Anyway, one thing I can't figure out is the idea of no sex before marriage. Specifically, how does marriage sanctify sex? Think about these contrasting examples:
- A guy (in no relationship) goes to Vegas, gets drunk, and ends up marrying an equally drunk waitress. They have sex. In the morning, after getting over their hangovers, they divorce and go their separate ways. According to the NSBM ideal, the sex is fine because it's within marriage.
- A youngish couple have been together for several years, and eventually decide to engage in some horizontal dancing. According to the NSBM ideal, this sex is wrong because, despite the couple's intimacy, they aren't married.
Come on fundies and ultracons alike, get over it. There is nothing about marriage that makes sex more or less pure or sanctive-it's just a transparently thin cover for you lot to try and make women* guilty for experiencing sexual pleasure. And in turn this simply is a means for controlling those sex organs which you are so petrified of.
*Get ready for an EPIC rant against purity balls.
2 comments:
Well said. Its all about controlling female bodies!
Well, as I've known, marriage is supposed to be permanent, and that its done in the context of making a family.
The existence of divorce in liberal countries makes that point null.
I can say that the 2nd case was alright.. that is if they (in the end) get married and form a family. If not, then too bad. XD
And personally, I don't have any knowledge of this "controlling female bodies."
lol
Post a Comment