The point was raised in a comment on my first post concerning sex and its proper context, marriage, that has prompted this follow-up post. The claim was that my argument was from the perspective of a man and, therefore, I had only shown that it was right for man to save sex and sexual acts for marriage.
But what about women? Do the same principles apply for women as they do for men? This was a bit trickier for me, a man, to tackle with an argument from experience. I have met women and I have dated women, but I have never been a woman. However, I will draw on from what experience I have to prove in an argument complementary to my first that sex and sexual acts are meant for marriage according to the healthy feminine nature.
First, there some differences between the masculine and feminine natures. These are necessary to point out to show that my first argument in my previous post does not really apply well to women, but more importantly, to outline the challenges unique to a woman. I have often heard it said that men are more logically based than women, and that women can often allow emotion to "overrule their reason". I believe this to be an unfair characterization because it frames women as irrational beings (albeit, at times). In my opinion, it would be more accurate to say that the feminine nature generally favors seeking empathetic understanding with others as opposed to logical agreement. This method of communication can create a deeper connection between two people than a simple "agreement of facts" can. For conciseness though, I claim that men tend to express themselves in logical terms, and women tend to express themselves in terms of their emotional connection to a situation, person, etc.
All the other terms and premises from my previous post apply, such as exclusive uncommitted relationship. If you need a refresher on that one and others, click here.
Ok, now suppose we take the same couple that we considered in my first post in an exclusive uncommitted relationship. As sex and activities leading to sex are frequent, the woman will become charged with emotional stimulation (similar to how the man is physically stimulated). The act is physically pleasant, but the woman primarily draws on the emotional closeness that she feels towards the man. As the emotional attachment grows stronger, the woman needs to be constantly assured of the man's affections for her (which can cause heightened expectations on the man, thus straining the relationship). Ultimately, the exclusive uncommitted relationship is bound to end or see serious hardship. If it ends, regardless of who initiates the break up, the woman will be forced to annihilate the vast emotional bond that she so dearly invested herself in.
The sexual act and acts leading to it inevitably create an emotional bond between the man and the woman. This is a sacred trust that is necessary to being together forever; to invest in and empathize with the joys and sorrows of the other. It is so tight-knit that were it to be broken, both would suffer excruciating emotional turmoil. The sexual act and other associated activities lead to one of two outcomes: (A) a loving, lasting emotional attachment between a man and a woman that allows them to enjoy together emotional sunshine and weather together emotional darkness, or (B) the woman succumbs to insecurity and despair as she searches for a full, lasting emotional commitment in vain.
Considering the path (A), just as with the argument from the masculine perspective, I do not think this option is available to those in an exclusive uncommitted relationship. As soon as the woman consents to any activity leading to sex, she has forsaken, to some degree, her essential dignity as a woman. It is a woman's responsibility, especially in this day and age, to command respect from men by holding them to honorable standards. Women can have, if they choose, a seductive power over men's reason. The feminine nature confounds his reason and ignites his passions. In my experience, this is not a reciprocal attractions, meaning, men do not have this same seductive power over women. (James Bond does not count because he was engineered specifically to give men the notion that they too could make women swoon over them; it doesn't happen) Women, in my experience, may fall for a guy, but they are never as without their wits as a man is before a woman. Thus, in the exclusive uncommitted relationship, the woman has the reigns of Reason and must show the man that she demands his respect and his full commitment to her. Without this respect, that emotional bond will not properly form.
In the case of (B), a woman who has engaged in many sexually active relationships will begin to wonder either what was wrong with the men she has dated or, my more frequent experience, what is wrong with herself. In the pornographic culture that we live in, there is an enormous pressure on women to be flawless. Each successive break up and emotional PTSD will be negotiated with thoughts that she just needs to lose more weight, get plastic surgery, etc. This goes hand-in-hand with the (B) scenario outlined in my first argument. Men will become more critical of their woman's appearance and ultimately, their partner's physical appearance will not be enough for him. A woman will be able to sense this acutely, especially if she is aware of any unfaithful relationships or pornography that the man is engaged in. This will only increase her sense of insecurity. With increasing insecurity, she will steadily set her sights lower and lower and entrust herself to more abusive and baser men, unable to believe that she is worth anything higher. If all her future relationships engage in sexual acts, she will be aware constantly of her physical appearance and remain in deep insecurity regarding her man's expectations and, more importantly, her worthiness of respect.
The repeated "high-stakes" emotional investment for a woman in a sexually active relationship will leave deep scares on her self-esteem, making it difficult for her to take her dignified place as an equal partner in a lasting relationship. A woman must not underestimate the power she has over a man; and it is this power that she must wield responsibly or forfeit it to the man's physical appetites. If a woman does not pick up this charge, then it becomes very difficult for a man to control his passions in the relationship. Though he is no less responsible for reigning in his passions, no man should associate with a woman who fails to hold him accountable for them, and no woman should associate with a man who fails to respect her according to her dignity, body and soul.
Authors Note: Ok, there it is. This is all based on my experiences and careful thought, but it is by no means infallible, whatsoever (a deep contrast to my other writings ;) just kidding) Whatever your thoughts, man or woman, please comment. This is a forum for serious discussion and I'll be the first to submit myself to guidance in this area.
From Rebekah Wielgos (reposted from a series of Facebook comments)
ReplyDeleteHm. I like this, but please allow me to add my feminine perspective: Women want to love and then to be loved, in that order. We desire nothing (aside from Heaven) so much as to know that we are able to protect and nurture another. Of course, much of this may take place between a mother and her child, but this desire also has its place in the romantic relationship. While we women ought not to "mother" our spouses/romantic partners, we want to be able to help support them and to help them become better men. Conversely, (and this is a biggie. Use this for good, men, not evil) we want to be loved, cared for, and supported. A woman wants to know that the man to whom she is entrusting the most intimate and delicate parts of herself--her fertility and her heart--will not take advantage of that gift she gives.
The deepest cry of a woman's heart is not "love me!" But "Allow me love you!" A woman can love best when she is loved. Of course, there are some circumstances (St. Monica, anyone?) in which the woman loves without being loved in return; this transcends the normal requirements of sacrifice within the human relationship and makes saints or bitter old ladies.
Outside of the extraordinary demands of Grace, however, the woman makes herself completely vulnerable when she loves, and so it is not true that men hold no power over women. When a woman has given herself to a man, that man holds the power to A) respond to her love by protecting her and "forsaking all others [except God] for her", or B) to throw it back in her face in the name of "freedom" or "independence." When A occurs, the woman is nourished emotionally as well as physically and psychologically; oxytocin is released, it becomes easier to live with another imperfect human being, and their love can even transcend the limits of the natural order and participate in the physical manifestation of love, namely, the creation of a new soul.
When B occurs, however, a terrible fracturing happens: the man to whom this woman has just given her whole self has rejected her gift, and to a woman, this is immensely painful. I cannot speak from experience here, but my observations and talks with other women have shown me the truly horrific damage that occurs when a man abuses his power over her in this manner. \\
This psychological and spiritual wound seldom heals. Often, the woman begins to believe there was something wrong with her gift, not with the one to whom it was given. Thus, it all turns inward, and she usually begins to build walls around herself and her heart, intending to protect them but really preventing herself from loving and being loved. Thus, a woman cannot be truly free to love unless she has been bound to the man who has promised not to forsake her or to abuse her gift. Logically, then, the conclusion is that men, real men, have an obligation to honor and protect the women from whom they receive this gift, and to whom they give their own gift. This happens within the context of marriage, wherein the man has solemnly vowed to do so. Outside of this context, women cannot be sure, and so have to "protect themselves" from the "consequences" of love, be they physical or emotional. The entire focus shifts from sacrifice for the beloved to a sense of a wary exchange in which neither truly trusts the other, even though they seem to be saying that they do trust each other.
This is Rebekah W. From above. Dear me, it seems I was theologically confused when I wrote that! I now know that it is necessary for a woman to be receptive to the love given to her before she can love another. This is simply our nature. :)
ReplyDelete