(Part of a much larger post)
You must have sex with him. The problem is that most men find grudging, duty sex from their wives unappealing. Your husband would like to feel that you are actually attracted to and aroused by him. Therefore, you will need to increase your attraction to him, and here is why. It is not for your satisfaction and fulfillment, it is for his. I say this in love, but understand that you are a whore and you deserve to be dragged to the city gates, stoned to death, and cast into hell. But Jesus Christ has paid the sin debt that you owe, and now that you are in Him, you are no longer condemned to be cast into hell. Your man was willing to take you into his home and give you his name. You are blessed to have him and you will now set aside your lusting after personal happiness and instead seek to obey the Lord by pleasing your husband. You will please him by being sexually attracted to him.
You must behave as if he were far above you on the sexual attractiveness scale, and this is not to be about his looks. This will be an attempt to recalibrate what you find sexually attractive, and you must do these things while beseeching our gracious Heavenly Father to rewire your brain so as to remove or reduce the effects of sleeping with other, more alpha men so that you may please your husband by becoming sexually attracted to him.
63 comments
"you must do these things while beseeching our gracious Heavenly Father to rewire your brain"
Please God, let this be a poe.
This is exactly the way christian men think. It overlaps and the wimmins start shitting it out of their mouths eventually. As revolting as it is I can personally attest that this is, in fact, programming.
It's been said once, it's been said six million times; we need a Sexists Say the Darndest Things subsection.
I mean, it seems like practically every third quote that gets submitted nowadays would qualify.
And ManBoobz.com oughta be added to the Friends of FSTDT list.
The depressing thing is that it looks like they captured a woman who was once a free human being, slut-shamed her into marrying a man she didn't find attractive, and are now trying to slut-shame her some more into being enthusiastic about duty-fucking.
And yes, we do need a Sexists Say the Darnedest Things. Now.
"I say this in love, but understand that you are a whore and you deserve to be dragged to the city gates, stoned to death, and cast into hell."
No you don't say this in love. You don't know what love is. You're not even a woman, you are an ugly fat old man, embittered by the many thousands of women who want nothing to do with you.
(Posted by Stike of Seville... forgot to add name.)
(Another edit... it seems many of you are aware that this person actually is a woman. Well, she needs to find herself on a desert island among a load of really attractive hunky 100% heterosexual men, who are honest, single, witty, and generous... and discover that not one single one of them want anything to do with her. Even while desperate for a woman, not one of them would touch her, not even while drunk.)
Yeah, I'm going ahead in saying that sunshinemary has clearly sexually submissive tendencies she's projecting unto all women for the sake of justifying her own lust and joy in submitting to her master/husband.
I never thought I'd see female submissiveness combined with fundamentalism.
How do you force yourself to be more attracted to someone? You can FAKE more attraction and be more affectionate but you can't make yourself like someone more.
you must do these things while beseeching our gracious Heavenly Father to rewire your brain
Well that would take care of the heart but what about the soul? Granted, I don't believe in one but you do. Is God going to rewire your soul to love your husband more, too? And if God can tinker around with your heart and soul then what does that say about free will?
Yeah, because at the end of a day of changing diapers, cleaning up after the older rugrats, cooking breakfast, lunch and dinner in between home-skoolin' the little ones that come about 11 months apart as the Lord intended, the good Christian wife must be a raging inferno of lust for the overweight husband who, after watching television for three hours, is totally ready to give her three minutes of hot missionary-position lovin' before he plants his god-seed, rolls over and immediately falls into a snoring coma.
" ... you must do these things while beseeching our gracious Heavenly Father to rewire your brain."
Or, being all-knowing and all-powerful, you know, he could have given your brain the correct wiring to begin with, maybe?
That poor woman...
Both sunshinemary and the woman she's talking to, I want to hug them both and, in sunshinemary's case, get her some kind of help.
I have a shocker for this loon--men don't want their wives to pretend to be attracted to us. We want them to actually be attracted to us. If they are not, there is something wrong with the marriage and that's nothing no amount of praying is going to fix. Also, holy sexism Batman.
So...spread your legs at his every whim. But also make sure you act like you really want it...because you know, otherwise it's kinda inconvenient to him, and might be a bit offputting. Because you should act like the little slut that you are...just a filthy slut, to be used as a fuck recepticle.
Jesus...these peole make me sick.
I judge man hating the way society judges woman hating.
Any unpositive feeling about women is judged as misogyny or at least on the road to it, and never allowed to pass without challenge.
Therefore, I judge it the same way with women, which is why I feel it's dangerous to focus solely on the radfemhub/femitheist types, because then people will say THAT'S the real manhating, rather than lesser things like getting together with your girls and feeling entitled to vent about men in general.
Either love men as a whole unconditionally (hate individuals as you wish), or you hate men.
Just as men are expected to love women as a whole unconditionally.
Who the fuck expects anyone to love a whole gender unconditionally?
(Well, Jesus, obviously, but apart from him).
Wrong. If a woman has it in her to feel bitter about men in general, then she can't really claim to not be a man hater, can she?
Just the same as with misogynists and their woman hating.
Men are expected never to feel the least amount of bitterness about women as a whole.
On the other hand, women commiserating together about how much men suck is expected, to the point that Cosmo once put up an article basically stating "Uh, girls, we're going to have to clamp down on that, guys are getting wise to it."
Why doesn't this dingbat just fantasize about Chris Hemsworth or Colin Farrell or some other male hottie? Or female hottie, if that's what really gets "her" juices flowing.
There are no amounts of threats that can make a person attracted to another. This is truly pathetic.
If the guy doesn't like duty sex, then he ought to make her want to have sex with him. Prepare a meal for her, light a few candles, some nice music, a delicious dessert and then continue the foreplay in bed until she moans with pleasure. Then it won't be grudging duty sex.
Why is it only for his satisfaction? Isn't it much more fun when both are genuinely satisfied? If HE wants the sex, isn't HE the whore, who deserves to be dragged and stoned?
My man and I got a home together, both our names where on the contract for our first apartment, and it has stayed that way for each new apartment and for our house. I gave him my name. We are blessed to have each other. Personally, I'm happy when my husband is happy, and he's happy when I'm happy. Personal happiness doesn't encroach on pleasing each other.
Why get married to a man that you don't find sexually attractive?
"I say this in love, but understand that you are a whore..."
Is it bad that I started laughing hysterically at this point and it took me 20 minutes to finish reading the rest of the post?
Well you're a real ray of fucking sunshine there, Mary.
You know, if sexual attraction/arousal was something that actually could be turned on and off there'd be no such thing as an awkward erection.
Also, many altar boys would have been spared the horror of a straight priest's painfully suppressed sexuality breaking through as predatory insanity.
Now stop having an opinion, I'm told it offends God for women to tell people how to think.
Yeah, it seems the clamor for Sexists Say the Dardnest Things is higher than I've ever seen it. That and the fact that many posts lately have no religious taint in them, just some mysoginy or mysandry.
I'm trying to understand what bothers you all so much about my post. It's written specifically for Christian women who were sexually promiscuous and can't feel normal attraction for their husbands. The Bible tells us in 1 Corinthians 7 that our bodies belong to our spouses and we are commanded not to deprive one another of marital relations. Many Christian women are in grave sin in this area, and sugar-coating the problem doesn't help them.
@ Sunshine Mary"I'm trying to understand what bothers you all so much about my post. It's written specifically for Christian women who were sexually promiscuous and can't feel normal attraction for their husbands."
I say it again; Why get married to a man that you don't find sexually attractive?
I'll save mary the effort of responding to that one, and expound upon the mentality over at Dalrock and similar sites:
It starts out with the usual "girls who date hot/awesome guys during their 18-30 range are just riding the Alpha Cock Carousel and depriving good natured but unsexy betas/omegas of sex from hotties."
Then they try to frame husbandly dominance in terms of PUA/game horseshit.
As far as they're concerned, women are as bad as the MRAs say, but in the name of Christendom they'll keep the machine going, by means of Christian sanctified "game" and shaming women for ever pleasuring themselves every night to bad boys instead of good natured* god fearing dorks.
After all, back in the old days when survival was more tough, that means they didn't always get to have the hunk that made them wet and throbbing. That's the days they want to return to.
* - I mean genuinely good natured but socially awkward ones, not creepy bitter ones.
@SunshineMary: We're creeped out because you wrote hardcore BDSM porn. Which there isn't anything wrong with, except the 'safe, sane, and consensual' thing is important--and you told the lady to give up her consent. What you wrote would probably be really fun for a BDSM sub, but might not be appropriate advice for a real, non-play situation.
On the bright side, it sounds like you might have something fun to try with your own guy. Maybe not BDSM, but for you and your husband, that sort of religious submission might be fun for you two...
It must be thinking like this, that one can change wqho they're attracted to by willing it, that must make these fundies think sexual orientation is a choice... I'm sorry, but straight, gay, bi, whatever.. if you're not physically attracted to someone you won't want to have sex with them, short of them getting a makeover :P
I have long thought that the MRA/PUA movement is a clearinghouse for a bunch of closet cases. This excerpt proves it. Men who love and feel aroused by women don't think as much about other men's looks and "social rank" as these creatures do. Even as short as this excerpt is, it's pretty telling. So much emphasis on men's looks and the idea of sleeping with other men. What do you want to bet the second sentence originally read, "The problem is that most men find sex from their wives unappealing?"
Oh-kay, time to throw down.
Let's throw any moral analysis of your suggestion out the window for the moment: this is a stupid idea. People don't generally respond to any line of reasoning that can be summed up as "well you suck anyway, so it doesn't matter if you're happy or not!" You have to change the subject's behavior by small increments over a period of time, beginning with simple, innocuous ideas that they will be likely to attempt. This level of bluntness is like beating someone senseless with a spaghetti-wrapped Stradivarius and then claiming it's just as good as if you treated them to an evening of Mozart and fine Italian food; you haven't just failed to make your case, you have made violent mockery of everything involved and done irrevocable harm to your case.
Now, to discuss the ethics of your stance on women's rights: what the capering turquoise FUCK are you on? Were you raised in a live-action recreation of "The Handmaid's Tale", or are your posts leaking into our reality from some horrid dystopian netherworld? How do you manage to last more than five seconds out of doors without either throwing a tantrum over some random bystander's clothing/speech/eye color/Kirlian aura, or getting a verbal (or literal) beatdown for taking the first option?
This applies whether you're male or female, Sunshine, as there appears to be some confusion over your true gender. Do you honestly believe this vacuous, hateful bullshit calling itself a social paradigm, or are you just trying to A) get 'dem wimmons' to stop outsmarting you at everything, or B) expose other people to a concentrated facsimile of Stockholm Syndrome in the hopes it will eventually metastasize into some kind of contagious mind-plague and wipe out humanity?
Because I'm pretty sure you've got to be pretty damn nuts to make a whole website just so you can talk about this on the Internet.
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.
