[Moved from Singles]A questions specificly for the women in this forum

[leothelioness]

Addiction can be defined as a compulsive behavior, but that has to be within the scope of things that a person does not have a natural compulsion to do. Gambling, snorting coke, drinking booze, these things could all be called addictions at the compulsion stage because they aren't normal parts of human psychological and physical development. On the other hand (no pun intended) sex is a perfectly normal and healthy compulsion. Maybe it's different from a guy's perspective, but to me it just sounds like a dude with no girlfriend that takes care of what needs taken care of and then beats himself up about later. 99% of people are self abusers, the other 1% are in denial.

I disagree. Even things that are deemed natural can become addictions. People can have addictions to food. The fact that something is "natural" does not mean that it is not something that can develop into an addiction.

 

[K9_Trainer]

inappropriate content addiction is a no-go for me, relationship wise, even as a non-Christian. And that applies to any addiction, honestly, but IMO, watching inappropriate content at all should be avoided.

inappropriate content does so many bad things to your brain, it's not even funny. It can totally rewire it. Your reward circuit gets messed up and your brain becomes overstimulated by all the novelty of different videos, pictures, women, etc. Everything is new and different. This causes your brain to decrease it's sensitivity to dopamine, as a way to cope....Dopamine is a neurotransmitter responsible for feeling pleasure or feeling good, and it's naturally released during sex and during new, exciting activities (like an amusement park ride, or winning an award, etc). So you become less sensitive to it in a way, and it becomes harder to gain satisfaction from the inappropriate content, but you also become hypersensitive to it to the point your brain responds to only it and craves it. The brain forms a negative feedback loop and basically classically conditions itself to respond to the sight of inappropriate content with another neurotransmitter. Which is exactly how addictions form. Watching inappropriate content basically becomes compulsive. This same feedback cycle is seen with food addictions, and drug addictions.

This is all very real and has been studied scientifically. Addiction: Decreased reward sensitivity and increased expectation sensitivity conspire to overwhelm the brain's control circuit
Sensitization processes in drug addi... [Curr Top Behav Neurosci. 2010] - PubMed - NCBI

It can absolutely ruin any relationship you try to form with the opposite sex. your brain can get to the point that it will no longer respond to real sex (inappropriate content induced erectile dysfunction basically). It has been conditioned to only respond like that to inappropriate content. Like with any other addiction, it will lead to the spouse becoming neglected, becoming second of importance next to your addiction, cause self esteem issues to the partner etc.

You seriously need to get it under control before you go looking for a relationship. Don't ask a woman to accept your inappropriate content addiction like it's a part of you. It's not fair to her. Seek therapy if you can. If you go to a university, they usually offer free counseling.

 

[Nanopants]

Then reject the Bible, reject God and live however you want to live.

He has a point. Society has changed, and let's not forget that the Biblical answer to temptation was to go ahead and marry, and very likely at an age younger than what we're accustomed to. When was the last time you heard of that being advocated in any "normal" church group today? Churches don't even follow the bible on this one now days, and yet we expect the problems to magically disappear when swept under a rug, and if not, repaint it as addiction and what essentially amounts to the denigration of sexuality in general, and when that doesn't work, we bring in the big guns of hellfire and brimstone for doing so much as looking at a woman lustfully. In fact, I'd suspect that some would go so far as to have children castrated, which I'm sad to say, has happened.

While the right way to handle these issues may not be so clear, one thing is: the church and the Western world has gone mad in the area of sexuality, probably because any time someone steps up to the plate to bring accepted norms into question, he or she runs the risk of being discredited in probably one of the most damaging ways possible.

 

[Strider1002]

Nothing wrong with getting married young... it just takes wisdom and discernment to do it right... and probably advice from parents, which young people often don't like to take.

 

[Clone93]

He has a point. Society has changed, and let's not forget that the Biblical answer to temptation was to go ahead and marry, and very likely at an age younger than what we're accustomed to. When was the last time you heard of that being advocated in any "normal" church group today? Churches don't even follow the bible on this one now days, and yet we expect the problems to magically disappear when swept under a rug, and if not, repaint it as addiction and what essentially amounts to the denigration of sexuality in general, and when that doesn't work, we bring in the big guns of hellfire for doing so much as looking at a woman lustuflly. In fact, I'd suspect that some would go so far as to have children castrated, which I'm sad to say, has happened.

While the right way to handle these issues may not be so clear, one thing is painfully clear: the church and the Western world has gone mad in the area of sexuality, probably because nobody wants to step up to the plate and face ridicule for daring to bring accepted norms into question.

Society can change as much as it wants to, but the Bible is the eternal word of God, if for some unknown reason murder became perfectly acceptable in society (which looking at abortion I'd say it has) does that change God? Does that change what God has said is right and what God has said is wrong? Or maybe this all took God by surprise and what was sin then is now fine, because society says it is?

It all boils down to, is there a right and is there a wrong? As Christians we believe that there is both, how do we know what is right and what is wrong? We don't go by what we personally think, nor what society has dripped into our ears since the day we recognized words, but rather on what God has to say about it, and we know that by reading the Bible. So no, he doesn't have a point.

 

[Nanopants]

Society can change as much as it wants to, but the Bible is the eternal word of God, if for some unknown reason murder became perfectly acceptable in society (which looking at abortion I'd say it has) does that change God? Does that change what God has said is right and what God has said is wrong? Or maybe this all took God by surprise and what was sin then is now fine, because society says it is?

It all boils down to, is there a right and is there a wrong? As Christians we believe that there is both, how do we know what is right and what is wrong? We don't go by what we personally think, nor what society has dripped into our ears since the day we recognized words, but rather on what God has to say about it, and we know that by reading the Bible. So no, he doesn't have a point.

I would say it is most definitely a sin to castrate kids, or to attempt to castrate your neighbor in the inspection of and unjustified management of his or her genitalia, in failing to effectively grapple with the realities of the human condition, and a fitting punishment would be castration itself. I'm inclined to believe that it's actually intentional btw, that inspired scripture would lead people with those particular motives down a path of self-mutilation. Seems to fit with castration being considered a punishment from God, and not a remedy for sexuality, as described in the old testament. God is just as they say, so it would be no surprise to me.

 

[MehGuy]

Thanks to the internet, now I'm bored of sex.. Is there some place I can quench my lust for violence? - Phillip J. Fry

 

[Strider1002]

Thanks to the internet, now I'm bored of sex.. Is there some place I can quench my lust for violence? - Phillip J. Fry

Not sure if Fry quote... or MehGuy quote.

 

[Clone93]

I would say it is most definitely a sin to castrate kids, or to attempt to castrate your neighbor in the inspection of and unjustified management of his or her genitalia, in failing to effectively grapple with the realities of the human condition, and a fitting punishment would be castration itself. I believe that's actually intentional btw, that inspired scripture would lead people with those particular motives down a path of self-mutilation. Seems to fit with castration being considered a punishment from God, and not a remedy for sexuality, as described in the old testament. God is just as they say, so it would be no surprise to me.

I'm fairly sure the Bible doesn't advocate for castration as a means of fighting our sinful nature, but rather living by the spirit and not by the flesh, which by the way is not suppose to be easy. So if a few crazies take inspired scripture and act crazy that's on them, not on the word of God, you never judge an ideology by it's abuse.

 

[MehGuy]

Not sure if Fry quote... or MehGuy quote.

Lol.. It's not an exact quote (just going by memory) but it's that episode where they go to the internet and Lela meets another Cyclops, who turns out to be an imposter.

I love Futurama humor. It speaks to my soul..

 

[SnowyMacie]

Society can change as much as it wants to, but the Bible is the eternal word of God, if for some unknown reason murder became perfectly acceptable in society (which looking at abortion I'd say it has) does that change God? Does that change what God has said is right and what God has said is wrong? Or maybe this all took God by surprise and what was sin then is now fine, because society says it is?

Was the Bible written in or for 21st century, Western culture? No.
It was written to a near-Eastern people who had no basis for their society, and then 1st century Roman culture, specifically a new minority group in 1st century Roman culture in Koine Greek.

Does that mean we can't take anything from it? No.

What it does mean is that we can't assume that it's saying what it appears to be saying on the surface. Do you know why in 1 Timothy it says Paul says that women should be quiet in church and can't be leaders? Because Timothy was working with a church in Ephesus, where there was the famous temple to the goddess, Artemis/Diana, who had priestesses. He's trying to separate the church from that, that's also why it says in verse 15 that women will be saved in childbirth, she was the goddess of childbirth/fertility, and doesn't allow them to be leaders of that church, where in Romans, there's a woman who's has a leadership position in the church.

That doesn't mean scripture is wrong, it means that you can't always take it at face value. Like Strider's signature quote says, it's not the Bible or God's fault if you see a contradiction, it's your own error.

 

[Strider1002]

Was the Bible written in or for 21st century, Western culture? No.
It was written to a near-Eastern people who had no basis for their society, and then 1st century Roman culture, specifically a new minority group in 1st century Roman culture in Koine Greek.

Does that mean we can't take anything from it? No.

What it does mean is that we can't assume that it's saying what it appears to be saying on the surface. Do you know why in 1 Timothy it says Paul says that women should be quiet in church and can't be leaders? Because Timothy was working with a church in Ephesus, where there was the famous temple to the goddess, Artemis/Diana, who had priestesses. He's trying to separate the church from that, that's also why it says in verse 15 that women will be saved in childbirth, she was the goddess of childbirth/fertility, and doesn't allow them to be leaders of that church, where in Romans, there's a woman who's has a leadership position in the church.

So, who gets to decide which parts apply to us and which don't? What standards are used? Frankly, humans are not trustworthy with those decisions. Take the whole Bible or none of it.

 

[Waddler]

Here's a thought, independent of the moral issues regarding inappropriate contentography:

inappropriate contentography is essentially high-tech masturbation, which means it's like a $500 Twinkie, when you could save up for the $10,000 banquet. Sure, the banquet costs more, but you also get a better value, rather than icing with the consistency of stale pudding wrapped in a tenderized Brillo pad.

Viewing inappropriate contentography while in a marriage is kind of like eating your $500 stale pudding and tender Brillo pad Twinkie at the $10,000 banquet. As your parents warned you, you're going to ruin your appetite for the banquet by doing that. Furthermore, if you pay for the banquet and the Twinkie, and the Twinkie ruins your appetite, then the value of your banquet is diminished, because you can't enjoy it as much.

Someone pointed out that inappropriate content actually changes the chemical composition in your brain, affecting the way you enjoy and experience the world. Even if you take morality out of the equation, inappropriate content is a bad idea, with (I believe) one exception: I believe it is perfectly okay for a spouse to make photos or videos of themselves for the pleasure of their significant other. Technically, this falls under the definition of inappropriate contentography, but I believe such things can enrich the relationship.

 

[Clone93]

Was the Bible written in or for 21st century, Western culture? No.
It was written to a near-Eastern people who had no basis for their society, and then 1st century Roman culture, specifically a new minority group in 1st century Roman culture in Koine Greek.

Does that mean we can't take anything from it? No.

What it does mean is that we can't assume that it's saying what it appears to be saying on the surface. Do you know why in 1 Timothy it says Paul says that women should be quiet in church and can't be leaders? Because Timothy was working with a church in Ephesus, where there was the famous temple to the goddess, Artemis/Diana, who had priestesses. He's trying to separate the church from that, that's also why it says in verse 15 that women will be saved in childbirth, she was the goddess of childbirth/fertility, and doesn't allow them to be leaders of that church, where in Romans, there's a woman who's has a leadership position in the church.

There's what is contextual and what is God's law, fornication, adultery, homosexuality, lying, murder et cetera, et cetera and so forth are not contextual, they're direct breaches of God's law. So once again it all goes down to is there a right and is there a wrong. God is clearer than day on certain issues, inappropriate contentography is most certainly one of them, does this mean we mess up we burn? No, but we're not to get comfortable in our sins, we don't accept that because we're prone to sin we can keep on sinning but rather lean on the Holy Spirit.

Oh, and I'd argue that the Bible was most certainly written for the 21st century and every century before and after.

 

[MehGuy]

Man I wish I could speak my mind without fear of getting into trouble, lol..

 

[KitKatMatt]

I'm probably never going to eat at the banquet, considering that I can't stand being touched and don't desire sex with other people, so I'll just continue eating twinkies

inappropriate content is not an addiction for me, so it's not a big deal to me personally.

 

[MehGuy]

Yeah, I can go a week without looking at it, and not care. Lol.

Or maybe that's bad.. eh I like romantic stuff more anyways..

 

[SnowyMacie]

So, who gets to decide which parts apply to us and which don't?

People who have spent years studying theology and thus that question of "which is relevant and which isn't?", that's who I've learned from. I wouldn't trust myself to understand scripture by just picking up and reading it.

Take the whole Bible or none of it.

I agree. I disagree that it should always be taken at literally at face value from Genesis 1:1 to Revelation 22:21. Am I perfect at following it? No.

 

[Strider1002]

People who have spent years studying theology and thus that question of "which is relevant and which isn't?", that's who I've learned from. I wouldn't trust myself to understand scripture by just picking up and reading it.

But theology changes. Attitudes change. People change. Only God and the Bible do not change.

 

[High Fidelity]

MOD HAT ON

​

Thread has been moved to the appropriate forum.

Just a reminder of the Singles Statement of Purpose;

Topics of sex or premarital sex are off topic and will not be discussed or promoted in the singles forum.

Enjoy

MOD HAT OFF
​