# Is religious guilt hurting your sex life?



## Casual Observer

hhttps://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/f1de/48c5f9a4b01834666e967a5cf4f8f08d5407.pdf

While trying to better understand my wife, I came across a rather remarkable thesis someone wrote about the effect of the more conservative church's teachings about sex, specifically to women, and the damage that can do. The context is what the church is teaching younger women, high school and college. It's a lengthy paper; 313 pages in all, but the key points will be found in the sections marked. Page numbers are for the document (what's shown on the printed page) and don't line up with the acrobat page numbers. I'm posting a few relevant sections below as well.

Identity Conflicts (starts on page 111)
Sexual and relationship problems with men (starts on page 181)
Affect dysregulation (page 212)
*
Fathers, lovers, and attention seeking with men.* All women identified their
fathers were distant. None noted physical or sexual abuse by their fathers. Five women
identified their fathers as emotionally abusive, and two stated their fathers had mental
illness. Each woman linked this lack of attention and affection to their low self-esteem
and subsequent vulnerability to male attention.

Six of the women indicated craving positive male attention so strongly that by the
time they reached college, even though they worked hard to maintain their virginity in
high school, they had sex easily with their first boyfriend there. Four of the six women
reported being mistreated by these initial boyfriends, pressured into sex, and cheated on
throughout their relationship. All six women stated their self-views were so low that the
positive attention from these men greatly, albeit temporarily, increased their self-esteem
and made them feel better. As Kristen stated, “I had such a poor self-image, that male
attention, a male wanting me was so addictive. It felt so good to be wanted, to be found
attractive . . . I felt like I owed sex to them for giving this attention” (Kr,2,398). Three of
the women claimed their self-esteem was so low, that they would have married the first
man who wanted to marry them. Cheryl, who married at a young age, and later divorced,
claimed, “I married him because he gave me flowers. That was the thing. I was ugly, and
he gave me flowers” (Ch,2,496).

*Dating as sexual acting out.* Two key messages were internalized that
influenced how they entered the dating world: a woman’s sexuality was her
power, and if she were to engage this power, she would not be wanted by a good
man. As Becky recalled:

I realized at a young age . . . I’m coming to this time of definite dawning
that I am very low in the totem pole . . . but that my sexuality was a trump
card. And so there was a great deal of power involved (Be,2,325).
She continued, “I was essentially told that I had no power, but that I could bring
down a kingdom by showing a little clavicle” (Be,2,341).

Nine of the women indicated their dating relationships comprised mostly
of sexual acting out (the remaining two were virgins and also had fears of relating
with men). Interestingly, for all nine women in the study, all of their dating
relationships (save their marriages) were with non-Christian boys and men who
did not share their faith and were not men they would marry. One slight exception
included a woman whose first sexual experience was with her first boyfriend in
college, whom she loved; however, after this, all of her subsequent sexual
relationships were mostly sex-driven and with non-Christian men. Another
exception included one woman whose first sexual partner was a Christian boy her
senior year in high school in a brief relationship.

*Hiding. *Struggles with identity and shame often resulted in hiding parts of
themselves and living compartmentalized lives, exacerbating a disconnected, shameful,
and isolated experience for the women. Hiding was often exhibited through secrecy,
lying, and compartmentalization.

*Secrecy. *Several mentioned secrecy and lying as a major theme in their sexual
story. Several shared of having secret boyfriends due to lack of approval by friends and
family. Most reported not only concealing their sexual activities, but some mentioned
overtly lying to friends and family in efforts to cover up their sexual activity. Kristen,
who did not have sex until college, in talking about her high school experience, shared, “I
was two different people and that kind of ties in with that Madonna/***** – what if they
knew what I was doing on Friday night? I kept secrets. I kept secrets” (Kr,2,308). She
also mentioned a time in college when, in response to the devastation of her “bad-boy”
non-Christian boyfriend breaking up with her, with whom she’d been having sex, she told
a family member that he broke up with her because she wouldn’t have sex with him. She
shared, “I can’t believe I said that lie, but I wanted so desperately for it to be true,
because I felt so dirty” (Kr,1,519). Beth stated, “I put a lot of energy in snowing my
parents” (B,1,855). Cheryl, who had a few sexual relationships prior to her marriage,
reported, “with the sex is an evil practice of necessity . . . obviously I hid my premarital
sex” (Ch,2,496). Many of the women mentioned the great isolation and anxiety they felt,
because they hid their sexuality from their close friends. They revealed lying to their
Christian friends about having sex with their boyfriends, so they would not be rejected by
their friends.

Many women mentioned their hiding as related to the lack of an emotionally safe
place to process sexual feelings and experiences. Beth shared, “There was no place in my
life where that was okay. Just none, you know? Certainly not in my family or my church”
(B,1,803). When asked of some if they had regrets in not talking about their sexual
struggles to their family or friends, they responded with an emphatic, “No, that would not
have been good,” citing the consequences they would have received for their openness,
primarily the end of Christian friendship and the end of reverence and respect within their
Christian community.

For many of the women, the fear and shame at sharing sexual information with
friends and husbands currently remains high. Many confided sexual information for the
first time during the interviews, and others stated that their first sexual disclosures
occurred with their counselors later in their adult life. Several women reported still
having significant sexual information they had yet to tell their husbands 15+ years into
their marriages or still feeling mortified if anyone knew they were not virgins when they
married. While many continued to struggle in sharing their sexuality, others shared of the
journey in opening up and facing the ingrained fear of rejection and abandonment for
disclosing their sexual stories. For Beth, “It bothers me that it’s still a fear, just because
I’d like to be able to be more open – just generally. I’d like to be able to be more open
with people” (B,1,834).
*
Compartmentalization. *Compartmentalization about sexuality often dictated how
these women experienced much of their lives as Christians. Many talked about having
two types of friends growing up, Christians with whom they withheld their sexual
information, and non-Christian friends they could talk to about their sexuality. For fear of
rejection from their Christian community, their sexuality and sexual behaviors were
separated out from the rest of their lives and kept in secret. Once married, most claimed
their sexual lives with their husbands have never been shared with others and have thus
been in the dark. Many, however, identified counseling as the conduit for beginning to
talk about their sexuality, yet revealed that much of their sexuality had yet to be
addressed in counseling, due to fear and shame - if not asked, they didn’t share.

Even during the interviews, many were surprised at how different it was for them
to share sexual information. One woman, who was a prolific writer and thinker on these
issues, mentioned she has managed to write quite a bit on the topic of women, religion,
and sexuality but has done so without having to self-disclose. She stated, “I feel a little
embarrassed that I wasn’t able to keep this academic somehow . . . women, religion, and
sexuality – those are things that I’m very interested in and passionate about, but I guess I
didn’t expect it to stir up so much personal stuff” (B,3,8). Almost all of the women,
though, expressed gratefulness for sharing during the interviews, noting it made them feel
valued that someone would be interested enough to ask.

*A woman’s need for rescuing.* Six of the women believed being in a relationship
was critical in making them feel more stable as women. Describing their own
insecurities, they were drawn to relationships with men in order to feel better about
themselves. Two of the married women shared of such significant insecurity in college
and afterwards that they admitted to dating anyone who would take them, that being in a
relationship made them feel more secure. Both mentioned they were lucky to have
married good husbands, as they would have married “anyone” out of need for
relationship. Four of the six women who were single or divorced identified meeting a
man as what would most help them feel more valuable and more secure as a woman. All
of the women indicated they were taught that the end-goal for them was to find a man.
Combined with the shame they experienced for being “sexually loose,” if left to their
own devices, many women either explicitly stated or implied that finding a man was
loaded for them with desperate feelings of wanting to be “made right.” Several stated
directly that being married either had or would make them feel more legitimate in their
churches.

*Depression and confusion.* In addition to fear and shame, emotional suppression
and avoidance was used to regulate sexuality. Often, emotional suppression and denial
was spiritualized as a form of godliness. To feel fear, sorrow, or anger was to not trust
God. For many of the women, mistrust of emotions was a core religious tenet. Emotions
were what led you astray and led you to sin and away from God, not toward God. For
many, this contributed to a dysregulated emotional state of depression and confusion,
often requiring them to dissociate, to detach from self-awareness and emotions in order to
cope. Susan, whose fear regarding sexual sin and desire to please has kept her from
dating her adult life, shared:
The whole ‘guarding your heart,’ which I don’t know what that means, but
that was something I bought into as well with dating, like girls, you have
to guard your heart. I don’t even know what that means . . . and you can’t
trust your desires, like, we can really be led astray by our desires.

Developmentally, many mentioned college as a beginning point for depression; a
mixture of emotional dysregulation and sexual acting out that often resulted in a spiritual
crisis of despair. Throughout their lives, some shared they felt blamed by their religious
leaders for their depression. Cheryl felt great confusion and shame when her pastor told
her she was not praying enough and trusting God enough, stating, “’Don’t let anybody
tell you that you need medication for depression’”

Eight of the 11 women reported some level of depression at the time of the study.
For one woman, her church has been the most healing for her. Counseling for many has
been helpful in normalizing their sexual feelings and emotions in general. Beth stated that
she had just begun working through these deeper feelings, believing much to be related to
her sexuality. She shared:
I’ve been in counseling since June. And I went to counseling, because I
was very depressed, and I have issues with anxiety anyway, but I feel like
a lot of the last year has been like being a burn patient, you know, when
they’re constantly scraping off dead tissue, and I just haven’t hit the
healthy tissue yet, I don’t think B,3,677).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

My wife found herself written about in several places. This is an amazing piece of work. You can see how much damage is done by teaching a binary set of values; you are either good and live within the teachings of the church, or you are bad and outside. What happens, in a nutshell, is that you hide one side of you from the other. You're a good girl in church, but you deliberate deal with bad boys outside, whom you don't have to see in church. And you're looking for a way out, a way to move past the sin of premarital intimacy. The effect can be life-long and has been referenced in a number of threads, including my own.


----------



## StarFires

_You didn't have to teach your daughters to pee, did you? You only had to teach them where you wanted them to pee. We don't have to teach people inherent behavior. We wouldn't spend so much time telling girls that they're naturally monogamous if they really were.....We are still trying to control their sexual behavior....So men could ease their insecurity about paternity._

This is a staggered excerpt from the book "Women's Infidelity: Living In Limbo." The book is written as a conversation the author had with a male friend, whose wife was having an affair, so the context of this excerpt was about girls being taught men are not monogamous but women are naturally monogamous, which isn't true.

Swap the term "monogamous" with "sexual", and it's the same that girls/women have been taught throughout the ages - that they are not naturally sexual beings but men are, as the dissertation discusses.

It's incredibly frustrating. I don't have a problem with girls and boys being taught to remain pure until marriage, but the things I hate the most are the double standard, the fears that are instilled in order to be convincing, and the fact that women have always subscribed to and perpetuated men's concepts of women and female behavior, even in today's societies, religions, and cultures. Like in the dissertation, not just men but women were also and still are the leaders and teachers conveying these messages. It's insane to me.


----------



## 2ntnuf

I didn't read that, but I wanted to ask why it's religion's fault and not your parents' fault? Religion didn't force you to go there and those who are not religious seem to be more open than others. 

I don't blame women or men for their adventurous nature, but I find them to be incompatible for me. I was raised in the church and as far as I know, I'm the only one(among my siblings) who didn't have an adventurous sexual life with plenty of partners. 

So, how do I reconcile that with the idea that it is all religions fault? I don't. Something else happened and I don't know what it was.


----------



## SunCMars

As troublesome as some of the Judeo-Christian church's teachings (as practiced) 'can be', and sometimes are, it is the major bulwark against rampant promiscuity. 

Good moral turpitude is dependent on having the best practices of societal behavior demonstrated, taught and encouraged. And enforced. 

We need some sort of glue to keep the wall of humanity from collapsing and falling into that steamy pit of random sex and drugs.

We are always two generations away from Bohemia, from Babylon. Religion is that glue.

Many in this world are 'lost' souls. 
With many aimless, and flailing around for some deeper meaning.

Without religion we are even 'more' lost. 

Not all religious teachings are bad. 
Not even close.

I visited Babylon, in Iraq in 2003. I found it in shambles and in ruins.
This is a good example of what can come to any country, maybe the world.


THRD- transmitted by a friend.


----------



## cp3o

SunCMars said:


> As troublesome as some of the Judeo-Christian church's teachings (as practiced) 'can be', and sometimes are, it is the major bulwark against rampant promiscuity.
> 
> Good moral turpitude is dependent on having the best practices of societal behavior demonstrated, taught and encouraged. And enforced.
> 
> We need some sort of glue to keep the wall of humanity from collapsing and falling into that steamy pit of random sex and drugs.
> 
> We are always two generations away from Bohemia, from Babylon. Religion is that glue.
> 
> Many in this world are 'lost' souls.
> With many aimless, and flailing around for some deeper meaning.
> 
> Without religion we are even 'more' lost.
> 
> Not all religious teachings are bad.
> Not even close.
> 
> I visited Babylon, in Iraq in 2003. I found it in shambles and in ruins.
> This is a good example of what can come to any country, maybe the world.
> 
> 
> THRD- transmitted by a friend.


ISTM that you are starting from the position that society ought to be as you wish it to be - and that achieving what you perceive as ideal is to be reached without regard for truth and evidence-based thinking - both of which many of us would regard as essential to a morally defensible society.

You pick a single country and claim your experience validates your attitude. Perhaps it does but you might spend some time looking at professionally gained and analysed data (Pew Research?) - consider that much of Northern and Western Europe where religion is in decline and is much more liberal and socially accepting (though well less than perfect) is not in "need some sort of glue to keep the wall of humanity from collapsing and falling into that steamy pit of random sex and drugs". Also think on the evidence that high abortion rates, low educational achievement and greater levels of religious practice seem to co-exist in a manner which suggests there may be some cause-and-effect in play. (Pew again?)

_"We are always two generations away from Bohemia, from Babylon. Religion is that glue."_ I don't think that is the lesson of history - though lessons from history aren't worth serious consideration. The UK Victorians in power enforced a church-going, work-ethic, guilt-ridden society based on knowing one's place, accepting God's will (as interpreted by those in power) and relying on an unevidenced deity complete with afterlife alternatives unsupported by fact or reason - and what happened - Edwardian England, The Great War the 1920s and 1930s. I wonder how that reality sits with your contention. 

_"Without religion we are even 'more' lost."_ I doubt it - you have evidence?
Without religion we would not expect the false promises that many religious proponents make to happen - and therefore would not be "lost" when they failed to occur. I know about "creating the need" - it is a common sales technique amongst those without a product that meets actual need. 

_"Not all religious teachings are bad. 
Not even close."_

Some are good - but none are owned by any particular religion. Just because a religion adopts some good teachings doesn't mean that we need the religion. The Ten Commandments (two of the three Biblical versions at least) reflect commands that predate Judaism - consider the Pharoic Law and the Code of Hammurabi. And if good teachings could validate religious belief they would validate not only Judeo-Christian practice but also Islam, Hinduism, Sikhism etc. etc.. Actually the Bible's main contribution to religio-moral thought seems to be the introduction, via the tenth commandment, of guilt for unwanted thought - one dodgy dream and you're going to hell. (And lets not forget the condoning of slavery through rules to mitigate the very worst of the owner/chattel relationship). All I've known who profess a religious conviction based on a text or texts fail to get past the pick-and-mix stage. I'm not doubting their sincerity and many are lovely people but their attitude to the text is the same as mine was sixty+ years ago faced with Woolworth's sweet counter on Saturday morning. I'll have some of those and couple of them, don't like the pink shrimps and can't have those - they make me sick- etc. etc. etc. 

Additional point - unless one proposes to teach/enforce practices which one admits are based on unsupported speculation - any insistence that religiously inspired thoughts are validated by their origin is, in itself, morally indefensible. Religion-based totalitarianism would be morally bankrupt, would stifle human exploration and achievement, validate current economic inequality and impoverish humanity - now and in the future.

Final thought - just occurred to me. Can you name something good that religion has caused - not something that humans have caused and credited to religion - something beneficial to humanity that could not have happened without religious belief.


----------



## arbitrator

*God bestowed the gift of sex to us as the means for procreation and to lovingly share and enjoy under certain parameters!

Guilt is usually only purveyed by those who erroneously apply biblical precepts!*


----------



## SunCMars

@cp3o, a very well written reply. I see you have in you, some, maybe a lot of distaste of, maybe hate, for religion, likely mainstream JC teachings.

You are not alone in feeling these thoughts. I had them....too. Until, I did not.

Every religion was predated by some other theism, some other philosophy. 

Ah, Hammurabi, preceded Socrates by some ~1300 years. Hammurabi's were the oldest 'recorded' laws. These were enforced, as Codes of behavior.

*What YOU would prefer or desire becomes that shoulda, woulda, coulda.* 

Yes, it would be preferable to have a better, more realistic set of 'moral rules of behavior'. To have a better philosophy for mankind to aspire, to follow.....to.

Here comes the 'but'!

Good luck in bringing about a new and improved religion or Code of Living. 

The present religions are solidly entrenched. It would be 'easier' to build off of those, to reform JC teachings, rather than to create a new one from scratch. 

The interim period is always the worrisome time period. *Going from established religions to no religions, then to a New Era one.*
Wishful thinking, methinks.

FYI, I am not a member of any religion. 

I do believe in a Creator, or (One, God Head). 'All that is', fits under THIS umbrella.

I know, I know....what about Leprechauns? 
Do they exist? I fear to say otherwise!!



THRD- transmitted by a friend.


----------



## Casual Observer

*Excerpts from the thesis- please read*

Moved content to post at top of page


----------



## 2ntnuf

. . . I felt like I owed sex to them for giving this attention”

I'm not getting the connection. Wouldn't they just hug dad and do something nice for him? How does that translate to sex with their boyfriend?


----------



## Affaircare

2ntnuf said:


> . . . I felt like I owed sex to them for giving this attention”
> 
> I'm not getting the connection. Wouldn't they just hug dad and do something nice for him? How does that translate to sex with their boyfriend?


I identify with this part. My father was an alcoholic and my mom was mentally ill, so she'd start in on her raging, the two of them would fight, my dad would leave and be at the bar all night, she'd be angry and take it out on us kids and beat us, and after I went to bed dad would stumble home from the bar. He didn't care if we were screamed at for hours or hurt. He didn't want to be so he left, and that left us kids to bear the brunt of a mentally ill mother. 

Soooo...when I went to college, my very first college "party" was in the dorm, and I got literally black-out drunk (I wasn't used to drinking), and when I "came-to" a guy I didn't know was on top of me finishing. After he was done, he just zipped up and left--didn't say anything--just walked out of the room. This pretty much blew my mind because even though I wasn't a perfectly good girl in HS (I had a bf and we made out and even did some experimental type things in the back seat)...I wasn't promiscuous by a LONG SHOT. After I was raped, in a way I just kind of gave up, because I thought: "Well there's no point now." I still didn't sleep around, but mainly that was because no one like me back...I was that girl everyone would talk to about the crush they had on my roommate or the girl who'd play poker with the guys, you know? I did fall in love with one of my dorm-mates though, and we did sleep together. 

Then along came my first husband. I was living in my own apartment and he was the security guard for my complex. He asked ME out and like the ladies in this study, he paid me attention so I felt like I owed him sex. And like the ladies, I married the first guy who would have me...I had no self-esteem whatsoever, so it seemed to me like he'd be the best I could do. 

The point being that my dad was and still is a charming man (to his buddies at the bar and on a surface, casual level), but as a father, he still doesn't pay any attention to me whatsoever. I don't think we've spoken in years...he doesn't make any effort to talk to me at all. So before I went to counseling and learned of my own self-worth and value, I did crave male attention AND if a male gave me attention, I figured the price of attention was sex.


----------



## Girl_power

I did not read this article. But I wanted to talk about my specific experience and how it affects my sexual relationships. Obviously I was taught to wait till marriage to have sex, which I did with my exH. But what my church/religion taught us was... only you can sexually fulfill/please your spouse. And sex is super important. I hesitate to say it’s our job but it kind of is our job to make our spouses sexually happy. Of course there are always limits to this. 

My church has done lots of talks on marriage and basically they put it like this... we’re suppose to love everyone, but your spouse is an extra special person that you chose and give them extra love, extra kindness, extra forgiveness etc. basically we should be treating our significant other extra special for life.


----------



## Girl_power

I guess my point is that my religion has taught me to be selfless and to try to be a blessing to my spouse.
It has not causes me to feel guilty (except when viewing porn and other sinful things). It has not given me a poor body image, or caused me to feel shame in anyway.


----------



## 2ntnuf

Affaircare said:


> I identify with this part. My father was an alcoholic and my mom was mentally ill, so she'd start in on her raging, the two of them would fight, my dad would leave and be at the bar all night, she'd be angry and take it out on us kids and beat us, and after I went to bed dad would stumble home from the bar. He didn't care if we were screamed at for hours or hurt. He didn't want to be so he left, and that left us kids to bear the brunt of a mentally ill mother.
> 
> Soooo...when I went to college, my very first college "party" was in the dorm, and I got literally black-out drunk (I wasn't used to drinking), and when I "came-to" a guy I didn't know was on top of me finishing. After he was done, he just zipped up and left--didn't say anything--just walked out of the room. This pretty much blew my mind because even though I wasn't a perfectly good girl in HS (I had a bf and we made out and even did some experimental type things in the back seat)...I wasn't promiscuous by a LONG SHOT. After I was raped, in a way I just kind of gave up, because I thought: "Well there's no point now." I still didn't sleep around, but mainly that was because no one like me back...I was that girl everyone would talk to about the crush they had on my roommate or the girl who'd play poker with the guys, you know? I did fall in love with one of my dorm-mates though, and we did sleep together.
> 
> Then along came my first husband. I was living in my own apartment and he was the security guard for my complex. He asked ME out and like the ladies in this study, he paid me attention so I felt like I owed him sex. And like the ladies, I married the first guy who would have me...I had no self-esteem whatsoever, so it seemed to me like he'd be the best I could do.
> 
> The point being that my dad was and still is a charming man (to his buddies at the bar and on a surface, casual level), but as a father, he still doesn't pay any attention to me whatsoever. I don't think we've spoken in years...he doesn't make any effort to talk to me at all. So before I went to counseling and learned of my own self-worth and value, I did crave male attention AND if a male gave me attention, I figured the price of attention was sex.


You haven't connected the two. You have connected being black out drunk with the likelihood of some ****ing ******* raping... basically like having sex with a corpse. ****ing dirty rotten bastard. I hope he gets his comeuppins. Sorry, I got angry with your rapist. 

But, I'd be pissed at dad. I'd assume any guy would not give a damn about me. I surely wouldn't want to give myself to them with that in mind. This personal experience would back being a lesbian. I don't see the connection to giving a decent guy more than a dozen chocolate chip cookies you baked. Hope that makes sense.


----------



## 2ntnuf

.


----------



## Affaircare

2ntnuf said:


> You haven't connected the two. You have connected being black out drunk with the likelihood of some ****ing ******* raping... basically like having sex with a corpse. ****ing dirty rotten bastard. I hope he gets his comeuppins. Sorry, I got angry with your rapist.


Truth be told, I don't know my rapist's name. I don't really remember much about him. It was kind of fuzzy at the time, and I remember clearly the sound of the zipping, but I didn't have the brains to look at his face clearly. But it's in the past, like almost 40 years ago. So I appreciate you're getting mad on my behalf. 

The connection of "lack of male attention" to sex is that if you don't get much male attention as a child (I didn't), then you CRAVE some kind of male attention. Then when you get older, and lawd help me but I have bodacious tatas, you realize that one way to GET male attention is via sexuality. See that connection there? Now, church says sex=bad, wait to marriage, etc. but to get what you crave (male attention) you use what ya got...and then feel guilty about it. 



> But, I'd be pissed at dad. I'd assume any guy would not give a damn about me. I surely wouldn't want to give myself to them with that in mind. This personal experience would back being a lesbian. I don't see the connection to giving a decent guy more than a dozen chocolate chip cookies you baked. Hope that makes sense.


Yeah that makes sense! I suspect lots of people go that way. I will admit that for YEARS I wondered what the heck was wrong with me that my own parents didn't love me! I mean, that **** is esteem demolishing! But for me, rather than thinking, "No male is gonna give a damn about me, so I'm batting for the other team" what I did think was that I am not worth giving a damn ABOUT (maybe even by me). I was not comfortable being female because feminine girls are just cheap and fake ... and I honestly was not cheap. So I was a tomboy type, and I did not have a lot of love interests except another girl in my dorm. It took me to about 30yo to realize that I could be female and be feminine and still have some value and be comfortable with who I was and how I was. 

Now, I had a very good HS bf--we were friends as kids in Sunday School--and we agreed that instead of doing all that "in love" drama, we'd just go together and do what teenagers do. It was a good relationship built on friendship. Next in college, I learned that I am attracted to the person's heart and who they are...not their gender. I married the first man who showed me attention, and he was abusive...so I learned that I had self-worth and value (via years of therapy and support groups). I married Dear Hubby, and he was a very good man...so I learned that there can be kind, loving men in the world and that it can last over the years. And THEN I met Beloved Hubby and all my life's lessons were made for that day.


----------



## Girl_power

2ntnuf said:


> Who are you? Don't answer that. It's rhetorical. You seem to be totally different in this post to many others I've seen. Maybe you just hate the **** out of me? I wouldn't know why.




I’m so confused.


----------



## 2ntnuf

.


----------



## Girl_power

2ntnuf said:


> Me too, or I wouldn't have posted that to you.




The difference is I’m confused by what you said. Not what I said.


----------



## 2ntnuf

.


----------



## Girl_power

2ntnuf said:


> Why? It's pretty clear. You are like two different posters. One is opposite the other.




It’s not clear at all. You apparently think I am a certain person in your head that I’m not. Not everyone fits in your boxes.


----------



## Girl_power

2ntnuf said:


> Why? It's pretty clear. You are like two different posters. One is opposite the other.




Also you can’t just delete things after you post them.


----------



## 2ntnuf

@Lila, will you delete this post and posts 14, 17 and 19? I'm sorry for the hijack. I had to get this out. I didn't want to pm anyone. I didn't want to start a thread on it, either. 

Thanks.


----------



## cp3o

SunCMars said:


> @cp3o, a very well written reply. I see you have in you, some, maybe a lot of distaste of, maybe hate, for religion, likely mainstream JC teachings.


I have a strong conviction that irrational belief restricts and demeans the potential that human beings have for love, progress and contentment. Restricts and demeans at all levels from the individual, through family to global. 

Supernatural belief is, by definition, irrational (attributed to some force beyond scientific understanding or the laws of nature). Religion is a sector of supernatural belief. 10% of humanity does not have access to potable water, humanity is adversely affecting the sustainability of the planet's ecosystem, people are being emotionally and physically damaged because they don't conform to unrealistic stereotypes and religion is used, god(s) are invoked, "sacred" texts are quoted to justify inaction or worse.

And yes - a lot of religious people are good people - but there is no evidence to suggest that they are good because of their belief. Left to themselves good people do good things and bad people do bad things; but religion is one of the ways in which bad people get good people to do bad things.



> You are not alone in feeling these thoughts. I had them....too. Until, I did not.
> 
> Every religion was predated by some other theism, some other philosophy.
> 
> Ah, Hammurabi, preceded Socrates by some ~1300 years. Hammurabi's were the oldest 'recorded' laws. These were enforced, as Codes of behavior.
> 
> *What YOU would prefer or desire becomes that shoulda, woulda, coulda.*
> 
> Yes, it would be preferable to have a better, more realistic set of 'moral rules of behavior'. To have a better philosophy for mankind to aspire, to follow.....to.
> 
> Here comes the 'but'!
> 
> Good luck in bringing about a new and improved religion or Code of Living.
> 
> The present religions are solidly entrenched. It would be 'easier' to build off of those, to reform JC teachings, rather than to create a new one from scratch.


 We disagree. 

1 - Present religions are in decline - more so in the wealthier parts of the world where secular education is more readily available. The RCC is dependant upon Africa for its future - It has largely lost Europe and is waning in S America. In the UK (where we have a state religion) surveys consistently show "no religious allegiance" as the self-definition of over 50% - and that's held back by the older members of society. The Church of England claims only 1 in 16 as adherents. Islam has its noisy few - but most Muslims I know are little more than cultural Muslims (and most Jews seem to be non-observant) being more interested in having a decent home, a couple of well educated kids, nice car etc. than being controlled by archaic ignorance.

2 - How do you reform something that is based upon unevidenced and rationally unsupportable belief? The story of the Gospels, of the Koran, and many later offshoots is the attempts by Jesus of Nazareth to reform Judaism, of Mohammed trying to "correct" the Abrahamic concepts, of the Puritans, the Wesleys, Smith, Baker-Eddy etc. etc. all building (whatever their motivation) on existing flawed belief and producing yet another excuse for division, fear and discrimination. Islam is fractured into often violent competing intolerance, Buddhism has multiple flavours etc. etc..

When we don't know how to handle a problem the best course of action, IMO, is not to throw our hands up and blame an undetectable divinity, a mythic ancestor and/or our own imaginary inherited wickedness. Start with what we know. And seek what we don't know in ways that exclude human tendencies to see false causes and effects, treat coincidence as intent, hang on to sunk costs, worship at the altar of confirmation bias etc. etc. - all fallibilities that have served us well enough in the past but should be retired now they are counter-productive. 



> The interim period is always the worrisome time period. *Going from established religions to no religions, then to a New Era one.*


 Why get out of the hole only to leap into another? 



> Wishful thinking, methinks.


Oh ye of little faith.0 And you may be right - but we seem to be getting there slowly - I doubt it will ever be total - the sharks are moving from god(s) to "wellbeing" and "self-improvement" - but the possibility of failure does not mandate the tolerance of despair does it?



> FYI, I am not a member of any religion.
> 
> I do believe in a Creator, or (One, God Head). 'All that is', fits under THIS umbrella.
> 
> I know, I know....what about Leprechauns?
> Do they exist? I fear to say otherwise!!


And there you summarise the most powerful argument for the supernatural - you can't prove my belief to be false. 

Pitifully underwhelming - but yet so comforting and seemingly protective if one has been conditioned to accept one's incompetence and unworthiness - and I'm back to the diminution of humanity that I started at aren't I? 





> - transmitted by a friend.


----------



## SunCMars

cp3o said:


> I have a strong conviction that irrational belief restricts and demeans the potential that human beings have for love, progress and contentment. Restricts and demeans at all levels from the individual, through family to global.
> 
> Supernatural belief is, by definition, irrational (attributed to some force beyond scientific understanding or the laws of nature). Religion is a sector of supernatural belief. 10% of humanity does not have access to potable water, humanity is adversely affecting the sustainability of the planet's ecosystem, people are being emotionally and physically damaged because they don't conform to unrealistic stereotypes and religion is used, god(s) are invoked, "sacred" texts are quoted to justify inaction or worse.
> 
> And yes - a lot of religious people are good people - but there is no evidence to suggest that they are good because of their belief. Left to themselves good people do good things and bad people do bad things; but religion is one of the ways in which bad people get good people to do bad things.
> 
> We disagree.
> 
> 1 - Present religions are in decline - more so in the wealthier parts of the world where secular education is more readily available. The RCC is dependant upon Africa for its future - It has largely lost Europe and is waning in S America. In the UK (where we have a state religion) surveys consistently show "no religious allegiance" as the self-definition of over 50% - and that's held back by the older members of society. The Church of England claims only 1 in 16 as adherents. Islam has its noisy few - but most Muslims I know are little more than cultural Muslims (and most Jews seem to be non-observant) being more interested in having a decent home, a couple of well educated kids, nice car etc. than being controlled by archaic ignorance.
> 
> 2 - How do you reform something that is based upon unevidenced and rationally unsupportable belief? The story of the Gospels, of the Koran, and many later offshoots is the attempts by Jesus of Nazareth to reform Judaism, of Mohammed trying to "correct" the Abrahamic concepts, of the Puritans, the Wesleys, Smith, Baker-Eddy etc. etc. all building (whatever their motivation) on existing flawed belief and producing yet another excuse for division, fear and discrimination. Islam is fractured into often violent competing intolerance, Buddhism has multiple flavours etc. etc..
> 
> When we don't know how to handle a problem the best course of action, IMO, is not to throw our hands up and blame an undetectable divinity, a mythic ancestor and/or our own imaginary inherited wickedness. Start with what we know. And seek what we don't know in ways that exclude human tendencies to see false causes and effects, treat coincidence as intent, hang on to sunk costs, worship at the altar of confirmation bias etc. etc. - all fallibilities that have served us well enough in the past but should be retired now they are counter-productive.
> 
> Why get out of the hole only to leap into another?
> 
> 
> 
> Oh ye of little faith.0 And you may be right - but we seem to be getting there slowly - I doubt it will ever be total - the sharks are moving from god(s) to "wellbeing" and "self-improvement" - but the possibility of failure does not mandate the tolerance of despair does it?
> 
> 
> 
> And there you summarise the most powerful argument for the supernatural - you can't prove my belief to be false.
> 
> Pitifully underwhelming - but yet so comforting and seemingly protective if one has been conditioned to accept one's incompetence and unworthiness - and I'm back to the diminution of humanity that I started at aren't I?


I have no need to prove anything false because I know and own some truths. Truth is a rare commodity, one that you can display and never get buyers. I care not for any such brotherly recognition. Not anymore, thank you.

........................................

This is not the, uh, proper thread for such thick wool, or is it Matka silk that causes you to chafe under your pained, your' collared, uptight existence.

Why so angry, so bitter?

You walk, you breathe, you love, ah, you hate. Is that not enough, not to despair?

Pained, you have laid out your lack of faith in all, including humanity in this small window pane, that is TAM.

Why so glum, live and let live. 

Let others enjoy of their ignorance, let some fewer enjoy their enlightenment. 

Why be Atlas, why carry the world foibles and folly upon your thin shoulders?
It ain't woith it.

Look at your riches, be happy for whatever they may be. Life is not of our creation, we must abide it, or be miserable and die from it....prematurely.

You are this collection of atoms, and molecules and yet you are mobile and you can think, muse, get amused.
Why spend this short life in frenzied anger?

Tilting at Windmills, yes, that be you, Cyrano.


----------



## StarFires

Affaircare said:


> I identify with this part. My father was an alcoholic and my mom was mentally ill, so she'd start in on her raging, the two of them would fight, my dad would leave and be at the bar all night, she'd be angry and take it out on us kids and beat us, and after I went to bed dad would stumble home from the bar. He didn't care if we were screamed at for hours or hurt. He didn't want to be so he left, and that left us kids to bear the brunt of a mentally ill mother.
> 
> Soooo...when I went to college, my very first college "party" was in the dorm, and I got literally black-out drunk (I wasn't used to drinking), and when I "came-to" a guy I didn't know was on top of me finishing. After he was done, he just zipped up and left--didn't say anything--just walked out of the room. This pretty much blew my mind because even though I wasn't a perfectly good girl in HS (I had a bf and we made out and even did some experimental type things in the back seat)...I wasn't promiscuous by a LONG SHOT. After I was raped, in a way I just kind of gave up, because I thought: "Well there's no point now." I still didn't sleep around, but mainly that was because no one like me back...I was that girl everyone would talk to about the crush they had on my roommate or the girl who'd play poker with the guys, you know? I did fall in love with one of my dorm-mates though, and we did sleep together.
> 
> Then along came my first husband. I was living in my own apartment and he was the security guard for my complex. He asked ME out and like the ladies in this study, he paid me attention so I felt like I owed him sex. And like the ladies, I married the first guy who would have me...I had no self-esteem whatsoever, so it seemed to me like he'd be the best I could do.
> 
> The point being that my dad was and still is a charming man (to his buddies at the bar and on a surface, casual level), but as a father, he still doesn't pay any attention to me whatsoever. I don't think we've spoken in years...he doesn't make any effort to talk to me at all. So before I went to counseling and learned of my own self-worth and value, I did crave male attention AND if a male gave me attention, I figured the price of attention was sex.


This is very common, actually. Lots of women go with whoever gives them some attention instead of being selective. Whatever their background, the problem is men don't know their role in their daughter's life. When it comes to children, lots of families place the kids into gender roles. During the adolescent years, bonding between males is more natural, and bonding between females is more natural. But daddy doesn't know he is the most important person in his daughter's life because he is her first love and first model. It's dad who needs to spend time with his daughter. It's dad who needs to instill self-esteem in his daughter. It's dad who needs to teach her about boys. It's dad who needs to teach her to have standards and self-respect. Dads don't know their role, and with the frequency of divorce, children born out of wedlock, and stepfamilies, too many kids either don't have a father or don't have much of a father. Girls need that male attention, so they look for it elsewhere and are vulnerable to any man that gives them attention because his attention makes them feel worthy of attention, like you said "He asked ME out" like you couldn't believe he was interested. That's often the way it goes.


----------



## Casual Observer

It was not my intent to indict religion per se, but rather a specific issue where one's sex life might be heavily impacted by a partner's beliefs, especially during the coming-of-age years. I'm probably guilty for issuing too broad a question and inviting an indictment of religion in general. That was not my intent. My Christian faith has served me well, but perhaps not so much my wife, who dealt with the issues I quoted from the thesis on Women, Sex & God; Women's sexuality and the internalization of religious messages. 

Perhaps this should have been placed in the Women's Lounge? This forum say's it's the place to look for faith based solutions. I've brought up faith based problems.

Should I try a do-over? Ask the mods to delete this thread entirely and re-post in the Women's Lounge forum?


----------



## Personal

No, religious guilt isn't hurting my sex life.

It could have, yet being someone not inclined to consciously or unconsciously reinforce sexual shame it hasn't been an issue.

My wife grew up in a Italian Catholic family, while having all sorts of sexual thoughts and desires as a teenager. She had her first boyfriend just after she finished High School and got mixed messages of him not being good enough, not being Italian and having her parents say she should be married off to him right away.

She then hid her boyfriends from her family, although she didn't have sex with them. Of whom they were mostly good young Catholic men. Who were so passive, caring and accommodating that she found that to be too weak passive and boring.

She also had a father who at different times called her a prostitute and other charming derogatory terms for wanting to move out of her parents house in her twenties.

Yet she remained a virgin until she was a few months shy of 26 years old, saving herself for marriage, once considering becoming a nun even. Yet she started not believing that Catholicism was true, then not believing Christianity was true or any other religion and not believing in a god.

Then to her relief her father died, when she was near 26. So she then reconsidered her life and thought to herself "**** it", what am I waiting for and got on with having sex with a guy that she used to work with, who was keen on playing with her.

She had fun with him to a point. Although she quickly grew bored of the experience, having never orgasmed with him at all no matter what he tried (oh and he was an experienced divorced guy). It reached a point where, he would tell her she was having orgasms and she was mistaken that she wasn't.

She then met me at work, started chatting then asked me out on a date, we had sex on our third date and then she dumped the other guy.

The thing is despite waiting so long to have sex, plus with all the background stuff. She is a terrific, highly enthusiastic sexual partner with a broad range of proclivities who orgasms very easily from penis in vagina sex through any other kind of sex. I remember early on she told me she had never given a blow job and she was worried about it. The other guy was patient so she never did it to him. Yet I told her you'll learn, you're going to get lots of practice. So given a bit of time after initial clumsiness she got better at it and after awhile became highly skilled at the art.

My wife claims that my confidence, skill, and willingness to take from her and tell her what to do sexually, made her feel safe to be a wild sexual animal without feeling bad about it.

My ex-wife is also Catholic and her and I were each others firsts, for penis in vagina sex (she was 16 and I was 17), two to three hours after we met at a party. Now she was an active member of a church group and on and on etc. Yet there was nothing we wouldn't do or try with each other. We wanted to explore every mm of skin and every orifice in every way imaginable.

Oh and as an aside though related, FaithfulWife told you to believe your wife and respect that she doesn't see sex as a spiritual thing. My wife doesn't see sex as a spiritual thing, nor did my ex-wife, or a number of my other sexual partners. Yet we get a connection from sharing sex.

Yet for people like them and perhaps even your wife. Sex isn't about the airy fairy stuff, it is about the actual sexual pleasure of it. So without the pleasure of it, there's no desire to want to share sex. Some women really just want to be rooted well and don't care for or desire a spiritual experience from it.

So be mindful of that and consider that sex can be boring with the same person over and over without variety and without lust and carnal desire.

The impression I have is that you are quite passive when it comes to sex and taking your wife. So given that, you can't expect enthusiasm when you don't generate enthusiasm.

With my wife over the years, we have always added things switch things up to generate excitement. When we first started having sex she didn't do anal sex, didn't take golden showers, didn't take fisting, didn't sometimes have sex in public places, didn't pose nude for erotic art so on and so forth.

Yet she does all of that and much more now because, she feels safe to ****/fornicate and be sexual with abandon and without judgement. Of which the fact that you have issues with your wife's very tame and insignificant past is all about your ego and judgement of her, which doesn't help you or your wife have a better sex life.

If I wanted my wife to close her legs and not want to have sex with me. I would take issue with her past and would want her to think that sex is a spiritual experience and I would be passive instead of taking her lustfully and I would try to convince her that she is a broken person who needs counselling.

So if you really want her to be a great sexual partner, you could start by not judging her for a past (let it go for chrissakes) that wasn't wrong and doesn't belong to you anyway.


----------



## Casual Observer

@Personal I can only tell you that since things hit the fan back in February, there has been steady and significant improvement in our relationship. She herself would tell you that. We were on a road to nowhere prior. You assume judgment on my part while ignoring the possibility it's all about peeling back layers and discovering why the passion switch had been turned off. It's wonderful that the two women you referenced in your life were strong enough to not have the issues growing up that my wife did. You weren't chosen as someone to rescue them. Obviously, this is all on me, for not recognizing what I was getting into. But for you to assume that it's too late to change, or that there's a statute of limitations for truth... I would suggest that's situational. In my situation, in her situation, things are improving for the better. 

A lot of ugly stuff has come out in the process. Would it have been better that she never had the opportunity to tell me that she resented sex for 30 years? Should she have not known that I was ready to leave? 

So the thesis I posted, the excerpts... those were to help people who were in similar situations. You aren't. My hope is that people can recognize the issues very early in their relationships, and deal with it when it seems more relevant. They won't have to get raked over the coals like I have, for seeming to drag stuff up from the past that should no longer matter. 

I'll continue to read posts here and reflect. IC & MC will be in my future, and my wife's, for quite some time. We both think we've got another 25 or so years ahead of us. We've both come to realize that marriage should not be a result of momentum but rather work. Work to make things better. And she's had to recognize that her future is a choice, not a given, and that has definitely helped change her thinking in terms of showing me an increasing amount of, what, attentive love? Hard to explain. But corny as it sounds, there's a feeling that she's falling for me again. Since she's a really bad actor and speaks her mind at the slightest frustration, it just might be real.

I'm very happy for you that none of this is anything you can relate to.


----------



## Personal

Casual Observer said:


> [MENTION=113521]Obviously, this is all on me, for not recognizing what I was getting into.


It certainly isn't all on you.

Your wife is also responsible for her own choices as well.


----------



## Personal

Casual Observer said:


> But for you to assume that it's too late to change, or that there's a statute of limitations for truth... I would suggest that's situational. In my situation, in her situation, things are improving for the better.


I don't assume it's too late to change, I don't even think a person can live a life without changing along the way. I doubt you are the same person you were 25 years ago, just as I doubt your wife is the same either.

Memories can fade and our recall and interpretation of events in our past or even recent history can be mistaken.

If you both want it, I'm all for both of you moving forward together.


----------



## Casual Observer

Personal said:


> I don't assume it's too late to change, I don't even think a person can live a life without changing along the way. I doubt you are the same person you were 25 years ago, just as I doubt your wife is the same either.
> 
> Memories can fade and our recall and interpretation of events in our past or even recent history can be mistaken.
> 
> If you both want it, I'm all for both of you moving forward together.


She really enjoys and appreciates our MC, which has been a big help. One of the requirements I had, when choosing an MC, was that it be a woman. That was a really, really good decision. My wife is ordinarily such a private person about any sort of personal problem. But with the MC, she is willing to open up on everything. Not that she feels good about some of the topics afterward, because the MC does enforce some degree of accountability. You can't just make a claim without backing it up and viewing it from another angle (or two). So some of the things my wife has brought up have backfired on her. But she sees it as useful, she sees it as saving our marriage, and she believes very much that she wants to stay married.


----------



## 2ntnuf

Yeah, I completely misunderstood what you were getting at. I wouldn't even have posted, if I realized what you needed. All I can give is support in words. I think you are doing the right thing by going to counseling and working with your wife. You two will just have to work together. My thoughts are, if you both keep an open mind and do the best you can, it will be a good life. I'm sure it won't be simple or easy for a little while. I think, if you get 'over the hump', you'll both be more comfortable. I wish the best for you and I do think it would be better to start over in SIM or the Ladies Lounge.


----------

