R
rpp
Guest
On on board with this!
- Status
D
Dtmccameron
Guest
**Goodness gracious! As though only women yearn for such things! It’s almost as selfish as the homosexuals stealing away rainbows, butteflies, parades, and a synonym for happy!
Young lady (and I can say that quite safely, as in regards to Methusela, we are all very, very, very young) I kindly wish to remind you that boys as well as girls grew up watching Disney!
**----*Quite. The idea might not catch on though, we ‘Christians’ do so love our sinning.
The very notion makes me ill (as does the fact of the wickedness which is the subject of this conversation) but it is so.
Then again, don’t cast judgement too quickly. Just as the mastubators do despise themselves and their wickedness, so too might some who look up this filth regret their crimes, and feel utterly trapped.
Aside from educating them, we can only pray.*
S
surfinpure
Guest
I somehow doubt that, just because “romance” as we define it today may not have been so well defined in centuries past, the concept was lacking in courtship and healthy marriages. The Song of Solomon makes it pretty clear that romance was alive and well in the ancient world. Or, if you prefer Ecclesiastes, “There is nothing new under the sun.”
No doubt our culture has lost most of what true romance was, and replaced it with a cheap imitation, as it has glorified sex above everything else relational. I believe true romance is a creation of God, and meant to be included in the context of the courtship and marriage experience. C.S. Lewis elaborated quite well on Eros in The Four Loves.
Just think of all the new cliches you hear : “I’m not getting my needs met.”, “I have a right to be happy.” etc.
Maybe we’d be better off if we went back to the old days when folks took a more realistic approach to marriage and asked is he hard working? does she come from a good family? is s/he a churchgoer? Will s/he be a good parent?
Instead of is she hot? is he romantic?
Absolutely! At this point, even arranged marriages would be a step up from the degenerate process of spousal selection (or merely “significant other shopping”) that we have today.
And for the record, I don’t believe it is in every man’s nature to be “romantic” in the Don Juan fashion. My own husband is not naturally this way, in fact. But if we were to view romance as not a way of being but rather a way of behaving, it would be a step in the right direction. Because truly, we had a wonderful romance in the early days, even without his having natural romantic inclinations. Romance was simply the joy of finding one another, of learning each other, and of building our life together. And we understand now (especially having learned and practiced NFP) that romance is very important to the physical relationship.
G
GraceDK
Guest
surf(name removed by moderator)ure:
I somehow doubt that, just because “romance” as we define it today may not have been so well defined in centuries past, the concept was lacking in courtship and healthy marriages. The Song of Solomon makes it pretty clear that romance was alive and well in the ancient world. Or, if you prefer Ecclesiastes, “There is nothing new under the sun.”
**The fact that some of you will actually glorify arranged marriages is just repulsive to me. ´Do you all know that The Church was the one to make the real marriage … during the middle ages when people in Europe were promised away to other families when they were still infants and where the sign of matrimony was the breaking of the female virginity, the Church came in and said that this was inhuman and that marriage should be a “contract” of two free, adult, individuals who were to give their free consent to the marriage. The Church was wise. As a Christian seeing what arranged marriages do to women and children around me in our muslim communities I shudder that any of you think such a life is worthy for men and women who were created to love. What man wants a woman he does not already love… a man who prefers a maid and a sex-slave. As for my own community, I thank God that there is not one woman here who is not repulsed at the thought of having to live and sleep with a man whom she had not chosen for herself.
**
No doubt our culture has lost most of what true romance was, and replaced it with a cheap imitation, as it has glorified sex above everything else relational. I believe true romance is a creation of God, and meant to be included in the context of the courtship and marriage experience. C.S. Lewis elaborated quite well on Eros in The Four Loves.
Absolutely! At this point, even arranged marriages would be a step up from the degenerate process of spousal selection (or merely “significant other shopping”) that we have today.
And for the record, I don’t believe it is in every man’s nature to.
** Lets not compare plague and colera and say which one is better.**
I somehow doubt that, just because “romance” as we define it today may not have been so well defined in centuries past, the concept was lacking in courtship and healthy marriages. The Song of Solomon makes it pretty clear that romance was alive and well in the ancient world. Or, if you prefer Ecclesiastes, “There is nothing new under the sun.”
**The fact that some of you will actually glorify arranged marriages is just repulsive to me. ´Do you all know that The Church was the one to make the real marriage … during the middle ages when people in Europe were promised away to other families when they were still infants and where the sign of matrimony was the breaking of the female virginity, the Church came in and said that this was inhuman and that marriage should be a “contract” of two free, adult, individuals who were to give their free consent to the marriage. The Church was wise. As a Christian seeing what arranged marriages do to women and children around me in our muslim communities I shudder that any of you think such a life is worthy for men and women who were created to love. What man wants a woman he does not already love… a man who prefers a maid and a sex-slave. As for my own community, I thank God that there is not one woman here who is not repulsed at the thought of having to live and sleep with a man whom she had not chosen for herself.
**No doubt our culture has lost most of what true romance was, and replaced it with a cheap imitation, as it has glorified sex above everything else relational. I believe true romance is a creation of God, and meant to be included in the context of the courtship and marriage experience. C.S. Lewis elaborated quite well on Eros in The Four Loves.
Absolutely! At this point, even arranged marriages would be a step up from the degenerate process of spousal selection (or merely “significant other shopping”) that we have today.
And for the record, I don’t believe it is in every man’s nature to.
** Lets not compare plague and colera and say which one is better.**
D
dakotagirl
Guest
Yours truly has figured out (it wasn’t that hard) that any film rated R for “sexual content” is not going to be healthy viewing, no matter what else it has going for it. 
S
surfinpure
Guest
**
Second, the Jews had arranged marriages for thousands of years, as have many ancient cultures BESIDES Muslim, and having read personal accounts from these cultures, I understand that there was quite a lot to be gained from not having romantic notions of one’s spouse before marriage, only to feel disilllusioned later on when the honeymoon is over. By contrast, those spouses who did not choose a mate (but nevertheless got one in the same faith tradition with similar cultural values – which is important) had only to grow in love, admiration, and appreciation for each other. The picture is not always nearly so bleak as the one you’ve painted.**
First, this really isn’t a thread about arranged marriages, so I will only post once on the subject.**The fact that some of you will actually glorify arranged marriages is just repulsive to me. ´Do you all know that The Church was the one to make the real marriage … during the middle ages when people in Europe were promised away to other families when they were still infants and where the sign of matrimony was the breaking of the female virginity, the Church came in and said that this was inhuman and that marriage should be a “contract” of two free, adult, individuals who were to give their free consent to the marriage. The Church was wise. As a Christian seeing what arranged marriages do to women and children around me in our muslim communities I shudder that any of you think such a life is worthy for men and women who were created to love. What man wants a woman he does not already love… a man who prefers a maid and a sex-slave. As for my own community, I thank God that there is not one woman here who is not repulsed at the thought of having to live and sleep with a man whom she had not chosen for herself.
Second, the Jews had arranged marriages for thousands of years, as have many ancient cultures BESIDES Muslim, and having read personal accounts from these cultures, I understand that there was quite a lot to be gained from not having romantic notions of one’s spouse before marriage, only to feel disilllusioned later on when the honeymoon is over. By contrast, those spouses who did not choose a mate (but nevertheless got one in the same faith tradition with similar cultural values – which is important) had only to grow in love, admiration, and appreciation for each other. The picture is not always nearly so bleak as the one you’ve painted.**
J
John_AH
Guest
GraceDK,
Like all things arranged marriages can be done for the right and wrong reasons. Yes, it should be in consent of the couple. But people do trust their family’s to-do what is good for the individual and the community. I don’t even think the topic is on arranged marriages in this form.
We have to be very careful choosing our spouse for number of factors. These factors are being misguided by media.
In my case I would seek advice from those who love me in making this decision for it not just about us (couple) it is about the community and God.
Why do people think there so wise to choose for themselves? Is that what got us into this mess in the first place? We should be meek and humble in accepting help on probably the second must critical decision of our lives.
God’s servant,
John Anthony
Like all things arranged marriages can be done for the right and wrong reasons. Yes, it should be in consent of the couple. But people do trust their family’s to-do what is good for the individual and the community. I don’t even think the topic is on arranged marriages in this form.
We have to be very careful choosing our spouse for number of factors. These factors are being misguided by media.
In my case I would seek advice from those who love me in making this decision for it not just about us (couple) it is about the community and God.
Why do people think there so wise to choose for themselves? Is that what got us into this mess in the first place? We should be meek and humble in accepting help on probably the second must critical decision of our lives.
God’s servant,
John Anthony
C
chevalier
Guest
Firstly, sex in a literary depiction is somewhat more elegant than a visual porn film, but it’s still sex. Generally, the problem is not with the medium but with the experiences sought.
Secondly, while I wouldn’t put them on the same level with porn, some romance novels may build an objectifying picture of men.
Generally, if men are defined exclusively by how they make women feel, I would say that’s objectifying. There’s a difference between serving women and serving the whims of women and some books and some men from middle ages through especially the 17-18th century, to now, have failed to get it. Some writers actually went against the tide to point this out, such as Friedrich von Schiller in The Glove. In that piece, a lady threw a glove down amidst lions in the arena and demanded a knight to pick it up for her. He went down, brought the glove back and refused to have any dealings with the woman. There’s also a similar Polish legend in which a Silesian princess made candidates ride around her steeply located castle if they wanted her hand in marriage. Their horses would trip and they would fall. A Polish knight came and did the round but refused the princess’s hand. If that legend is actually mediaeval in origin, that would suggest there was already some opposition to the popular “romance” trend.
Obviously, this kind of story, where the man takes an incredible amount of beating just to make a woman feel satisfied that she has this kind of effect on him, is flawed. This is generally the case with the mediaeval ideal of “courtly love”. Less extreme examples include novels in which the man is the woman’s puppy and all sorts of superficial displays follow. I don’t think such books help people become wiser. However, I would put them on the same level with male machismo stories and films (hardly books, actually), not with porn.
Now, a genuine romantic book - something you can actually call a book, a piece of literature - is probably something young men should actually read once or twice to learn something.
Secondly, while I wouldn’t put them on the same level with porn, some romance novels may build an objectifying picture of men.
Generally, if men are defined exclusively by how they make women feel, I would say that’s objectifying. There’s a difference between serving women and serving the whims of women and some books and some men from middle ages through especially the 17-18th century, to now, have failed to get it. Some writers actually went against the tide to point this out, such as Friedrich von Schiller in The Glove. In that piece, a lady threw a glove down amidst lions in the arena and demanded a knight to pick it up for her. He went down, brought the glove back and refused to have any dealings with the woman. There’s also a similar Polish legend in which a Silesian princess made candidates ride around her steeply located castle if they wanted her hand in marriage. Their horses would trip and they would fall. A Polish knight came and did the round but refused the princess’s hand. If that legend is actually mediaeval in origin, that would suggest there was already some opposition to the popular “romance” trend.
Obviously, this kind of story, where the man takes an incredible amount of beating just to make a woman feel satisfied that she has this kind of effect on him, is flawed. This is generally the case with the mediaeval ideal of “courtly love”. Less extreme examples include novels in which the man is the woman’s puppy and all sorts of superficial displays follow. I don’t think such books help people become wiser. However, I would put them on the same level with male machismo stories and films (hardly books, actually), not with porn.
Now, a genuine romantic book - something you can actually call a book, a piece of literature - is probably something young men should actually read once or twice to learn something.
S
surfinpure
Guest
Great post, chevalier.
G
GraceDK
Guest
Yes, I second that.
Great post Chevalier
Great post Chevalier
G
Ghoti
Guest
Indeed. The purpose is often to arouse, or else why would the descriptions be so graphic?
Secondly, while I wouldn’t put them on the same level with porn, some romance novels may build an objectifying picture of men.
Generally, if men are defined exclusively by how they make women feel, I would say that’s objectifying. There’s a difference between serving women and serving the whims of women and some books and some men from middle ages through especially the 17-18th century, to now, have failed to get it. Some writers actually went against the tide to point this out, such as Friedrich von Schiller in The Glove. In that piece, a lady threw a glove down amidst lions in the arena and demanded a knight to pick it up for her. He went down, brought the glove back and refused to have any dealings with the woman. ** There’s also a similar Polish legend in which a Silesian princess made candidates ride around her steeply located castle if they wanted her hand in marriage. Their horses would trip and they would fall. A Polish knight came and did the round but refused the princess’s hand. If that legend is actually mediaeval in origin, that would suggest there was already some opposition to the popular “romance” trend.
Obviously, this kind of story, where the man takes an incredible amount of beating just to make a woman feel satisfied that she has this kind of effect on him, is flawed. This is generally the case with the mediaeval ideal of “courtly love”. [Indeed, IIRC, “courtly love” was heavily influenced by, if not a product of, Catharism.] Less extreme examples include novels in which the man is the woman’s puppy and all sorts of superficial displays follow. I don’t think such books help people become wiser. However, I would put them on the same level with male machismo stories and films (hardly books, actually), not with porn.
chevalier:
You mean like this?Now, a genuine romantic book - something you can actually call a book, a piece of literature - is probably something young men should actually read once or twice to learn something.
A
armyross
Guest
My thoughts are anything that makes you lust is wrong. For some it could be a book or it could be a movie. I think Lust is one of the hardest thing I have ever tried to deal with.
C
chevalier
Guest
Eeeeek! No. That stuff should be banned. I said a piece of literature.
G
Ghoti
Guest
Archie Comics should be banned?
Whyfor?I await enlightenment.
BTW, I do not disagree with your premise, which I have bolded. I was being facetious, but I thought on the naive side (now, to be fair, I haven’t read an Archie comic since the sixties, and they might have “matured” since then…)
C
chevalier
Guest
Oh, waitasec. I was being facetious too when saying it should be banned. That cover is saccharine overdose, although admittedly I wouldn’t really call it decent, now that you’ve turned my attention to this problem. There is something unsettling in it.Archie Comics should be banned?
I await enlightenment.
BTW, I do not disagree with your premise, which I have bolded. I was being facetious, but I thought on the naive side (now, to be fair, I haven’t read an Archie comic since the sixties, and they might have “matured” since then…)
G
Ghoti
Guest
Is it because Veronica looks like Bettie Page, and Betty looks like Ethel Mertz?Oh, waitasec. I was being facetious too when saying it should be banned. That cover is saccharine overdose, although admittedly I wouldn’t really call it decent, now that you’ve turned my attention to this problem. There is something unsettling in it.
C
chevalier
Guest
Yeah, possibly. Plus they are two and they’re both rubbing against Archie, who’s accepting it from both of them and please note that there’s something primordial in the whole scene anyway.
C
ChristineML
Guest
I know you two are just joking around, and I always take things too literally, but I read my brother’s Archie comics in the late 70’s and early 80’s. Back then I just thought it was stupid, but now I think it’s humiliating for Betty and Veronica to always be competing with each other for Archie’s attention. Let him make a choice and live with it already. Any guy who can’t make up his mind after how many decades isn’t worth having. Sheesh.
But seriously, what great piece of genuine romantic literature would you recommend for men (or even women for that matter) to read?
Christine
isn’t worth having. Sheesh.But seriously, what great piece of genuine romantic literature would you recommend for men (or even women for that matter) to read?
Christine
G
gettingthere
Guest
I’m not really sure if men would even be interested in these…
Pride and Prejudice and Sense and Sensibility have always been favorites of mine. I could read them over and over and I think they are pretty timeless.
Away From Her by Alice Munro is a really great love story. It’s different though, because it’s about a kind of endless love between a married couple. There’s a movie based on this book too, and it was really good. I know there was at least one scene which refers to sex, but it was sex between a husband and wife and it was only referenced, it wasn’t actually seen on screen.
G
GraceDK
Guest
I too liked to watch those movies as entertainment… but for my critic sense I really think that especially *Pride and Prejudice *is very superficial… Its not even romantic if you consider it. It describes a sad time of English history where a woman was only something inasmuch as she could marry and that according to her rank.
I enjoyed the movie but the love story in it had no meat on it.
*Sense and Sensibility *had more of a love story…
Anyway… the question is really interesting… I thought I’d have a list of good love stories on my tongue … but
- Status