J
jrgmercado
Guest
Not just “these days”, society has always accepted that men would be sexually experienced and that women should be inexperienced (virgins)…hence the stereotypical “studs/sluts”
If men are supposed to be sexually experienced and women are supposed to be inexperienced, then from whom are the men supposed to gain their sexual experience?Not just “these days”, society has always accepted that men would be sexually experienced and that women should be inexperienced (virgins)…hence the stereotypical “studs/sluts”
Never heard of that before and had to look it up. That is really freaky… and a very disordered view of sexuality.Thanks for the video.
This brings to mind purity balls. I wonder if this is part of purity culture.
The only answer that logically fits the conditions is cougars.If men are supposed to be sexually experienced and women are supposed to be inexperienced, then from whom are the men supposed to gain their sexual experience?
I also believe that their teology on marriage and sexuality is more weak than us (theology of the body) so they try to fill the gap with insisting on purity, as their conception of chastity is too vague and limited to what is forbidden outside of marriage.
Yeah, I think my point here is there’s often not much to their idea of sex other than “sex in marriage = good, sex outside of marriage = bad.” There’s no real theology behind it to explain why.And sometimes these churches don’t even hate sex, but the delivery of their message is clumsy.
This is probably easier to do in polygamous societies. Although societies where that was widespread also had to correct the balance one way or another, usually violently.There is a double standard and it has historically it’s always existed in society. In most religions, women are expect to be virgins and men were expected to be “experienced”. Once upon a time, the consummating of a marriage included the “bed sheet” test.
I also think this idea is simplistic, and there is many more point missing, but it isn’t wrong.Yeah, I think my point here is there’s often not much to their idea of sex other than “sex in marriage = good, sex outside of marriage = bad.” There’s no real theology behind it to explain why.
It’s related to my original point about purity culture not really taking root in the children. If all you teach children is rules, with no depth behind them, then you won’t keep children as they grow up and start to ask questions. “Because that’s the rules” only works for little kids; you have to give more for the mind and the heart to grasp on to as the children grow if you want to have any hope of them staying firm into adulthood.I also think this idea is simplistic, and there is many more point missing, but it isn’t wrong.
Of course there is theology behind it. Marriage as a way to copulate and procreate (sorry to presented it like that) is rooted in the Bible. And of course, outside, sexuality is not well ordained.