More plain sex talk ahead, and as always remember that this is a map of an escape route used by a fellow convict.
————————————–
I’ve talked pretty extensively about a really simple subject (women like dick) because that is where sexual love and marriage start; the lifelong pursuit of which is presumably why you’re reading this. From an earlier post:
Some of the liars will say they know that cocks and muffs are good things from God, but I can tell from their comments that they don’t really because they are angry about the pure desire for dick. They want something “more”. If you’ve ever thought to yourself, “Why doesn’t she appreciate me for who I am?”, check your pants, because the whereabouts of your cock are unsure. She has nothing “more” to give you if she doesn’t love you for your dick. It starts there.
Peregrine John highlights this in the comments:
It starts there.
Yes. I’ve been trying to get this basic fact through many dense skulls for a very long time: Sex is the beginning of intimacy, not the end. So many insist on arguing over paint colors before even laying a foundation, and wonder why things never come together.
Foundation, indeed. There is much more intimacy other than sex in marriage, but it is foundational. Foundations aren’t supposed to go away, either. It’s also true that if you spend all your time laying (hey-o!) foundation, you’ll never have time to erect (bah-dum-ch!) the building upon it. Another commenter would rather I write more about how important prayer is to marriage. He is concerned that the spiritual aspect of life, marriage, and sex are getting short shrift in my new posts.
I think there should be more talk about prayer in marriage or whatever state of life you are in over sex. The best bonds in marriage are the spiritual ones.
A little background before I continue: I take it as given that I’m somewhat infamous for ruining a perfectly good and cathartic comment thread by smashing around the place with Bible verses, variations on a man-up theme, and an overblown sense of importance. Sometimes I comment on a thread that’s been added to every five minutes for the past two hours. Then I make some bombastic statement about the importance of the spiritual aspect of the topic and that thread just loses its pulse. Not always, but it’s not infrequent either. So, why did I not start this conversation with the importance of fundamentally spiritual things?
I did.
C.S. Lewis rightly said:
“You do not have a soul. You are a soul. You have a body.”
Sex is a fundamentally spiritual experience. Just as there are no amoral tools, there is no non-spiritual sex. Sex always has an effect on the spirit: That’s why it’s important. Whatever a soul does with his body, his spirit is involved in. Sex is sex, but it’s also a sign pointing us towards other things: love, life, the mystery of the Trinity…and prayer.
The reason my last post was titled “Neutered Piety” was precisely to point out the uselessness of a spirituality that shunned sex, and the blasphemy inherent in the general lack of appreciation for child-rearing itself, and the blessings those burdens provide. Most of the comments, however, were a defense of NFP; to which I only devoted one paragraph! The post wasn’t even focused on NFP.
NFP itself is not an inhibitor to children because it has very few practitioners. Most people simply use artificial birth control, or deny each other. It’s what NFP stands for (and what it was developed for) that aborts life. It’s one thing to accept that we are fallen creatures who are given to fear where we should hope. It’s another to practice fear and hopelessness. There are extenuating circumstances for which I think NFP-like practices can be a grace. These are rare. They probably don’t apply to you. Can people use the knowledge cobbled up in NFP for procreation? Sure, but that was not the RCC’s intent when they set about codifying it, and it’s not the intent under which it is practiced. Their intent was to release the members of the church body of the burden of taking care of one another; the very thing we are supposed to do as members of a church body.
I assumed the NFP paragraph was going to cause a ruckus, but I also knew that I’d precede it with a statement that nobody cares most Protestants are going to Hell, and no one would remark upon that. “Who cares about Protestants? Defend NFP!” Whoever wants to complain about my (perceived) lack of spirituality should read that post and comments.
And no one said anything about vasectomies; which are very common, and self-evidently gruesome.
Birth control is a classic case (If not THE classic case) of insanely wicked desires foisted by women onto men; who in turn perpetrate it onto the whole world. Women complain about the burden of child-making; which was given to them by God for women’s sake. Men scramble around trying to find ways to circumvent the very thing that God specifically gave women for their instruction and redemption.
- Men pull out.
- Men invent condoms.
- Men invent NFP.
- Men invent BC pills.
- Men invent BC shots.
- Men invent divorce.
- Men invent no-fault divorce. (Level up!)
- Men invent alimony.
- Men invent compulsory daycare and call it public education.
- Men perfect and distribute porn.[1]
- Men keep their daughters from marriage.
- Men cut off each others’ balls.
Women then utterly lose their respect for men. Why? Because women perceive correctly that it is madness to trust those who just cannot be stopped from cutting off perfectly functioning balls. They cry and wail and provoke because they want proof their men have balls, and there’s precious little proof. They’re crazy for validation of their desire for dick. In their delirium, many spread their legs to any swinging cock; just groping around in a blind panic to get their hands on one that functions the way dicks are supposed to.
A good number of men in this corner of the Internet respond that one more round of birth control will bless where the other methods have cursed: “When the male birth control pill comes out, it’s gonna be a GAME-CHANGER!” Such men won’t be happy until everybody is as sackless and dickless as they already are. No thanks: I like mine, and women do, too. Even when women don’t get to experience them first hand, they’re glad just to know functioning gonads are out there.
This is why I am pointing folks back to the basics of “women like dick and that’s awesome because we have them.” Read the sign, numbnuts. Has the sign of sex been covered with graffiti, porn, marketing, and all manner of misinformation? Unquestionably, but the church’s response has been to blindfold men and then beat their heads downward. Christians are trying to walk them past the sign of sex for fear of the graffiti. The sign is still good, though. It’s the graffiti that is the problem; much of which was requested by women in their insanity. Time for another C.S. Lewis interlude:
“A man can no more diminish God’s glory by refusing to worship Him than a lunatic can put out the sun by scribbling the word ‘darkness’ on the walls of his cell.”
The task in front of us is not to “not see graffiti”, but to scrub it away from the sign of sex and our women. For that we’ll have to take the blindfolds off men, stand them up straight, and teach them to open their eyes and to think rightly. Then they and others can follow the signs; not further down the rabbithole, but out into the sunshine where men belong.
For some non-graffiti examples from some respected women: Check out the comments, likes, and links from women to these posts. They are exuberant about my proclamation that women like dick. The men who followed those women here ought to think about what that communicates about all of us; when women ought to be following men into the open air.
Read the sign of sex, there from the beginning–the final development of men that God said made mankind good, in coincidence with the gift of subordinate mate women–and the revelation of the good and joyful and necessary use of the dicks God gave man. Then reflect that it is by the work of our dicks that women will be not only be satisfied, but disciplined. Then, yes, go pray about it.
[1] Newsflash: Your computer is a sexbot. You can stop waiting for the Grand Sexbot Reformation because it’s here. How do you like it so far?
Things that We have Heard and Known 
Somehow I missed that line about Protestants going to Hell.
Sorry I took up so much space in the last thread. Just realized I was arguing for NFP as the methodone to get people of the heroin of Birth Control. Which means that it risks being just as addictive and damaging if you don’t deal with the underlying reason for the use in the first place.
I’ve helped a few of my Protestant friends get off birth control. My hope is that they will in time move to a full embracing of God’s providence and move away from fear.
CC: No apology necessary. It was a good discussion.
Man basically doesn’t respect his seed…so it’s no wonder women don’t respect men.
It’s one thing for guys that consciously do this…but all the chemicals that we put into our body that damage the seed because the elites love population control, that’s what concerns me. Sugars, soys, plastics, drinking water…it’s no wonder testosterone has gone down.
I mentioned prayer because that is the oxygen of the soul…and without it you might as well be a walking corpse. Prayer is where faith comes from. You want to prove to women you have a dick…have strong faith, first with God and then yourself.
I’ll let you in on a secret…my “dick” didn’t manifest until I prayed to God and asked for it. I didn’t call it a dick though…I asked for a strong heart.
Earl
You are trying to make a point while missing another.
@Earl
I’m not sure what you’re talking about here. If I were to describe anything as the oxygen of the soul, it would be the breath of life from Genesis; which I would not describe as prayer. It seems to me that you’re grasping at metaphorical straws. Prayer is very important. It is more important than sex.
It is not more important than sex for building a marriage. Sex in a marriage is prayer, you see. It’s the coming together of the provider and the subordinate to communicate in a profound, mysterious, private, and intimate way; uttering to each other dark and holy things; things which we have heard and known that were passed onto us from of old.
I keep meaning to do a post on the sexual references in the Bible, and their sign-ificance.There are a lot. Christians know they are supposed to pray. They don’t really know what prayer is though because they don’t even know what sex is. I haven’t yet fully made the case, but maybe you can see what I’m getting at here.
I think this is where some confusion comes between us. I don’t want to prove anything to women, and I don’t think other men have to either. Faith in God is of utmost importance in all things. Faith in yourself–self-confidence–is totally unnecessary, and ultimately fruitless. Whatever faith I put into myself is wasted, and would be put to better use as confidence in (keeping faith with) God. Self-confidence is self-deceit. We know this because the heart is deceitful above all things. Which brings us to this:
What good is a strong heart if it is deceitful? I want God’s heart.
Pingback: Ravishment fantasies as an expression of the feminine desire to submit to male power. (PG-13, Mildly NSFW) | Sunshine Mary
I take it as given that I’m somewhat infamous for ruining a perfectly good and cathartic comment thread by smashing around the place with Bible verses, variations on a man-up theme, and an overblown sense of importance.
I laughed at that. I like that you don’t take yourself too seriously while saying serious things.
Women then utterly lose their respect for men. Why? Because women perceive correctly that it is madness to trust those who just cannot be stopped from cutting off perfectly functioning balls. They cry and wail and provoke because they want proof their men have balls, and there’s precious little proof.
Huh. I’ve never really followed the issue of birth control all the way to this conclusion, always assuming that a significant number of men were just as interested as women in curtailing reproduction.
“Men invent NFP.”
Allow me to provide another argument for it. My Catholic friends who have used it for years generally have 4 or more kids…so they are actually having more children than most secular couples.
The purpose of sex is for procreation and the uniting of husband and wife. Now when you use chemical birth control…you are basically changing the hormones of a woman and she becomes something else. Condoms or castration for men basically show that you don’t want your seed to get into her. You are taking God’s design and creating something that isn’t of God’s design.
With NFP nobody’s body is changed…you still give yourself fully to each other…you are still using God’s design. God made the woman’s body fertile for a short period of time…while a guy is fertile 24/7. Does the conscious knowledge of what a woman’s body is doing make it evil? What I’ve read about chemical birth control I’d never allow my future wife to take it. That would be like me forcing her to eat rat poison.
It allows each other to discuss issues and know each other better. If you prefer to go whenever you want and have as many kids as possible…nothing wrong with that either. I’d say make sure you are willing to sacrifice to give those kids the best opportunity possible. NFP gives you the opportunity to exercise prudence.
With everything man has invented it can be used for selfish reasons or destruction….but I’d say those who use NFP for that reason will have many other problems in marriage too.
@Elspeth, I had wondered the same thing regarding men and birth control. I know that my aunt’s first marriage broke up because she wanted children and he didn’t. That had been clear from the beginning but she chose to ignore it and hoped he would change his mind. And I’ve know several situations where the wife would like more babies and the husband steadfastly insists on limiting the family. Or the husband gets angry at the wife for not using birth control and leaves. So I don’t know.
Is this another one of those high status males colluding with average women things?
The issue of chemical birth control and NFP I think are something of a distraction on this topic, though people have strong feelings about them. Chemical control, something my wife never used (nor NFP) is part of the slope into oblivion anyway. Conventional wisdom would say that Christians therefore need to breed large litters, and try and reach others as best we can, but that they will do with BC what they will in the end. Now, however, I’m not so sure that the churchians that populate most churches are world changes even if they had quivers full of babies. I’ve just been witnessing what I’m getting at.
Some of Cane’s words here would have been great points to share with a new bride and groom. You know that ain’t happnin.
Okay, let me see if I’m following here:
The work (labora) of marriage is the begetting and rearing of children. Because marriage is a vocation, and because we are spiritual beings, this work had the aspect of prayer (ora) when engaged in properly disposed. It’s kinda Benedictine that way.
We’re trying to get back to the fundamental truth that marriage and sex is for making babies, that we are given healthy desires to do so, in the context of marriage of course, and just as things go off the rails if we try to have sex outside of marriage, things go just as badly off the rails if we try to have marriage without its natural result, sex followed by babies.
While there are always hard cases (which is why we have people like moral theologians and things like casuistry) the general rule is that systematically separating sex from babymaking is a fast track to hell. Arguing over NFP is a red herring.
The bigger picture is how we’re viewing sex overall. If we keep confusing private with naughty, we create people afraid to do what God commands. If we place convenience and worldly approval over all, we create people afraid to do what God commands. Whichever lie we accept, we keep doing what Eve did, allowing the lie of the Enemy to break our trust in, and submission to, God.
I am tracking here?
@TRM
Yes, you’re tracking. 🙂 Perhaps a glance further down the road to which these signs point.
I would say this as: Marriage is a bringing together into a common (one) body, and for common (more than one, but united) purposes. Within marriage, sex is a physical bringing together into a common (one) body, and for common (more than one, but united) purposes.
Sex, then, is a sanctuary within the sanctuary of a marriage (exclusive to husband and wife; the congregation of children are excluded; despite the fact they literally came from within). Not even the whole man and woman can fully enter into sexual congress–just his member into her sanctuary; but by those two small bits the whole body is glorified, and from that same sanctuary whole people will emerge.
The sanctuary of marriage is itself a sanctuary inside the local church body; which the rest of the broader congregation cannot enter. The local congregation is a sanctuary within the wider denomination…you see where I’m going, I trust.
Do you build a cathedral for the sake of communion with God, or for the sake of having a congregation? We’d never ask such a question, because we just know those goals are thoroughly entwined. Yet, we bring up this with each act of sex.
When you put it in church terms, it reveals the insanity of joy without children, and children without joy:
“Ok, this service, we’re trying to grow our congregation, so just do it by the numbers, and make it count, Floyd!” We shouldn’t cater our congress to the sole end of having children. Every service is for enJOYment between the two parties untied into one body for common purposes.
On the other hand: “Listen, Clyde, our finances are tight as it is. Let’s have a good service, but try to keep the riff-raff out.” How long can such a church call itself a church? If you keep throwing parties that no one is invited to, that’s…kind of gay.
This whole series of posts makes me want to grab some pom poms and start leading cheers. Why do I seem to be the only person who is having this reaction? This all seems like something to rejoice about to me. Is no one else getting that from it? I would have expected a big Hurray! and much rejoicing from the men in particular.
@SSM
You’re not alone, but it is mostly women who are cheering. Though, some fellows keep “Like”-ing my posts, and I dig that, too.
Pingback: Lightning Round – 2013/06/19 | Free Northerner
Are there any other of your (later) posts that follow this theme directly? I have enjoyed these–and profited by them–so much that I want to keep the thread of these ideas.
@Minimus
Welcome.
Which theme in particular?
I guess the overall theme of how we have misconstrued the nature of sex: essentially non-physical, abstract, woman-pleasure centered, egalitarian, sterile, non-patriarchal. Just any of the posts you think are really essential to your outlook on the meaning of the love between a man and a woman.