feminism must further the sexual revolution. She writes:
"How do feminists fit into the modesty debate? Well, awkwardly. (RH: Why is that?) Second-wave feminists, who made it possible for women to take control of their own sex lives, are at a loss for words when asked to comment on young women's early, sometimes ill-fated, forays into sex. Feminism has not finished its job; a version of nonmushy, nonmarital sex that makes women feel good about themselves is still hard to achieve."
Exactly, Willis-Aronowitz. Feminism continues to fail to understand that women are not men. We don't think or act like men. The sexual revolution was, in their minds, about acting like men sexually. Without commitment or purpose.
The reason they have no answers is because they cannot admit the solution: they were wrong.
What they wanted via the free love mantra birthed in '67 has cheated, short changed and lead their daughters and granddaughters down a perilous path.
Women have always controlled the reigns sexually. We've always had the power. Men want it. We have it.
Feminism came along and insisted we give up the reigns. Change our role. Move to the men's playing field where we gained nothing and lost everything.
Abortions increased. Rape increased. Sexually transmitted diseases went up exponentially. Abuse increased. Single moms now populate the nation. Thousands of kids, many of them minorities, are being raised without fathers.
The sexual revolution broke down the family. More women are in economic straits than ever before, and we can't blame the "glass ceiling."
Tell me again how we're liberated? Because we can walk around with our "privates" showing and not feel guilty?
Because we can dance around a pole, or pose nude without feeling condemned? This is empowerment?
No, Ms. Willis-Aronowitz. It's enslavement. And we were sold into bondage by our mothers and grandmothers.
Ironic, most slavery begins with a people group selling out their own.
Willis--Aronowitz goes on to ask, "Why should sex have an everlasting warranty of love attached to it? Sex is the ultimate risk, a risk that makes human relationships complicated, intoxicating and wonderful. It is a risk that women are finally allowed to take without being chastised for it. And if young women choose to keep their sexuality under wraps, fine. Girls deserve the space to figure out a sexual reality that makes them happy, rather than dwelling on the difference between "Madonna" and "whore"--and deciding which is worse."
Why should it not come with a warranty of love? Willis-Aronowitz is over simplifying the subject. She only chooses the extremes. Madonna (and not the recording artist) or whore.
No one, even the Shalit and Winner, are advocating Madonna or whore extremes.
But feminism never takes into consideration in their holy-to-them sexual revolution all the casualties in between sanctimonious and slutty! There are millions of them. Girls. Babies. Families.
Sex is complicated. It's not an experiment. It's spiritual. Emotional. And no matter how hard we try, it comes with attachments.
The sex act is what makes people "one." Just because we want it to be casual sometimes and binding other times doesn't change anything. It's almost a law of nature: sex binds people together.
There is nothing ethereal about a wedding ceremony that unites a couple. It's the honeymoon!
Why should girls have to train themselves to discard modesty so we can fulfill some pie-in-the-sky reckless idealism of bitter rebellious women?
Women who began feminism to eliminate the our need for men. Read their manifesto.
For the most part, pop culture doesn't even know the meaning behind the marching orders we so ready follow.
Shouldn't the feminist sexual revolution be about women calling each other higher? About challenging men to a higher standard. Why is lowering the bar, revolution?
Song of Solomon 2:15 says, "Catch the foxes for us, The little foxes that are ruining the vineyards, While our vineyards are in blossom."
The sexual revolution is a fox that has ruined the vineyard of many young women while their values and morals were in bloom. They watch television shows like Friends and believe it's the way cool, modern young people behave.
If the cast of Friends lived out their actions in real life, five of the six would have incurable
STDs. Probably all but Chandler. (wink) Unless he got it from Monica.
Casual sex is not healthy for men, either. Men, stop sleeping around. You can get all kinds of nasty critters. And, what's that old saying, "If you sleep with someone, you sleep with everyone they've slept with."
Tony once prayed for a guy who was struggling with homosexual feelings. Turns out the guy slept with a bi-sexual woman and didn't know it until later. Hmm. He spiritually connected with her and tapped into something she had.
Paul tells the hip, modern, progressive Corinthians, "Do you not know that the one who joins himself to a prostitute is one body with her? For He says, "THE TWO SHALL BECOME ONE FLESH."
Women are beautiful, unique creatures that have a destiny designed by God that impacts the universe. Each one of us impacts one that impacts another. All the way to the stars!
Why should we behave like the lowest common denominator. The least of who I am is who I am sexually. In fact, sex has nothing at all to do with who I am. I don't need it to define me. Thank God.
We are all twisted around the axle here. Is sex good and right. Absolutely. In the right context. Many of the best things in life are good only in the right context.
Lookit, we don't drive up to McDonalds, order a Big Mac meal and a hundred year old bottle of Merlot. Why not? The wine doesn't fit the context.
Girls, don't act like the drive up window at McDonalds. You're not special number 1, 2, or 3.
You are a bottle of the best fine wine, aged, cultured, treasured, only to be opened at the right time, by the right man and savored. Same for you men. No double standards here!
But ladies, we are the gate keepers.
Funny, we respect wine more than ourselves sometimes.
Jesus has a plan, purpose and destiny for you. Don't get side tracked by the idea of sexual liberty that only exists in the minds of elitists.
True sexual liberty only comes in the commitment of marriage. And I can defend my claim any day. ;)
So, the Virginity Mystique Willis-Aronowitz writes about? Really, it's the sexual revolution mystique.
There are three things which are too wonderful for me,
Four which I do not understand:
The way of an eagle in the sky,
The way of a serpent on a rock,
The way of a ship in the middle of the sea,
And the way of a man with a maid.
Proverbs 30:18-19.
Willis-Aronowitz challenges authors like Wendy Shalit (A Return to Modesty: Discovering the Lost Virtue) and other conservative authors, like Laura Sessions Stepp (Unhooked), Dawn Eden (The Thrill of the Chaste) and Lauren Winner (Real Sex: The Naked Truth About Chastity) about their call for women to return to modesty.
While Willis-Aronowitz recognizes Paris Hilton NOT to be a good role model for young women, she can't seem to find the balance or the reason why.
She insists feminism must further the sexual revolution. She writes:
"How do feminists fit into the modesty debate? Well, awkwardly. (RH: Why is that?) Second-wave feminists, who made it possible for women to take control of their own sex lives, are at a loss for words when asked to comment on young women's early, sometimes ill-fated, forays into sex. Feminism has not finished its job; a version of nonmushy, nonmarital sex that makes women feel good about themselves is still hard to achieve."
Exactly, Willis-Aronowitz. Feminism continues to fail to understand that women are not men. We don't think or act like men. The sexual revolution was, in their minds, about acting like men sexually. Without commitment or purpose.
The reason they have no answers is because they cannot admit the solution: they were wrong.
What they wanted via the free love mantra birthed in '67 has cheated, short changed and lead their daughters and granddaughters down a perilous path.
Women have always controlled the reigns sexually. We've always had the power. Men want it. We have it.
Feminism came along and insisted we give up the reigns. Change our role. Move to the men's playing field where we gained nothing and lost everything.
Abortions increased. Rape increased. Sexually transmitted diseases went up exponentially. Abuse increased. Single moms now populate the nation. Thousands of kids, many of them minorities, are being raised without fathers.
The sexual revolution broke down the family. More women are in economic straits than ever before, and we can't blame the "glass ceiling."
Tell me again how we're liberated? Because we can walk around with our "privates" showing and not feel guilty?
Because we can dance around a pole, or pose nude without feeling condemned? This is empowerment?
No, Ms. Willis-Aronowitz. It's enslavement. And we were sold into bondage by our mothers and grandmothers.
Ironic, most slavery begins with a people group selling out their own.
Willis--Aronowitz goes on to ask, "Why should sex have an everlasting warranty of love attached to it? Sex is the ultimate risk, a risk that makes human relationships complicated, intoxicating and wonderful. It is a risk that women are finally allowed to take without being chastised for it. And if young women choose to keep their sexuality under wraps, fine. Girls deserve the space to figure out a sexual reality that makes them happy, rather than dwelling on the difference between "Madonna" and "whore"--and deciding which is worse."
Why should it not come with a warranty of love? Willis-Aronowitz is over simplifying the subject. She only chooses the extremes. Madonna (and not the recording artist) or whore.
No one, even the Shalit and Winner, are advocating Madonna or whore extremes.
But feminism never takes into consideration in their holy-to-them sexual revolution all the casualties in between sanctimonious and slutty! There are millions of them. Girls. Babies. Families.
Sex is complicated. It's not an experiment. It's spiritual. Emotional. And no matter how hard we try, it comes with attachments.
The sex act is what makes people "one." Just because we want it to be casual sometimes and binding other times doesn't change anything. It's almost a law of nature: sex binds people together.
There is nothing ethereal about a wedding ceremony that unites a couple. It's the honeymoon!
Why should girls have to train themselves to discard modesty so we can fulfill some pie-in-the-sky reckless idealism of bitter rebellious women?
Women who began feminism to eliminate the our need for men. Read their manifesto.
For the most part, pop culture doesn't even know the meaning behind the marching orders we so ready follow.
Shouldn't the feminist sexual revolution be about women calling each other higher? About challenging men to a higher standard. Why is lowering the bar, revolution?
Song of Solomon 2:15 says, "Catch the foxes for us, The little foxes that are ruining the vineyards, While our vineyards are in blossom."
The sexual revolution is a fox that has ruined the vineyard of many young women while their values and morals were in bloom. They watch television shows like Friends and believe it's the way cool, modern young people behave.
If the cast of Friends lived out their actions in real life, five of the six would have incurable
STDs. Probably all but Chandler. (wink) Unless he got it from Monica.
Casual sex is not healthy for men, either. Men, stop sleeping around. You can get all kinds of nasty critters. And, what's that old saying, "If you sleep with someone, you sleep with everyone they've slept with."
Tony once prayed for a guy who was struggling with homosexual feelings. Turns out the guy slept with a bi-sexual woman and didn't know it until later. Hmm. He spiritually connected with her and tapped into something she had.
Paul tells the hip, modern, progressive Corinthians, "Do you not know that the one who joins himself to a prostitute is one body with her? For He says, "THE TWO SHALL BECOME ONE FLESH."
Women are beautiful, unique creatures that have a destiny designed by God that impacts the universe. Each one of us impacts one that impacts another. All the way to the stars!
Why should we behave like the lowest common denominator. The least of who I am is who I am sexually. In fact, sex has nothing at all to do with who I am. I don't need it to define me. Thank God.
We are all twisted around the axle here. Is sex good and right. Absolutely. In the right context. Many of the best things in life are good only in the right context.
Lookit, we don't drive up to McDonalds, order a Big Mac meal and a hundred year old bottle of Merlot. Why not? The wine doesn't fit the context.
Girls, don't act like the drive up window at McDonalds. You're not special number 1, 2, or 3.
You are a bottle of the best fine wine, aged, cultured, treasured, only to be opened at the right time, by the right man and savored. Same for you men. No double standards here!
But ladies, we are the gate keepers.
Funny, we respect wine more than ourselves sometimes.
Jesus has a plan, purpose and destiny for you. Don't get side tracked by the idea of sexual liberty that only exists in the minds of elitists.
True sexual liberty only comes in the commitment of marriage. And I can defend my claim any day. ;)
So, the Virginity Mystique Willis-Aronowitz writes about? Really, it's the sexual revolution mystique.
There are three things which are too wonderful for me,
Four which I do not understand:
The way of an eagle in the sky,
The way of a serpent on a rock,
The way of a ship in the middle of the sea,
And the way of a man with a maid.
Proverbs 30:18-19.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
