Missionary Position

[Allister]

This BBC2 documentary about a Christian couple who have founded a sex shop/website can be found in the link below as well as the link to their website.

How do the Christians here view the coming together of their faith and sexual pleasure through aids and toys?

A good idea or not.


Warning: film contains mild sexual content

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/page/i...layercategories&start=12&version_pid=b008ywq4

http://www.whollylove.co.uk/

 

[Allister]

This thread has been up for less than one minute and has already been reported. Shame on you!

This is a perfectly legitimate discussion for ethics and morality. A discussion about a CHRISTIAN couple setting up a website about sex WITHIN MARRIAGE.

I even gave a warning above the links warning of mild sexual content.

Warning: film contains mild sexual content

Shame on you!!

 

[cantata]

This thread has been up for less than one minute and has already been reported. Shame on you!

Agreed, that's pathetic.

Incidentally, I think that couple is doing something great and they should keep at it, although I'd like to see more room for discussion on their website about what is and is not okay for Christian couples.

 

[Robbie_James_Francis]

I think it's a fantastic idea. And I have to say that whoever reported the thread, and anyone who objects to this, that it really undermines their constant claim that their apparent anti-sex attitude actually masks a fundamental belief that sex (in heterosexual marriage) is a good thing.

And I'd also like to say that to anyone who tries to censor me by reporting my post for in-thread discussion of moderator action.

 

[Molal]

I think what the couple is doing is great.

 

[gengwall]

A couple needs to build a model for sexuality within their marriage but I see nothing wrong with getting advice, help, and "accessories" IF that is the way they want to build their model. I would think that Christians would appreciate the fact a couple doesn't have to go to "that nasty shop around the corner" anymore.

Contrary to popular belief, religious people are not prudes when it comes to the marriage bed. They can, in fact, be quite wild and adventurous. Christians make excellent lovers. And don't even get me started on Orthodox Jews. I have read they are (within marriage of course) quite the sexual dynamo's.

 

[flicka]

I visited the site Themarriagebed.com recently because it was mentioned in another thread. From the forum discussions I see no difference in sexual practices between Christians and non Christians. However, the Christians who would go to that site and post about their sex life are self selecting (as any group is) and may or may not represent the majority.

I also came away with the feeling that much of it was acting as a "legitimate" form of pornography, much like the stories you read in Penthouse. I'm assuming they don't see it that way.....but I do!!! LOL

 

[Caitlin.ann]

Sex is sex, with or without the use of toys, although I must add that its all the more worthwhile sometimes with aids. As for what I Christian would think, the only close Christians to me I can think of are my parents and I just don't want to go there...so I'm not sure what most Christians think of using toys. I guess since since there are so many there will be differing opinions.

Personally I like the use of aids and I think the Christian couple are doing great.

 

[gengwall]

I visited the site Themarriagebed.com recently because it was mentioned in another thread. From the forum discussions I see no difference in sexual practices between Christians and non Christians. However, the Christians who would go to that site and post about their sex life are self selecting (as any group is) and may or may not represent the majority.

I also came away with the feeling that much of it was acting as a "legitimate" form of pornography, much like the stories you read in Penthouse. I'm assuming they don't see it that way.....but I do!!! LOL

I love TMB, but avoid their forums. I agree, TMI.

 

[ElephantsAreAwesome]

It's fine with me so long as it's in marriage. Problem is that many of these "toys" are sold right next to porn and other disgusting smut which is unChristian and unhealthy in general. So I guess if they avoid going near the porn stores and giving them their business then its fine.

 

[cantata]

It's fine with me so long as it's in marriage. Problem is that many of these "toys" are sold right next to porn and other disgusting smut which is unChristian and unhealthy in general. So I guess if they avoid going near the porn stores and giving them their business then its fine.

Heaven forbid grown adults should see the box of a pornographic film.

 

[gengwall]

Heaven forbid grown adults should see the box of a pornographic film.

Although most grown adults can probably cope with the box of a pronographic film, they have no general need to be exposed to it. From a Christian perspective, (and usually from a feminist one as well) pornography is very unhealthy and, of course, unChristian as Elephants accurately states. So why would we not be encouraged that we don't have to be exposed to pornography in our endeavors to purchase acceptable marital aids?

 

[cantata]

Although most grown adults can probably cope with the box of a pronographic film, they have no general need to be exposed to it. From a Christian perspective, (and usually from a feminist one as well) pornography is very unhealthy and, of course, unChristian as Elephants accurately states. So why would we not be encouraged that we don't have to be exposed to pornography in our endeavors to purchase acceptable marital aids?

No, that's fair enough of course, but it was the tone of Elephants' post that I found slightly odd, as if people who saw the box of a pornographic film might be melted on the spot.

Incidentally, as a feminist, I don't think there's anything inherently wrong with the notion of pornography, although much of the porn industry is arguably exploitative. Pornography made by women is generally more sensitive to its participants' concerns, and is also rather better in many cases as well.

Interestingly, the couple who run WhollyLove won't permit any anal toys, which I don't think are exploitative or particularly un-Christian either.

The phrase 'marital aids' makes me giggle

 

[gengwall]

No, that's fair enough of course, but it was the tone of Elephants' post that I found slightly odd, as if people who saw the box of a pornographic film might be melted on the spot.

LOL - visions of the wicked witch of the west.

Incidentally, as a feminist, I don't think there's anything inherently wrong with the notion of pornography, although much of the porn industry is arguably exploitative. Pornography made by women is generally more sensitive to its participants' concerns, and is also rather better in many cases as well.

It is the exploitive aspects of which I speak (in terms of feminists). Although I would guess you would be hard pressed to find any movies in your local porn shop that were produced in an unexploitative manner.

Knowing the source for our word pornography helps shed light on the universal disgust within Christian circles. The Greek porneia, at least in its use in the New Testament (and Septuigint OT), means literally sexual immorality. It should be pointed out that it doesn't refer so much (or even at all) to particular acts being universally immoral, as it does to particular participants. Hence, many Christians will accept pretty much anything (even anal) as long as it occurs within marriage and is consented to by both parties.

 

[cantata]

LOL - visions of the wicked witch of the west.

That's right! "NOT THE NIPPLES" *melt* &c.

It is the exploitive aspects of which I speak (in terms of feminists). Although I would guess you would be hard pressed to find any movies in your local porn shop that weren't produced in an unexploitative manner.

Possibly true, and if so then that's sad. I did read an article a few years ago about the pornography industry which argued that many women involved in it are actually quite happy and are shrewd and powerful businesswomen, so I don't think it should just be assumed that they or their male counterparts are being exploited.

Either way, sex shops and websites like Shh! are quite good about choosing pornography that is both sensitively made and appealing to women; I hope that businesses like these continue to grow in number and popularity.

Knowing the source for our word pornography helps shed light on the universal disgust within Christian circles.

Well, hardly. I'm sure you're not going to commit the etymology fallacy...

The Greek porneia, at least in its use in the New Testament (and Septuigint OT), means literally sexual immorality. It should be pointed out that it doesn't refer so much (or even at all) to particular acts being universally immoral, as it does to particular participants.

Whence a word comes, as I'm sure you know, has little bearing on its current usage.

Hence, many Christians will accept pretty much anything (even anal) as long as it occurs within marriage and is consented to by both parties.

I'm glad to hear that. I couldn't see any good reason why it shouldn't be allowed.

 

[PassionFruit]

Although most grown adults can probably cope with the box of a pronographic film, they have no general need to be exposed to it. From a Christian perspective, (and usually from a feminist one as well) pornography is very unhealthy and, of course, unChristian as Elephants accurately states. So why would we not be encouraged that we don't have to be exposed to pornography in our endeavors to purchase acceptable marital aids?

Porn being unhealthy isn't really a feminist perspective, but there are feminists out who believe that pornography is degrading towards women. And then you have the sex positive feminists who feel that it can be empowering. Strange, but true. But I understand how from a Christian standpoint that porn is inherently harmful.

You can on online and purchase sex toys. So, you don't have to be exposed to porn.

 

[gengwall]

That's right! "NOT THE NIPPLES" *melt* &c.



Possibly true, and if so then that's sad. I did read an article a few years ago about the pornography industry which argued that many women involved in it are actually quite happy and are shrewd and powerful businesswomen, so I don't think it should just be assumed that they or their male counterparts are being exploited.

Either way, sex shops and websites like Shh! are quite good about choosing pornography that is both sensitively made and appealing to women; I hope that businesses like these continue to grow in number and popularity.



Well, hardly. I'm sure you're not going to commit the etymology fallacy...





Whence a word comes, as I'm sure you know, has little bearing on its current usage.



I'm glad to hear that. I couldn't see any good reason why it shouldn't be allowed.

I certainly do understand the difference between the source of a word and its current usage. "Sodomy" comes to mind as an even greater example of the failure to divorce a word from its beginnings. "That's so gay" shares a similar dilema on the liberal side of the house. But that is neither here nor there.

Sensible or not, Christians consider "pornography" to refer exclusively to sexual immorality. The more current definition would be, I guess, "explicit eroticism", or something of the kind. Within that definition, even certain interpretations of Song of Solomon render that book pornographic. I have no problem dealing with the term either way. But we all know what way Elephant was using the word and so his level of disgust is understandable given his point of view, even if others don't share it.

 

[Caitlin.ann]

Sensible or not, Christians consider "pornography" to refer exclusively to sexual immorality. The more current definition would be, I guess, "explicit eroticism", or something of the kind. Within that definition, even certain interpretations of Song of Solomon render that book pornographic. I have no problem dealing with the term either way. But we all know what way Elephant was using the word and so his level of disgust is understandable given his point of view, even if others don't share it.

SOME Christians..since Christians make up a majority of the population I don't think its wise to generalize.

I don't get the big deal though..its just sex and sexual aids to use with your significant others. From the general Christian point of view, if the couple is married, then whats the big deal?

 

[gengwall]

SOME Christians..since Christians make up a majority of the population I don't think its wise to generalize.

I don't get the big deal though..its just sex and sexual aids to use with your significant others. From the general Christian point of view, if the couple is married, then whats the big deal?

I stand corrected. "SOME (and probably most) Christians". A fair compromise?

I agree that within marriage, all (or almost all) is fair. I would draw the line at pornography that is exploitive to either participant or consumer as it can certainly be defined as immorality (just the fact that the participants aren't themselves married makes it so) and therefore defile's the marriage bed. But heck, who need pornography anyway if your sex life is good?

 

[Caitlin.ann]

I stand corrected. "SOME (and probably most) Christians". A fair compromise?

I agree that within marriage, all (or almost all) is fair. I would draw the line at pornography that is exploitive to either participant or consumer as it can certainly be defined as immorality (just the fact that the participants aren't themselves married makes it so) and therefore defile's the marriage bed. But heck, who need pornography anyway if your sex life is good?

Lol, just saying.

To each their own, I guess.