Tag Archives: slut shaming

Duggars, religion, sex, slut shamers

Partial repost: There’s something “fishy” about this logic…

Here’s a partial repost from March 2018. It’s only a “partial” repost, because I have matured a bit since 2018 and feel the need to be slightly less vulgar and obscene. Also, it gives me some time to think about today’s “fresh” content. I’m sure I’ll be wanting to post some fresh content after writing about this subject. Or maybe I’ll just want to take a shower.

A few days ago, I saw this photo posted in my Facebook feed.  Someone had shared it in the Duggar Family News group. Here’s a link to an article about this, which led the original poster to get quite a “grillin'”.

Mmmm…. appetizing!

Personally, I did wait until marriage before I lost my virginity.  It wasn’t because I was concerned about how tight my twat was, though.  In fact, I vividly remember worrying about what that first experience would be like, since I didn’t have any sex before I got married.  In my case, being a virgin was less because of a sense of morality and saving myself, and more because of practicality.  I simply never found anyone with whom I wanted sex who also wanted sex with me.  I will admit that I didn’t try very hard.  And Bill, who was a lapsed Mormon during our engagement, wanted to wait until marriage, too. I figured I’d waited that long, I might as well wait for our big day… and then we waited another couple of weeks, because I started my period right after the ceremony. 🙁

I know how Ginny felt… actually, I didn’t need muscle relaxants. Aunt Flow was kind enough to wait until after we were at our B&B.

I truly don’t regret waiting for marriage, but I realize that’s not a choice everyone will want to make.  Moreover, I would much rather people have sex while they are single, than get married simply so they can finally fuck each other.  I can personally attest to how awful and complicated divorce can be, not just for the person who gets divorced, but also family, friends, and significant others.  I am for people being responsible about it and taking precautions to prevent pregnancies and disease transmission.  Then, by all means, have your fun.

That’s right!  It could simply mean that you have a really small penis.

I have not yet seen a post encouraging men to wait until marriage, even though I’m sure that’s encouraged among the religious.  On the other hand, guys like Josh Duggar preach about family values and living the fundie Christian way.  Then they go out and hire strippers and prostitutes.  The truth later comes out in a big scandal.  I suspect that a lot of fundamentalist Christian males are massive hypocrites and liars.  I feel sorry for Josh’s wife and kids because I’m not sure he’ll ever live down what a hypocritical scumbag he was revealed to be. (ETA: remember, this was originally posted in 2018– three years before the world found out how truly vile and disgusting Josh Duggar really is! I feel even more sorry for his kids today, although my sympathy for Anna is slightly less now…)  

If you’re LDS, that could take awhile…

I think it’s pretty gross that the person who made the first post used fish to illustrate how tight a woman’s vagina is after multiple sex partners.  I mean, did that person choose fish on purpose, realizing that a lot of sexually transmitted infections can cause that part of the body to take on a fishy odor?  What’s the old saying?  Fish and visitors stink after three days?  

And what’s with wasting perfectly good fish on an object lesson?  That fish died so the world can get a graphic representation about how women who have sex with many men might make them too “loose” for a man’s pleasure.  There are people starving in the world… people who would love to have fish for dinner.  And finally, the idea of a woman’s genitals being akin to a cold, slimy, fleshy, malodorous piece of fish.  I’m surprised anyone would feel sexy after seeing that.  But I guess that was the point.  

This fish business is even grosser than using licked cupcakes and chewed gum to teach girls about purity.  At least gum and cupcakes are appetizing.  Using raw fish, especially when illustrating a woman’s vagina, is just nasty and disrespectful. 

And just to make this more topical in 2021… I have been stumbling across more and more news pieces about fundie males who turn out to be total deviants and perverts. I am convinced that a higher number of creeps are hiding out in fundamentalist religious cults than in the regular population. If you think about it, those types of very legalistic religiously based groups with high levels of control and power over members are especially ripe for abuse. Females are usually taught in those groups that they are to submit to men at all costs, and if they suffer from abuse or mental health issues, it’s because they aren’t “right” with God and need to repent and pray.

Every day, when I read about these kinds of situations, I am more and more grateful that my parents did not raise me in a cult. I went to a mainstream church, where there was no weirdness and no intrusive interviews about my sexual habits or preferences. No one ever shamed me for what I was wearing. And I was only expected to be in church for an hour (two, if you count Sunday School) a week.

Speaking of Josh Duggar… looks like his most recent court case involving his evident issues with downloading videos and photos of CSA is heading south at a rapid pace. The federal judge keeps turning down his desperate requests to suppress evidence. I think he’s going to regret not accepting a plea deal, because I have a feeling that at the end of his trial, he’s going to be going away for a very long time. I’m generally not a fan of putting people in prison for years on end, but I do think it’s probably appropriate in his case.

In any case, the fish object lesson is particularly disgusting. I thought the wadded up gum, licked cupcakes, and wilted roses used to discourage girls from being “handled sexually” were yucky, but none of them compare to using tuna to demonstrate the condition of a woman’s nether regions. Eeeeew! The guy who made this ought to be ashamed of himself… and he should enroll in an anatomy class, pronto.

Standard
slut shamers

Moms who care too much…

I just read an outrageous story on the Web site for the British tabloid, The Daily Mail. Meet Lauren Wall, aged 34. On August 14, 2004, when she was 19, her mom, Julie, paid 15,000 GBP for Lauren’s dream wedding to her 20 year old groom, Paul White. Lauren and Paul, by then already parents to a baby daughter, were so grateful for Lauren’s mom’s generosity that they took her on their two week honeymoon to Devon.

Weeks after the wedding, Paul became very secretive and wouldn’t let Lauren see his phone. One day, Lauren’s sister happened to see some texts between Julie and Paul. They were having an affair. Paul soon walked out on Lauren and their daughter, then took up with Julie, whom he promptly knocked up with another child. Lauren spotted her mom walking around with a baby bump and her mom denied she was pregnant, claiming she had a “cyst”. Scariest of all, Julie works with children and thinks she can tell her grown daughter than an obvious baby bump is a “cyst”. Does she tell the children she takes care of such obvious untruths?

Mood music…

Julie, now 53, is currently married to Paul. They wed on August 15, 2009. Lauren was there at their nuptials, for her daughter’s sake… her daughter, who is the daughter and granddaughter, and stepdaughter of the bride and groom… and the half-sibling and niece of their child… I’m actually getting confused by this. I kind of feel sorry for the children involved in this mess. Julie has tried to make up with Lauren, but Lauren says their relationship is permanently damaged.

As an addendum to yesterday’s post about the evilness that is Bill’s ex… I would not be surprised if she would try something like this, if she were younger and still fertile. And Paul sounds like a real shameless asshat, too. I think he and Julie probably deserve each other, but talk about treacherous family members!

I try to keep an open mind in situations like these, but jeez… this is pretty outrageous. It’s the type of thing I’d expect to see on an 80s era soap opera. This is what I would call a convoluted family tree!

My mother-in-law, who hails from Arkansas, says it sounds like home.

Standard
LDS, musings

Getting laid… a continuation.

Today’s post is going to include frank discussion of sex. Proceed with caution.

A few days ago, I wrote a post about a guy named Lafayette who has Asperger’s Syndrome and wants to know how he can get laid. The good folks on the Recovery from Mormonism site offered plenty of tips. Some of it was actually good advice. Because there was such an outpouring of advice for Lafayette, his post was eventually closed and someone opened a new thread offering even more advice. The new thread was lighthearted and joking, so someone was kind enough to let Lafayette know that the first post offering tips was joking in nature.

But then, a woman offered this comment, which I thought was very astute…

Just a thought for Aspie (or not) men who want casual sex: your desire for pleasure is reasonable, but please consider that for women, casual sex comes with a risk of becoming pregnant with a human being that will need to be cared for for the next 18 years, unless she aborts it, and making either of those choices as a single women will be loaded with a metric ton of judgment from society. Even without a pregnancy or abortion, casual sex for a woman is still loaded with a whole lot of baggage. Even more judgment for being a woman who has casual sex, for example. Please take these things into account when you wonder why it isn’t easier to get laid.

I was talking about this with Bill recently. This guy wants to get laid. I’m assuming it’s because he has a physical desire for it. Not being male, I have no idea what that feels like for a man. It must be a very strong drive, though, because it seems like most men are looking for physical affection. A lot of them want it casually, with no strings attached. Some are looking for it from other males, but most want it from females. Females have more to lose when they engage in casual sex. Most of them can get pregnant.

We now live in a society where males are actively trying to take bodily autonomy away from women. Read the news, and you’ll see that in many U.S. states, there are “heartbeat bills“, that would ban abortion for women beyond about six weeks gestation. A lot of women don’t even know that they’re pregnant at that point. Unintended pregnancy can really put a kink in a woman’s plans for her own life. She can have the baby and raise it, give it up for adoption, and at least for now, consider having an abortion. All of those choices are potentially devastating and involve costs– financial and personal– that will affect the woman for the rest of her life. Most men aren’t like my husband. They expect the woman to financially provide for herself. It’s a lot harder to do that with children.

Another thing I didn’t see addressed in the original thread is that for some women, sex is painful. I am one of those unlucky women who needs a lot of lead time before sex doesn’t physically hurt me. Fortunately, Bill is the kind of man who doesn’t mind taking his time warming me up. Not all guys are like Bill. Some of them want what they want when they want it, and they don’t consider that sex hurts sometimes. It might be easy for a guy to be ready to go at a moment’s notice. Maybe it’s like that for most other women, too. But I know that my experiences are not unique. A lot of women experience pain when they have sex. There are a lot of nerve endings down there. And frankly, I am not willing to go through that kind of pain for someone I don’t care about.

There are a lot of reasons why sex hurts for some women. Sometimes, it’s a matter of not being lubricated enough. In that case, a little more foreplay is all that is needed. Generally, that’s what works for me. Some people use commercially prepared lubricant to ease the way. Personally, I don’t care for it– it’s messy, slimy, and gross to me. But other people don’t mind it and use it with great success. I think I also suffer from a touch of vaginismus, which is when the vagina tenses up and spasms before something enters it. I know I had vaginismus when I was younger, and having sex was a nightmare. I can remember tensing up before doing the deed, knowing it was going to hurt. That’s also why I don’t use tampons.

Sometimes a woman has anatomical issues or sexually transmitted infections that make sex painful. In that case, a visit to a physician is the best way to solve the problem. But visits to the doctor cost money and time off work, and they are also potentially embarrassing. Although getting treated is probably the best thing the woman can do for herself, she may not want casual sex with you badly enough to go to the doctor. That’s her call.

I have some empathy for Lafayette. I was glad to see him come back and leave this comment on his original thread:

Top notch! Awesome feedback!

The post-start was a bit rhetorical.

It is not very likely that I will get laid but it makes it all much funnier to discuss.

Once – back in the time – I found a blog post that described how animals that are raised by humans imprint wrong behaviour. Things that will come naturally does not, so they will be lucky to learn to do natural things. I do not know if autism is just like that but it feels similar.

Being raised inside the frames of a cultural theocracy takes it toll on the imprinting.

As a naturally gullible person I must say that life has not always been easy but I should not complain today. Some things really are great!

I’m sure when he mentioned “getting laid”, it probably wouldn’t be the approach he would actually use. Or, at least I hope not. Autism is another one of those life experiences other people have that I can’t relate to at all. I don’t know how it feels. But I also liked this comment:

Announcing that you want to get laid. Jesus! Dude!

If the only thing you want to do is have sex, okay. But “How do I get laid”? I can’t even.

What you wrote translates into “Women exist for the laying of males. No mind or feelings necessary. All I want is a wet vagina.”

Christ! DUDE!

For some of us, achieving a wet vagina, even with someone we love and trust, isn’t all that easy. And if you’re not willing to put in the effort to get the woman there, why should she risk pregnancy, STIs, or heartbreak for you, just so you can satisfy that physical urge? I don’t know what it’s like for a man. But I think a lot of men don’t know and have never considered what it’s like for a woman, either. Too many of them want a woman who will “put out”, but then shame her for being “slutty” or getting pregnant. And too many men are unwilling to do their part to reduce the risk that the woman they’re having sex with won’t be left with any unpleasant lingering aftereffects… not that having a baby is necessarily “unpleasant”, per se. But not every woman wants to be a mother. Not every woman is cut out to be a mother. And quite a lot of women can’t afford to be a mother without help from the other party.

Personally, I wouldn’t want to have sex with someone with whom I couldn’t raise a child, but that’s just me… and fortunately, I’m about done with my childbearing years, anyway. I suspect that in a few years, it won’t matter at all for me anymore. I’m writing this for the younger women out there… and the men who might be willing to consider this perspective. You think of it as a roll in the sack, but for her, it could end up being a lot more than that. So if you really want to “get laid”, please have a little consideration for what that could lead to for the other party, and act accordingly.

Wow… even Cyndi Lauper was a Dr. Ruth fan.

On another note… sometimes I miss Dr. Ruth Westheimer’s cable show. Too bad I was too young for it when it aired on Lifetime.

Standard
condescending twatbags, slut shamers

Catholic mom begs girls and women to stop wearing leggings…

Ah… modesty. It’s a topic that has graced my blogs many times in the past. Now I have a new blog, and I haven’t yet written about modesty on this one. So here goes…

Many people are of the opinion that leggings are not pants. Some people think leggings are indecent and immodest. Some people think people with certain body types have no business wearing skin tight, stretchy fabric that shows every crease and roll. And some people are hyper-religious and sexually repressed and they worry that the sight of a pretty young woman in leggings will cause moral decay.

Catholic mom, Maryann White, recently wrote a letter to the editor of The Observer, a student run newspaper that serves The University of Notre-Dame and other local colleges. White’s letter has caused a stir which caused so much commotion that the story was featured on Today.com. White, who is the mother of four sons, writes:

“I’ve thought about writing this letter for a long time. I waited, hoping that fashions would change and such a letter would be unnecessary — but that doesn’t seem to be happening. I’m not trying to insult anyone or infringe upon anyone’s rights. I’m just a Catholic mother of four sons with a problem that only girls can solve: leggings.”

White goes on to explain that in the Star Wars movie franchise, Princess Leia was forced by Jabba the Hutt to wear a revealing slave girl outfit that “steals her personhood”. She explained to her sons that the slave girl outfit is demeaning, especially since it’s forced upon Princess Leia. Then, she writes that no one forces women and girls to wear leggings, except maybe the “fashion industry”, which has created these damnable garments that allow women to display their “nether regions” in such a way that males can’t look away from them.

I’ve actually never seen this movie… but I have seen the bikini. I don’t think Princess Leia’s bikini is the same as leggings…

White is very distressed about this. She’s so distressed that she writes:

I’m fretting both because of unsavory guys who are looking at you creepily and nice guys who are doing everything to avoid looking at you. For the Catholic mothers who want to find a blanket to lovingly cover your nakedness and protect you — and to find scarves to tie over the eyes of their sons to protect them from you!

She then goes on to suggest that girls and women “choose jeans” instead. She admits that we have the right to wear leggings if we want to, but choosing to wear leggings is, in her opinion, indecent and disrespectful on many levels. And oh, can’t we please think of the males who will be either tempted or disgusted by the sight of female bodies and their long suffering Catholic mothers?

I haven’t worn leggings in many years. There was a brief time in the early 90s when they were popular. I wore them then because they were more comfortable than jeans. I’m short and curvy– okay fat– and it’s hard to find jeans that fit properly without actually going to a store and trying on a whole lot of them. I also find jeans uncomfortable. The heavy seams and stiff fabric are not pleasant to me, so it’s not so often you’ll catch me wearing them these days. I particularly dislike how jeans have that low rise fly, which just accentuates my beer gut. Leggings can just be pulled on and stretch to accommodate everything. I don’t wear them today, but I can see why some women like them. I do think it’s wise to use good judgment and discernment when dressing. I wouldn’t wear them to church, which is one scenario White complains about in her letter. But then, I don’t often go to church anymore. I’m sure a lot of ministers/priests/holy people are less concerned about what a person wears to church and more concerned that they have butts in the pews and money in the offering plates.

I do understand Ms. White’s angst about leggings. They aren’t always a good fashion choice for everyone, at least in terms of aesthetics. However, that’s the kind of thing that is in the eye of the beholder. What may be offensive to one set of eyes is pleasurable to another. And it’s very difficult for people to please everyone. I run into that concept a lot as a blogger. I get snippy comments from people who don’t like what I write and complain, while others continue to read and even praise me. Women and girls can certainly eliminate leggings from their wardrobes, but then still offend people by wearing jeans or short skirts.

I think that it’s up to the “Catholic moms” (and all the other parents) to teach their children that people are worthy of basic respect no matter what they’re wearing. Maryann White says it’s hard to teach her sons that all women are someone’s wives, mothers, daughters, etc. What she doesn’t seem to grasp is the fact that women are not merely “someone’s anything”. Women are “someones” in and of themselves.

Chances are excellent that male hormones will surge regardless of what women choose to wear. Furthermore, it’s exhausting for females to keep trying to figure out which rules they should follow in order to be “respectable” in the eyes of people like Maryann White. It’s not up to girls and women to protect boys and men from their “lustful” thoughts. It’s up to everyone to exercise self-control of their own thoughts and actions.

I don’t think Maryann White’s letter has done much to convince anyone not to wear leggings anymore. People have become so up in arms about White’s comments that she’s inspired people to host “Leggings Pride Days”. They’re posting pictures of themselves in leggings all over social media. So, instead of shaming women back into long skirts and jeans, White has probably made the situation more acute.

The point is– what a person wears doesn’t define his or her worth. The human body is beautiful and complex and absolutely nothing to be ashamed of. So, Maryann White, don’t “slut shame” girls and women for wearing leggings. Teach your sons that women and girls are people worthy of respect and self-determination. I’m sure that such a caring “Catholic mother” such as yourself is up to the challenge.

Standard