Why Are Women Expected to be the Gatekeepers of Virginity?

That's the point! That's what seoulsearch is trying to say, that this is a problem in the world we live in.

If we never discuss the change we want to see, we will never see the change we want.

Sight is the minds way of distorting reality... or so I was told years ago...

Back to the discussion at hand... In the typical church culture, Guys generally can sleep around as much as they like, with as many as they like, and it's ok. Just pick a number, doesn't matter how many he becomes "one" with. He can finally get married to one, then he's eligible to be deacon... Nobody says a word about that.

However, let a woman be a "revolving door for men" and she will be judged far differently than the guy mentioned above. She will be the one kept at a distance. You don't want her teaching the kids and you sure don't want her sitting near your husband in Sunday school class.

No, not all churches are like this, but I'm just saying this is how it works out on average.

I have often said that I need to hire Lynx and Cinder as my forum translators. They usually come in and summarize exactly what I was trying to say over 10 pages in 2 sentences.

The whole point of this thread is to talk about the way in which the world view around us has infiltrated the way in which the church handles the subject of sexual purity: the gender roles it assigns and enforces, and how we as Christians, having been made aware of it and are open to discussing it, might go about correcting and changing the many wrongs that are being done or perpetrated.

Thank you so much for this post, Rod!

This is exactly the mentality I grew up around and I couldn't have illustrated it better.

I feel like I've been missing out. Why did I never get in on this free ride for guys?

Oh yeah... I'm allergic to the drama that comes with it. Ne'mind.

Wat

I think this also varies greatly by denomination and I think the ones that have a more egalitarian view of gender roles have closer to the same standards for men and women (though in some of your more liberal churches that becomes more like God doesn't care who you sleep with regardless of whether you're male or female). For my part, I'm not interested in dating a guy who holds a casual consumer view of sex. But I also think overall, maybe more particularly in regards to women we need to stop focusing on past failings to determine a person's character and instead look to present behavior and how to encourage people in their transformation to more Christlike behavior in the future. That was kind of how Jesus dealt with people.... go in peace and stop sinning.

To the actual thread topic...

I have shared this at least once before... many years ago I attended a church that also ran a private Christian school. One of the students became pregnant; the father was part of the congregation and helped with tech stuff. I happened to be at the elders' meeting where the response was discussed. Several people wanted her ejected from school, but nothing was said about consequences on him. I addressed that, stating that consequences should be evenly applied. I was appalled at the blatant sexism displayed in that meeting, by both men and women (the elders' wives were present).

Here's the rub: when a woman loses her virginity, there is physical evidence. The only thing to prove that a man has been pure is his conscience (unless God chooses to speak on the subject). Men value virgin females more highly than non-virgins, with the idea being that a man who marries a virgin knows that the children are his; a man who marries a non-virgin might not be certain. Of course, this is all cultural reality, not necessarily biblical truth.

Should women carry the responsibility for sexual purity? For themselves as individuals, yes; as should men, for themselves.

Dude, go start a new thread and whine about racism somewhere else. You're off topic, and you're hijacking.

I found an interesting passage in my Bible reading this morning in the book of Hosea.

For any of our friends here who areunfamiliar with Hosea, he was a prophet of God whom the Lord commanded to marry a prostitute, even though God told him she would be unfaithful, because God used this to illustrate His relationship with His unfaithful people.

The passage I found is:

Hosea 4:14 -- (God is speaking) "Therefore your daughters commit harlotry, and your brides commit adultery. I will not punish your daughters when they commit harlotry, nor your brides when they commit adultery; for the men themselves go apart with harlots, and offer sacrifices with a ritual harlot. Therefore people who do not understand will be trampled."

The footnote says something interesting (from The Jeremiah Study Bible): "Israel's practice of idolatry included widespread prostitution, and the men who propagated it by their participation were even more responsible in the Lord's eyes than the daughters who committed harlotry."

I realize this interpretation might be debated by some, and I know this passage is about spiritual adultery more than physical, but regardless, it seems very clear that God holds both men and women responsible, at the very least, to equaling degrees.

If that is the point, then OP should formulate an OP about how to socially engineer away genderroles. Not ask a question, that is answered in the OP. We live in a society, we mostly like the differences in genderroles, especially women I think. Without the genderdifferences, a lot of female rights and privilieges would be gone, so the left has gone as far as pissing of the feminists now, with this social engineering. It was extremely funny when the left pushed through mandatory paternal leave, and almost 100% of families got pissed, and they also got the lesbians and feminists to turn.

Never in world history have women been more depressed, and men too, because of no values,, no rules, and endless breakups of relationships. Love is gone. Lust is all that is left, and to make it in life seemingly, you must be selfabsorbed, and market a false image of joy.People have never been more alone. And you have shared custody, former partners using their kids as a weaponm in the negotiations of the financial divide after desolving of marriages, and pure revenge.It feels empty and void, women popping antidepressants as candy now, they are not happy with this. I have never met a woman who do not miss and want a familysituation, where she cares and nurtures, with a man who assumes the role as provider and wants to be guided. Even if they have something on the side or accepts that by the other.

And this is a christian forum, so another NOGO in erasing genderroles. People gossip, so why pretend it is shocking that the christian gossip is about sexual promiscuity? We can always discuss social engineering, pros and cons, if it is laid out honestly and on point. What is next? Pretending like we do not understand why feminism do not thrive in the muslim community? Do demographic worldmaps on tradcon, and religious demographics, you will find it fits perfectly. We are on page 4, and the issue you state that OP wanted discussed, has not been touched upon, because it was not stated clearly and honestly. The anecdotal example of how judgemental churchgoers are, made that not happen.

well look at the passage where Paul advises people not to be 'unequally yoked' isnt our God a God who cares about EQUALITY?

ok so if you slept with say, ten people, then your tenth partner also could have slep with ten people. If your partner was an idolator, you'll be an idolator too. tit for tat.

If you are a christian, then if you are to be 'equally yoked' you find another christian who has sinned just as much as you have (and repented and been forgiven just as much)

Women might be the gatekeeper sof sex. But it takes two to tango.

This is a really interesting concept Lanolin.

It would definitely make a thread of it's own...

Does equally yoked mean finding someone who has sinned and been forgiven "equally"?

Of course, drugdealers and drugsellers. It works well as long as your dealer does not get high on her own supply

At my home church, both guys and girls were taught the same about virginity. There were a couple of times that people on the worship team participated in premarital sex, and the way it was found out is because someone got pregnant (one case a vocalist girl got pregnant, and the other case, a guy got his gf pregnant). Both were told to step down from ministry for a while.

Midwest. I heard everything Seoulsearch heard everywhere from birth to just yesterday. I didn't grow up in a catholic school though.

Just curious... trying to read between your lines... Were you, or are you currently, doubting there's a big difference in the drives? I find it immensely fun poking holes in research, especially social science research. Just curious if you had doubts?

You mention, in a creative writing way, if it's God's intention for women to be the 'moral backup for both people within a couple'. I sense your 'negative' to that question. Or am violating the safety measures of your creative wordsmithing? Er, I mean, or am I wrong about that? I'm just teasing you. Not accusing you of anything.

So on that moral backup issue. Just for fun... how about if I use this analogy... If two friends go out for fun, and one's an alcoholic and the other is not. If they are both come across an opportunity to drink alcohol, does the friend who isn't an alcoholic have any extra power and responsibility to steer them both from the collective decision to go drink together? And does this analogy relate reasonably to the 'moral backup' question?

Hmm, velly intellesting indeed... So melita's church is like mine and yours is like seoulsearch's and rod's.

Now I'm curious if my church's way of handling the matter is because of our church or because our church is in this geographic area - Do other churches in this area handle the matter the same way? I don't know how I would find out. It's not the kind of topic that naturally comes up when I meet somebody at the grocery store.

Hey Sculpt,

Those are great questions.

As for your example with drinking -- I'm not a complete teetotaler, as I've had alcoholic drinks in the past, but for many years, the only form of alcohol I have is when it's in food products (the last thing I can remember is rum raisin ice cream a few months ago.)

So if I ever got invited to a party or big social gathering (because I was always the resident nerd,) you can immediately guess why -- people wanted me as their designated driver.

I was saying in another post that I am basically allergic to alcohol. Now, does this put a greater responsibility on my shoulders? Should I be held accountable for looking after those who want to drink? I don't think so, but it certainly puts you in that position.

I grew up in Lutheran schools but went to a public college. My suitemates talked me into going out with them one night, and one of them wanted to go home with a guy she just met. I told her, "You came here with us -- as long as I'm driving, you're leaving with us, because if something happens to you, I'm not having that on my conscience."

Well you can imagine how popular that made me. And I never went out with them again. Personally, I'm not keen on people throwing a burden on me that isn't mine to carry, just because they want to be irresponsible for a while.

As far as the differences between male and female sex drives -- although psychology was my major and focus in grad school (though I never actually worked in the field,) social psychology was my major. My knowledge in this field is absolutely worthless now, as all my information would be very outdated.

So I don't know what the official research is. But, my own personal guess, and this is just from my own observations, I think the gaps between the genders (at least frequency, strength of wanting, etc.) may be closing. It's a fact that higher and higher percentages of women are becoming addicted to porn and not just men, and with the liberal culture of the day, everyone, male and female, is being encouraged to express themselves through some sort of sexual experimentation.

We're on a different side of the pendulum, and I think social acceptance of women having drives and desires is decimating what was once thought of as far as women having more repressed drives. Now I'm not saying that some of the differences don't hold true -- I just believe that we are seeing a collision of nature (God-given desires) and a much wider social acceptance of expressing that desire. After all, historically, women who expressed such interests were (and still are, as we see in the church,) heavily condemned.

But the atmosphere today is one of "finding who you are and what you like," and as much as that may head into leftist territory, I can't help but wonder what the research will show regarding a difference in genders between the sex drives after another 20 years of encouraging both men and women to experiment in any way they want.

Horrifyingly, sexual abuse of both genders also seems to be almost commonplace, and again, I don't have the research on this, but all my life, people have been talking to me about the abuse they've gone through -- both men and women -- and I know that for me, I've observed two extremes.

Whether man or woman, the person seems to either shun sex completely, declaring it dirty and sinful -- or goes in the other direction and becomes completely addicted, because someone taught them that this was all they were worth.

Just my 2 cents.

The reason I'm talking about this is because if a couple goes on a date and things start to happen, it's generally always expected that the woman has to be the one to say, "No! Stop! I won't do that!", and not the man.

And if anything DOES happen, it's always seen as being because the woman didn't protest hard enough and did not stop it (therefore labeling her as THE BAD GIRL in the process.)

This is the part that I take issue with.

Just as with my suitemate, it wasn't my responsibility to make the decision for her to keep her safe just because I didn't drink, but yet, I had to make it.

The bottom line was that it was her responsibility to make good decisions for herself -- but she didn't.

So let's say that I didn't say anything, let her do what she wanted, and she went home with Mr. Stranger, and later said that he had raped her.

Who's responsibility would that have been -- hers, or mine?

But yet, someone surely would have come back and pointed a finger at me, because I was the one who wasn't drinking.

I know this isn't a perfect analogy because in the dating scenario, both people really do have the responsibility to say no and stop.

But yet, most church cultures will blame woman if the lines are crossed, and the fact that this just isn't right is what I'm trying to bring attention to in this thread.