Via Pam Spaulding of Pandagon
There is a crisis brewing in the Church: a growing epidemic of sexual addiction among women. A new book from Pure Life Ministries by authors Steve and Kathy Gallagher, Create in Me a Pure Heart, explores the scope of the problem and provides biblical answers for the church and the struggling woman.
For twenty-two years, Kathy Gallagher has been helping women cope with their husbands’ addiction to pornography, strip clubs and prostitutes. Now she is responding to a growing number of women addicted to porn, chat rooms and online sex. “Thirty years ago,” remarks Gallagher, “you never would have thought that the woman sitting next to you in Sunday school might be viewing porn. But with the growth of the Internet, the gap between what men and women do in secret has been drastically reduced.”
According to Nielsen NetRatings, nearly one-third of the visitors to adult websites are female. Today’s Christian Woman reported that 34 percent of their online newsletter readers admitted to intentionally accessing Internet porn. Women are also twice as likely as men to visit online chat rooms, according to Internet Filter Review.
While I think there really is a problem with “sex addiction” in the sense that there are attachment-related compulsive disorders, and while it’s even possible that women — traditionally kept distant from nuts-and-bolts sexuality — might not be well prepared to recognize something like that, I’ve always been a little cautious about the difference between “as much as one should have” vs. “as much as one wants.”
It wasn’t that long ago (throughout the 1900s) that American and English men were advised not to have sex with their wives more than 10 times a year for fear of certain insanity, de-vitation, and an early grave (let alone what might happen if they masturbated 10 times a year!) Nor it was it that long ago (the first half of the 20th Century) that “considerate” gynecologists removed or burned away the clitorises of “nymphomaniac” women — very often at their request! — in hopes of curing them of “uncontrollable” sexual urges.
And so while I feel sympathy for men or women who really have compulsive disorders associated with sexual behavior I’d rather hear about it from a more neutral, more credible source than the couple that Spaulding links to but I don’t care to. (It’s not bad that Spaulding does. I just really don’t care to follow suit.)
Somewhat coincidentally the image below the fold includes a nude torso and partial erection (with very nice natural shadows and lighting, if I say so myself.) Server logs and survey data suggest that of those who chose to view the image about two thirds of you are women and a third men. No one should feel obliged to look.
[Doh! Now you can click through. —fl]
Submitted by 1686 (not verified) on Fri, 2007-10-19 09:52.
I don't feel obligated, I feel honored. You're a fine piece o' man, Figleaf.
And I suspect that the kind of person who would write with horror about women viewing pornography either doesn't know what porn is (a lot of people seem to think it's much dirtier and more extreme and less voluntary than it is), or views ANY sexual desire as way too much.
[Thank you kindly, Holly! I agree that there's either purblind ignorance or else some other agenda in play with the claims in that post. --fl]
Submitted by 1686 (not verified) on Fri, 2007-10-19 14:32.
I thought about posting something educational but they filter comments.
But it seems to me what some of them are suggesting is sex with God...look at all the sexual language in this Create in Me a Pure Heart blog entry:
“There was a time that I remember saying in my heart, ‘God, You can’t fulfill this part of my life. You can’t meet this need. This is too deep, too big, too wide for You.’ And that is exactly how I felt. It was the lie I believed. I was looking at my Creator and my body, and telling Him that He could not satisfy me. That lie was the crux of my sin.â€
No use for Freud there, nosirree!
If even God couldn't fill such needs, maybe a Hitachi magic wand would work.
For God's sake, some of these women posting are worried about fantasizing. Don't they know this is normal?
It sounds like these women don't really believe in women's pleasure. Most women have to achieve orgasm through masturbation. Do they think God intended orgasm only for men? Why would God care if they masturbated? Seems to me God created that pleasure button in the beginning. Did he say he put it there to tempt us? No. He looked on all he created and said it was good.
[Very nicely put, B. Thank you. --fl]
Submitted by 1686 (not verified) on Tue, 2007-10-23 18:31.
I had a point to make - I know I did. I absent mindedly clicked on the link (at work mind you), having read the word 'partial' and figuring it was going to be the 'hint' of something, and now I can't for the life of me remember what I was going to say.
Oh boy!
[Heh. Thanks, HE. --fl]
Submitted by 1686 (not verified) on Thu, 2007-10-18 17:39.
What fold?
Why would viewing pron considered a sex addiction?
It just might be that is as close to sex as they can get. Just being a receptacle for procreation isn't sex.
Sorry, it's a dumb term that comes, I think, from old print newspapers. Anyway I meant if you click on the "see more..." link at the bottom of the post. Ok, ok, the slow learner has fixed the problem by adding the missing photo. Apologies, Five. As for why simply viewing porn would equal addiction in men, let alone women...? We'd have to ask the people worried about it. I think you hit the nail on the head when you said "just being a receptacle for procreation isn't sex." I think that's what they really want. As Amanda Marcotte says, though, they know they'd get laughted at if they admitted it. Thanks, Five! --fl]
Submitted by 1686 (not verified) on Thu, 2007-10-18 19:23.
I'm with Five of Nine. I fail to see a problem. And what business is it of the person sitting next to them?
The website for these repressed people says masturbation is sinful, too. All kinds of errors in logic on their website. Like this little gem: "Masturbation causes feelings of guilt and shame—clear signs of its wrongness."
I'd say, wtf, but I guess they don't...
[Well... it's kinda *gotta* depend on something besides logic, right? :-) Thanks, B! --fl]
Submitted by 1686 (not verified) on Thu, 2007-10-18 20:00.
fl, there isn't a "see more" link in this post, or at least it isn't coming up on my screen.
"I've always been a little cautious about the difference between "as much as one should have" vs. "as much as one wants." "
Your caution is, sadly, not practiced by everyone.
Clearly, if we could do away with "should have" in favor of "wants" most people would be a lot happier. But it would take away an avenue of judgement which seems to give satisfaction to many...
I think a lot of people define sex "addiction" in the same way they define "slut"-- just a little bit/few more than I'm having/had-- now -that's- addiction. (I don't mean to trivialize or discount the condition, btw. Just the casual "Oh, that slut's a sex addict" kind of accusation.)
[Nicely put, L. Also doh! I've added the missing photo. Thanks on both counts. --fl]