Moist and Twisted

As far as I can tell, all of the Western world is in denial about the temptation of women to lust. We are the proverbial fish, and female lust is the feel of wet. For women still under the pull of the red tide, they are tempted to view everything from a sexual perspective. Ev-er-y-thing. Those beyond it are sympathetic, even wistful.

Every piece of clothing is measured on its sex appeal. Every purchase is made either in congruence with, or in opposition to, its sexual connotation. Every interaction with a man is investigated and dissected for sexual content. If it’s there and desired that’s good to that woman. All other combinations disappoint in some way.

Everybody understands that sex sells, and everybody understands that women are the target audience for the great majority of advertising, but nobody puts the two together.

It is the same among Christians, but we add a twist: When women dress, behave, or speak lewdly, we blame men for noticing the lewdness. We accuse those men of lust. But it is at least the second act of lust, because the desire to attract illicit sexual attention in the first place just is lust.

9 thoughts on “Moist and Twisted

  1. To answer Mr Anderson’s question, I offer a recitation of the types of love from a
    Christian perspective:

    Caritas or agape, which means self-sacrificing love that is non-sexual and is often extended toward divinity and also builds onto the honouring of one’s neighbour.

    Philadephia, the love which is camaraderie between brothers as peers and does not really cross the gender line.

    Storge, which is love of the familiar, can include inanimate objects like shoes or a favourite food, but also includes the profoundly important, like home and the collective nature of such a community.

    Finally, eros, which of course is the love between man and woman intended for procreation and special intimacy.


    With such definitions in front of us, friend, I now state that marriages should be based on the first types of love: caritas (agape) and storge. The eros begins properly at “You may now kiss the bride” and the Honeymoon, not before it. Trust that the community’s, and especially the family’s, involvement in the arranging of the marriage will lead to wholesome opportunities of eros for the couple after the marriage begins, after the wedding ceremony.

    Best regards,


  2. Alan, I have no problem with your definitions. But where do you get the idea that eros has no place until after a marriage? Both Jesus and the Apostle Paul taught that sex was the reason to marry. This assumes sexual desire before marriage. I think we should be careful not to add restrictions to God’s word in order to fit our religious traditions… especially in the area of sexuality which is a great burden for men and women alike to suppress.

    Just my “two cents” 🙂

  3. First, Scripture isn’t the same as Tradition, both of which are important.

    Also, you appear to insist that private feeling should be expressed and accepted in public fully and it shouldn’t. Just because somebody has an inkling of eros feeling before marriage does not mean that society should adapt to that, and that society should not go on as before. That is the reason that Sacraments like Matrimony were developed—in order to sanction the place for eros.

    “Saving Eve,” you’re a reductionist; and the smartest Christians at this time, like I am, are trying to get the important fundamentals of society back into place so that the softer Christians including women and the undisciplined new Christians, and potential Christians, can have a place in which to grow and thrive. Disagreeing on an interpretation of scripture and then having that serve as the reason to immobilise yourself and others is entirely counterproductive.

    Another thing is that you may be against the concept of arranged marriage, something that is hugely controversial, in this country, in 2017 Anno Domini. If that is the case, friend, then you ought to try and accept that arranged marriages are still the norm in any civilisation and that the default American culture has rejected them to its extreme peril. There is a whole philosophy out there that needs to be redeveloped if arranged marriages are to become the American norm, outside of the most fundamentalist of Christian circles.


  4. @Alan

    I repeat: where do you get the authority to say eros has no place until after a marriage?

    To clarify, I am not advocating pre-marital sex. I am only saying it is absurd to insist that these instincts should be considered shameful aND hAve place prior to marriage. Men marry because they want to have sex with a particular woman. Women dress in a way to accentuate their feminine beauty and indicate to a potential husband that she has all the right signs of fertility. This is how men and women pair off with the best possible mate.

    Traditions are fine so long as they facilitate freedom to pursue obedience to God. But I have no regard for traditions that go against nature and place heavy burdens on people… such as the early church father’s erroneous teachings on sexuality.

  5. “Both Jesus and the Apostle Paul taught that sex was the reason to marry. This assumes sexual desire before marriage.”

    Much of the innate Evangelical genophobia stems from the traditional misunderstanding of the Lord’s words about lust in Matthew 5. I believe His words were less about encouraging His followers to police every sexual thought/deed/desire/urge than they were about preventing self-righteousness.

  6. And the point in writing expansively as I have is so that the facts and points come through regardless of how well received they may be.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.