This sounds very much like another user I've not seen for some time. They also posted against sex. And fed into the drama of their own threads, while also playing a martyr. A lot of similarities.
Antisexuality
- Thread starter williamfinch
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
E
EleventhHour
Guest
I've been promoting an offline local group for people like me, when a lady responded to such promotion with an email that read "hey 28 f here interested in this !" and a photo of her in a dress that showed a lot of her chest.
One of the reasons why I am forming this local group is to avoid such photos and communications. Many websites exploit men like me with unsolicited romantic sexual content. In this case, she sent me a photo that I did not request, especially one where a large amount of her chest was showing. If I had sent someone a photo with a good amount of my groin or pelvis showing, yet not revealing my private parts, then I can get reported for that. Some people would find that inappropriate, unsolicited, or offensive.
I've changed requirements such that I will avoid future recipients sending me unsolicited photos.
I am proud of my response for a few reasons though. Some other weaker men may have sexually or intimately interpreted her email with that provocative photo. But as soon as I saw the photo, I started to mostly take her account seriously and assumed that she might even be a lesbian. I've been looking at a series of photos and clips that helps me "desexualize" women. Because if I weren't desexualizing women or exercising antisexuality, I would've assumed that she was heterosexual. The ability to assume homosexuality is very great, because it helps me respect women more as humans and less as sexual objects.
Another proud instance of my response was that I refrained from intimately or sexually interpreting her communication and photo because she might actually need help. Her sending me a photo, of herself in a provocative dress, doesn't mean that her outreach is any less sincere or authentic. Her dress looked like of some custom or tradition. If she truly needs support, then I would have to start seriously considering her and not be sexual or intimate around her because the group is mostly for celibates.
Lastly, when I reviewed her photo again, she reminded me of some transsexual. I look at a series of photos that help me understand the reality of women, including transsexuals. And I definitely do not want to treat a transsexual as a sexual object! So again, I refrained from intimately or sexually interpreting her photo and response.
I've taken measures to make sure recipients don't send photos anymore, or at least such recipients would be marked so that I ignore their responses. This is the internet, and prostitution businesses are quick to sexually exploit weak men because there's little moderation but a lot of potential profit.
One of the reasons why I am forming this local group is to avoid such photos and communications. Many websites exploit men like me with unsolicited romantic sexual content. In this case, she sent me a photo that I did not request, especially one where a large amount of her chest was showing. If I had sent someone a photo with a good amount of my groin or pelvis showing, yet not revealing my private parts, then I can get reported for that. Some people would find that inappropriate, unsolicited, or offensive.
I've changed requirements such that I will avoid future recipients sending me unsolicited photos.
I am proud of my response for a few reasons though. Some other weaker men may have sexually or intimately interpreted her email with that provocative photo. But as soon as I saw the photo, I started to mostly take her account seriously and assumed that she might even be a lesbian. I've been looking at a series of photos and clips that helps me "desexualize" women. Because if I weren't desexualizing women or exercising antisexuality, I would've assumed that she was heterosexual. The ability to assume homosexuality is very great, because it helps me respect women more as humans and less as sexual objects.
Another proud instance of my response was that I refrained from intimately or sexually interpreting her communication and photo because she might actually need help. Her sending me a photo, of herself in a provocative dress, doesn't mean that her outreach is any less sincere or authentic. Her dress looked like of some custom or tradition. If she truly needs support, then I would have to start seriously considering her and not be sexual or intimate around her because the group is mostly for celibates.
Lastly, when I reviewed her photo again, she reminded me of some transsexual. I look at a series of photos that help me understand the reality of women, including transsexuals. And I definitely do not want to treat a transsexual as a sexual object! So again, I refrained from intimately or sexually interpreting her photo and response.
I've taken measures to make sure recipients don't send photos anymore, or at least such recipients would be marked so that I ignore their responses. This is the internet, and prostitution businesses are quick to sexually exploit weak men because there's little moderation but a lot of potential profit.
Usually I keep a pretty open mind about things but it appears from your post that you at least spend some time looking at pictures of people in order to "desexualize them" pictures that objectify women...you proceed to "use" toward this purpose? Do you not see how that's somewhat warped?
Sounds the same as falling prey to a sexualized image on purpose. You are "using" these pictures and treating them as objects.
First you view this woman as provocative, then you disassociate yourself from that fact and as a work around you essentially "force" a belief on yourself that this woman is a lesbian "seeing clearly"...but then I guess that doesn't work so you "force" her to line up with being transexual in need of help. So you have done nothing but only consider this woman's sexuality as far as I can tell..."knowing" that she clearly needs help because she may have been indiscreet with her cleavage which you cannot prove was intentional or not.
Maybe you are still reading...but not every female is aware of their effect on men. There are some that grow up showing cleavage and it doesn't particularly "do anything" for most of the men as a lot of them are desensitized to this. The intentionally lustful images that are portrayed in media awaken "drives" in early teens and possibly late teens but it's pretty uncommon for your average male. They see it all the time and it's culturally acceptable.
How do you know it wasn't an honest mistake? Certainly a person can have a discussion about modesty.
If it were legitimately an attack, I feel ya man and I've had stuff like that occur in my life as well...although it could have been coincidence that I was involved, there are definitely some women out there that do intentionally do things like that and I've experienced that first hand. It is disturbing for sure.
Just consider how you are "using" an image. Regardless of what you are using it for, it still applies to sexuality. Do you know how we make a covenant with our eyes? Don't look and not only that but this is only part of the battle, learn to redirect the energy toward something productive. Sure there are some "hot moments" where it seems incredibly hard and I've definitely had my share of defeats without question but force disassociation and reprogramming through such tactics is ill-advised. Get off the internet, seek some solitude in nature. If it's that big of a personal issue this shouldn't be that big of a step. I've done it...lived outside for long periods without the internet in order to work through things. The biofeedback occurs in dreams, but it's just another battle to pray through.
I'm pretty hardcore in how I view purity and have been militant about it as well...the results haven't been spectacular trying to do it "my way".
Are you looking for encouragement by posting here? What's your motivation for including others in such a pursuit which is akin to asceticism? I'm certainly all for rising above the flesh but you don't do that in your own power and strength or you will inevitably fail, and I find it hard to believe the Lord is leading you through in this fashion.
It would help to at least post your goals on what you are trying to accomplish. Brute force disconnection from a natural process must have some sort of aim. If it's purity, more power to ya (just don't go overboard). If it's essentially exalting yourself against the creator and saying that his system is wicked regardless of whether you are in Christ or not, then we have some problems. Read through Genesis...there's quite a bit to learn about purity there, what to do and what not to do.
I probably won't spend any more time responding unless you are interested in discussion not treating this like a personal blog on a public forum. I understand that the state of the sexual affairs in the world today can be traumatic (it's a lifelong struggle for me) but eventually your drive begins to diminish and it becomes a bit more balanced and easier to handle it seems. There's battle enough propounding a Godly standard for marriage in today's world and how to navigate the pitfalls surrounding us in a way that honors him.
You still have not answered any of the questions. What did Yeshua/Jesus mean when he said, "All Power is given unto me in heaven and in earth"?
1 Corinthians 7:8-9 King James Version (KJV)
8 I say therefore to the unmarried and widows, it is good for them if they abide even as I.
9 But if they cannot contain, let them marry: for it is better to marry than to burn.
The Single Life of the Ascetic Priesthood allows for total immersion and commitment in Service to Elohim/God. And as Paul instructs, speaking by the Spirit, if you cannot contain, than it's better to marry. Sex is for Procreation only and it must be between mature married man and woman. Can you prove otherwise by using Scripture?
Colossians 3:5 Young's Literal Translation (YLT)
5 Put to death, then, your members that [are] upon the earth -- whoredom, uncleanness, passion, evil desire, and the covetousness, which is idolatry
Any Addiction that is not Addiction to Elohim/God is Idolatry.
Genesis 19:4 King James Version (KJV)
4 But before they lay down, the men of the city, even the men of Sodom, compassed the house round, both old and young, all the people from every quarter:
Certainly not Roman Catholic. Nobody persecutes and harasses Celibate Roman Catholic Priests and that is because there is "NO SEPARATION BETWEEN CHURCH AND STATE" and, apparently, Roman Catholic is the State. On the other hand, we are under 24/7 surveillance, persecuted and harassed because we are not a member of a Denominational or Non-denominational State Church. We rejoice in this persecution.
The Knights Templar is a Roman Catholic Order. Elohim/God has brought his Satanic/Demonic enemies to battle for ARMAGEDDON.
To further inform readers, we are surrounded by Sexual Perverts that are engaged in all kinds of deviant and unspeakable sexual behaviour. These Sexual Perverts are trying to pervert every person in the neighbourhood, including the young.
There are Powerful Satanists modelled on Aleister Crowley (the majority), and there are Ascetic Satanists (the minority) that are more Powerful.
Fasting Thread:
https://christianchat.com/threads/fasting.188652/post-4083816
https://christianchat.com/threads/fasting.188652/post-4084276
i just dont see how ascetism would appeal to satanist. you would think they would just engage in sodomy of all kinds.
Prove what? You didn't point out what you disagreed with. The only thing I disagree with is that if sex was only for procreation why would God make it intimate, or feel good, or how the brain chemistry changes to mimic the use of a drug in a euphoria state of mind. The Song of Solomon sure doesn't sound like God designed sex for just procreation. It has a spiritual connection otherwise if it didn't it would just be like doing laundry. Otherwise it wouldn't have the emotional pain element when someone is caught in adultry or rape.
The original person I'm thinking of wasn't mocking. They were a long time regular that suddenly went off the rails on the subject.
E
EleventhHour
Guest
E
EleventhHour
Guest
This is actually interesting ..
Maybe now I am beginning to get your point at least on this.
E
EleventhHour
Guest
The moderators can delete this thread. I'm making an improved thread in another part of the website.
Nevermind. The new thread was removed apparently.
I hate the internet and how it censors antisexuality. I can't wait to form my local offline group not financed by prostitutes. The internet is disgusting.
I'm pretty sure that I can't easily get killed offline for my antisexuality. If I was exercising homosexuality, I'd get harassed or killed though. And some people could assume antisexuals are homosexuals. But the Almighty will protect me: being antisexual is not a sin.
E
EleventhHour
Guest
The Nazi War is against God! Despite popular belief, the Nazis never lost the World War.
God is dead
'God is Dead' (German: About this sound„Gott ist tot“ (help·info); also known as The Death of God) is a widely quoted statement by German philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche. Nietzsche used the phrase to express his idea that the Enlightenment had eliminated the possibility of the existence of God. However, proponents of the strongest form of the Death of God theology have used the phrase in a literal sense, meaning that the Christian God, who existed at one point, has ceased to exist.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/God_is_dead