 |
| Book cover for "The Great Sex Rescue." |
Links to all posts in this series can be found here: Blog series on "The Great Sex Rescue"
---
So like I said, I'm going to be reading The Great Sex Rescue: The Lies You've Been Taught and How to Recover What God Intended [affiliate link] and blogging through it. Here's a review of chapter 1.
The book opens with a discussion of the phrase "Sex is a gift from God" because this is a thing that evangelical Christians are always saying. The writers of this book are writing to women who were told that "sex is a gift from God" but when they got married and had sex, it didn't feel like a "gift from God." Maybe because they're required to have sex they don't want. Or because they do enjoy sex, but they feel like they're not supposed to.
The book asks the question, "What if our evangelical 'treatments' for sex issues make things worse?"
I mean, yes, they do! I am totally in agreement so far.
And then there's this:
We want to rescue couples from teachings that have wrecked sex and put you back on the road to great sex-- because that's what you should be having!
Uh... yeah as an asexual, I have alarm bells going off when I read things like that. "should be having"??? No, I don't think everyone "should" be having sex. How about you only have sex if you want to, not because you "should"?
So to some extent, reading chapter 1 I'm like "wow this is great, people need to read this" and to some extent I'm like "this does not work for asexuals." Here is my read on how this book is framed: It's about the mismatch between the abstract ideals about sex that evangelicals are always talking about- sex is a gift from God, etc- and the actual reality that straight-married Christian women are experiencing. A lot of straight-married Christian women are having problems in their sex lives, and they get advice from the church like "you need to have sex with your husband whenever he wants" which just makes things worse. The book is about calling out those harmful teachings and taking a stand against them, so that the ideals about "sex is a gift from God" will actually be achievable for straight-married Christian women.
It doesn't leave any room for aces, though. ("ace" means asexual / asexual spectrum.) Or anyone else who isn't heterosexual. Those ideals about "sex is a gift from God" are not inclusive of everyone.
So, I mean, I think this book will have parts that are useful for me. But right here in chapter 1, the book is telling me it's not really for me.
And, wait, let me back up and talk about myself a little. I'm a straight asexual woman, married to a man. I'm a Christian, grew up evangelical and totally bought into all the purity stuff- but I'm ex-evangelical now. And I do have sex... In the asexual community, people use the term "sex-favorable" for aces who do want to have sex. So, I'm sex-favorable, but I don't really use that label very much because I feel like the label "asexual" is enough- I relate to a lot of things that other aces talk about, regardless of whether they are sex-favorable/sex-indifferent/sex-repulsed. But for the purposes of reviewing this book, I guess my being sex-favorable is an important factor in the perspective I'm coming from.
Anyway what I'm trying to say here is, I do have sex, but still, as an asexual I feel like the way this book talks about sex doesn't match my feelings/experiences.
Okay moving along, we have a section about the definition of sex. Okay, yeah this is a really good point! People talk about sex like it's defined as 'penis-in-vagina [PIV] until the man has an orgasm', but actually, sex can be a lot of other things besides that.
And I love this part:
Let's do a thought experiment. Insert that definition of sex into the Bible verse about sex that we found to be the most quoted, and it's easy to see how sexual advice can go so far off-kilter:
Do not deprive each other [of a husband penetrating his wife until he climaxes] except perhaps by mutual consent and for a time, so that you may devote yourselves to prayer. (1 Cor. 7:5)
(If you're not familiar with 1 Corinthians 7- this is the main passage that's used to tell women "you need to have sex with your husband whenever he wants it." That's not an exact quote from the bible, but this is: "The wife does not have authority over her own body but yields it to her husband. In the same way, the husband does not have authority over his own body but yields it to his wife." Also this: "But if they cannot control themselves, they should marry, for it is better to marry than to burn with passion." Anyway, 1 Corinthians 7 is the reason why my headcanon says the apostle Paul was a really problematic asexual. Read the whole chapter and you'll see what I mean.)
The point that Gregoire and the other writers are making here in this "thought experiment" is this: If we define sex as just PIV, and then claim that the bible says "do not deprive each other" of it, well that makes no sense. It's so one-sided- what on earth would it mean to not deprive each other of the man getting an orgasm? And it's so focused on just the physical climax- the book says "then we may start to think that what God really cares about most is that husbands ejaculate frequently enough." Wow, yes, good point, that is really ridiculous! It would make much more sense to define sex more broadly, and as something that has equality between men and women.
(I mean, I want to say "equality between all genders" but Gregoire and the other writers seem to think everyone is a cis man or a cis woman, so... yeah this is the best we can expect from this book...)
Okay so right when I'm starting to say yes I agree that sex shouldn't be defined solely as PIV, then we get this:
Each of you were created for sex that is about so much more than one-sided pleasure.
Uh. *gestures asexually*
Also, as far as I know, Gregoire and the other writers believe sex is only for monogamous hetero marriage (please correct me if I'm wrong, I would love to be wrong about this!), so, I'm having a hard time understanding why they say "each of you"...
Great sex is the fulfillment of a longing for intimacy, for connection, to be completely and utterly bare in every way before each other.
??? Yeah Christians are always saying that, but that's not how it is for me.
Yes, baring ourselves physically is necessary for sex (though sometimes socks can help on those cold nights), but that's not the only kind of baring that real sex involves. It's also a baring of our souls, a deep hunger for connection, a longing to be completely consumed by the other-- while also bringing intense pleasure to both of you.
Yeah, if that's what sex is for you, good for you. Very cool for you. But this is not relatable for me at all.
(Also, I'd be interested in hearing an aromantic perspective on this. I suspect these ideas are not inclusive of aros, but in a different way than they're not inclusive of my experiences as an asexual.)
And then they have a list of what "sex should be":
Here's what we propose, based on our survey results and biblical principles, that a healthy sex life should look like:
Sex should be personal: Its is a chance to enter into each other's very being to truly become one; it is a knowing of each other that leads to deep intimacy.
Sex should be pleasurable: Sex was designed to feel good-- really good-- for both people.
Sex should be pure: Both partners can expect the other to take responsibility to keep themselves free of sexual sin.
Sex should be prioritized: Both partners in the relationship desire sex, even if at different levels, and both partners understand that sex is a vital part of a healthy marriage.
Sex should be pressure-free: Sex is a gift freely given; it's not about getting what you want through manipulation, coercion, or threat.
Sex should put the other first: Sex is about considering your spouse's wants and needs before you consider your own.
Sex should be passionate: Sex was designed to allow us to enter into a state of joyful abandon, to completely surrender ourselves to the other in an ecstasy of trust and love.
Okay, I have lots of thoughts on this.
Let's start with the part where I agree: "Sex should be pressure-free." Yes! Very important! And this is something that Christian women NEED to hear, because there is so much Christian marriage advice about how wives have to have sex with their husbands, otherwise they will ruin their husband's self-esteem and then he will go cheat on her because you know how men are. It's very NOT COOL how this kind of teaching pressures married women into sex they don't want, and doesn't allow them to even ask the question "what do I want?"
Okay, and then the parts where I completely disagree: "Sex should be prioritized"? Uh did they put this on the list just to exclude the asexuals, or what? "Sex should be pure"- okay I don't know how they're defining "sexual sin" but I have spent a lot of time getting out of purity culture, and I do NOT want anything in my life to be "pure", I don't wanna touch that word with a 10-foot pole. "Sex should put the other first"- not exactly sure how they're defining this either, but as an ex-evangelical I have spent a lot of time learning the importance of putting myself first. And I believe that in sex, you should treat both people's needs as equal.
And then the ones that kind of don't feel right to me, but it's hard to explain why: "Sex should be personal", "Sex should be pleasurable", "Sex should be passionate." I read these and my first reaction is "that's not how it is for me," but, wait, am I saying that when I have sex with my husband, it's not personal/pleasurable/passionate? No... it is those things, it definitely is... But I think what I'm reacting to is the idea that sex is uniquely personal/pleasurable/passionate. Like it's THE MOST personal you can ever get with someone, it's THE MOST pleasurable thing you can ever do, it's THE MOST passionate you can ever feel. Yeah, that is what's definitely not true for me.
Going to the grocery store can be personal/pleasurable/passionate, if you're going with the right person. My husband and I have fun together all the time. We work really well together. And sex is somewhere in there too, but it's not like... uniquely important.
Or, let me say it this way: If a woman is having sex that doesn't feel good physically, and she thinks "well this is just the way it is, women don't enjoy sex, this is fine and normal" then it could be really useful to her to hear the message "sex should be pleasurable." Not to throw more guilt on her for how she's failing to do sex "correctly" but to make her realize, "omg, something's wrong, what I'm experiencing is not normal and I need to find out why."
If you're having sex that's not personal/pleasurable/passionate, and you wish it was, and everybody- your husband, pastors, etc- is telling you that you're wrong for wanting something different, telling you that you're selfish and sinful, well this book is here to tell you that it matters what you want. You deserve to have people care about that. If your husband's getting what he wants out of sex, and you're not, that's not okay, and you deserve better.
That's the message I want people to hear- and this book does say that. But it's right next to sentences like "Each of you were created for sex that is about so much more than one-sided pleasure"- which, I mean, as an asexual I read this and it feels so narrow. "created for sex"??? Um no thanks.
So when I hear things like "sex should be pleasurable" or "passionate" or "personal", it really depends what the situation is, and the purpose of making that statement. Like, what is it a reaction to? If it's about sending the message "sex is the best thing ever, and here's why" then I don't agree with that. If it's "are you unhappy with your sex life because what you actually want is something personal/pleasurable/passionate, and that's not what you're getting in your marriage? Well guess what, you deserve better" then yes I agree with that. Yes, that is absolutely a message that people need to hear.
Near the end of chapter 1, the writers talk about the ways they researched for this book:
- survey of 20,000 women (seems like they specifically targeted married Christian women)
- academic research about evangelicalism and sexuality
- focus groups
- reading bestselling Christian marriage books
I gotta say, I love the idea of reading the bestselling Christian marriage books and then doing surveys of women who buy into those teachings, and evaluating whether those teachings make things better or worse in reality.
All right, so that's chapter 1 of the book. Basically, this book agrees with the Christian teaching that "sex is a gift from God" that everyone is "designed" to have (specifically in a monogamous hetero marriage, I'm assuming, though this chapter doesn't say that directly). The purpose of the book is to argue against other common Christian teachings which frame sex as something that a wife is required to do for her husband, because those harmful teachings are keeping women from having great sex the way that God "designed" it. As an asexual, I'm really interested in what they have to say about the "women are required to have sex with their husbands" teaching, because that is very harmful to asexuals. But the alternative the book presents- all the things they say sex "should" be- those don't match how I feel.
---
Links to all posts in this series can be found here: Blog series on "The Great Sex Rescue"
Related:
No comments:
Post a Comment