***
Owen Strachan speaks against Fifty Shades of Grey and attempts to show how complementarians do not abuse their wives, and says that Christianity disciplines abusive men
***
Owen Strachan, President and Editor-in-Chief of Council for Biblical Manhood and Womanhood (CBMW) released an article last night, How “50 Shades of Grey” Harms Women & Jesus Saves Them, after seeing an ad about the upcoming movie during the Super Bowl. He wrote four reasons why the movie is abusive to women, but also seemed to say that if spouses would hold to the “Biblical” roles as defined by complementarianism, we wouldn’t be seeing these kinds of abuses, as his title concludes, “Jesus Saves Them.”
Now, I can understand the problems he has with Fifty Shades of Grey, and I certainly have a problem with any kind of situation where a woman is being forced to do something against her will, and especially sexually, but Strachan defends what he deems as Biblical male and female roles as the solution to abuse saying that those who challenge complementarianism are the problem:
We commonly hear today, from a secular culture and also from many voices of progressive Christianity (so-called), that the Bible is oppressive to women. Men are called to be heads of their home, goes the line, and women are called to submit, and that makes the Bible hugely problematic.
Ok, notice he says “progressive Christianity (so-called).” So, those Christians who do not hold to CBMW’s views of male headship are now “so-called” Christians? Is he questioning the salvation of those who don’t hold to his secondary doctrinal beliefs? If so, this kind of talk is spiritual bullying. It’s inappropriate and wrong.
Strachan begins by addressing the “sham accusation” that the Bible is oppressive to women:
1. This is a sham accusation, of course. Men are called to be heads, but in the image of Christ. They’re called to lay their lives down for their wives (see Eph. 5:22-33).
What we typically notice from this group is a verse they conveniently leave out right before Ephesians 5:22, and so I sent out a tweet asking why he left it out. So far there has been no response:
***
***
But what, pray tell, is verse 21, you might ask? I’ll even quote from the complementarian-approved Bible translation, ESV:
submitting to one another out of reverence for Christ. (Ephesians 5:21)
***
This is the verse that is most often absent from those who want to hold to a male headship model of marriage. Isn’t it interesting they forget that THEY – husbands – are also to submit to their wives? I wonder why they leave it out so frequently? Hmmm
And then Mr. Strachan says this:
2. Christianity disciplines abusive men. As I just wrote in a “Three Views” piece for the January 2015 edition of Christianity Today, a man who sexually uses and abuses women will be excommunicated from the church, reported to the police, and opposed with the full force of biblical righteousness.
***
I’m not going on to the 3rd and 4th point, but just camp here at his Point 2 and you will see why.
I’m glad to see Mr. Strachan saying this, Christianity disciplines abusive men, but this is not the pattern we have seen in the church of late. Has Bill Gothard been excommunicated? How about Doug Phillips? Bill Gothard is working on his Total Success Power teams, and Doug Phillips is at his new non-family-integrated church and has become a member in good standing. Whoa, swallow that pill.
Another staunch complementarian (you know, the ones who endorses “Biblical” roles for men and women), Pastor Mark Driscoll, told women to repent for not serving their husbands oral sex. Let me remind you of that teaching from Driscoll:
She [the wife] says, “I’ve never performed oral sex on my husband. I’ve refused to.” I said, “You need to go home and tell your husband that you’ve met Jesus and you’ve been studying the Bible, and that you’re convicted of a terrible sin in your life. And then you need to drop his trousers, and you need to serve your husband. And when he asks why, say, ‘Because I’m a repentant woman. God has changed my heart and I’m supposed to be a biblical wife.’” She says, “Really?” I said, “Yeah. First Peter 3 says if your husband is an unbeliever to serve him with deeds of kindness.” [Laughter from audience] How many men would agree, that is a deed of kindness. He doesn’t want tracts. Those won’t do anything. What we’re talking about here could really help. (Source)
Why had the wife refused to perform oral sex on her husband? Could she have been sexually abused in the past? Perhaps that act was not her cup of tea. So now a pastoral authority tells her how she is wrong Biblically and she must serve her husband oral sex, and she must repent for not performing it. There is no command in scripture about oral sex. Is this not a woman being forced to perform a sexual act and coerced because a trusted pastor twisted scripture to make it sound Biblical? So, I hear Fifty Shades of Grey has to do with bondage and sex without consent. Is this not the same – a wife being forced to perform oral sex on her husband because it’s Biblical? By the way, this was taught before a mixed audience.
It’s interesting that Strachan has strong words to say about Fifty Shades of Grey, but I don’t remember any church leader going after Driscoll for essentially doing the same thing – – forcing women to do sexual acts against their will. Isn’t this sexual abuse? By the way, coercing a woman to believe that performing oral sex on their husband is Biblical is also spiritual abuse – it’s not in the Bible. At least in the secular world, it’s only sexual abuse, but in Christianity, we now have secondary abuse occurring when the Bible is used to control.
What did Strachan say? Oh yea, “Christianity disciplines abusive men.”
***
And now let’s talk about a big promoter of complementarianism, C.J. Mahaney and Sovereign Grace Ministries, and how they failed to report sex abuse cases. The Washington Post has this to say very recently about former SGM Pastor Joshua Harris and the sex abuse cases which were part of a very public civil lawsuit:
In an interview, Harris said the isolation of Covenant Life, and of a small cluster of churches of which it was a part, may have fed leadership mistakes, including the decision of pastors — himself among them — to handle a child sexual abuse case internally instead of going to police.
A former Covenant Life member who helped with the youth group was convicted last year of molesting three boys in the 1980s. Trial testimony showed that the victims or their families had gone to church leaders for help and that the church officials did not call police. Harris said the thinking of the church was that such allegations should be handled as an internal, spiritual issue, though church spokesman Don Nalle noted that Covenant Life has contacted civil authorities in other abuse cases in the past.
This is new. If I’m not mistaken, this is the first time we’ve seen Harris publicly accept responsibility for not reporting sex abuse. This is what the SGM civil lawsuit was about – – the fact that they did not report. It is only because of the Statute of Limitations that the case was dismissed. Where are all of the church leaders who were staunchly defending CJ Mahaney and SGM pastors now? Why are they not demanding public apologies from their buddies they so fiercely defended and even wrote statements on CJ Mahaney’s behalf to show support?
Let’s not lose sight of Strachan’s claim: Christianity disciplines abusive men.
***
Why is it that I continually hear from several ladies each week about their complementarian churches excommunicating THEM because the church leaders (men) have sided with their abusive husbands who have put on a “Christian” facade and convinced them that the problem is his “unsubmissive wife?” Why is it that certain church denominations have court processes which do not allow women to testify on their behalf? Tell me, whose side will the men be on?
Meanwhile, the wife, who often was a stay-at-home mom has no recourse but to separate/divorce without support from the church, and she and the children are often left in dire housing/financial situations. A typical situation I read is the ex-husband remains at the church under good graces and eventually remarries with full blessing from the church. I lost track of how many times I have read this story.
Mr. Strachan continues:
Those who work against biblical manhood and womanhood, who fight the Scripture’s teaching as marginalizing, are in fact undermining the last cultural defense that still stands against male predation and sexual suffering.
This is where Strachan has it wrong. The Bible is very clear on how to take care of abusers. However, those who have been church leaders have dropped the ball and have NOT followed Biblical rules on ridding abusers from churches and keeping victims and the oppressed safe. Not only that, they have allowed abusing and corrupt pastors to remain in pulpits.
I see that women are marginalized, ignored, and left to defend themselves in their abusive marriages in churches which wear the complementarian banner. Complementarianism/Patriarchy is no safe haven for an abused woman. I do not see that a woman’s personhood is honored, valued, respected when the leaders of these so-called Biblical gender distinctions can’t even use all the Bible verses as they define their roles.
The “my-wife-is-unsbmissive” claim is the security blanket abusers use to convince church leaders of their innocence.
***
The more I hear stories of spousal abuse and spiritual abuse in churches, the more I am convinced that this bad interpretation of male headship and enforcing it so strongly within the church is pushing men into roles in which they take control of their wives and call it “Biblical.” And because of how men’s roles are labeled in these churches ie, “spiritual head” of the family, and the hierarchical structure of authority, church leaders tend to defer to men FIRST and women often do not get a fair hearing. Their words/testimonies are dismissed as soon as the husband makes the “my-wife-is-unsubmissive” claim.
As long as CBMW continues to perpetuate unbiblical roles of men and women, women will be kept in harm’s way. The leaders connected with CBMW have NOT done a good job speaking out against pastors who abuse their authority over women. Sadly, I don’t think we will have any success in keeping women safe from abuse until men stop assuming an authority that dominates and rules over women. If a man refuses to submit to his wife as she submits to him, there is no Biblical marriage.
And furthermore, while Strachan seems to say that the church saves women, frankly, I’d say that I’m hearing much more outrage about abuse in the secular world about abuse than in the church. I hear of Christian women with no place to go except PUBLIC shelters. Where are the churches who are housing and financially supporting/defending abused wives?
You tell me, does Christianity discipline abusive men? Are women safer in church?
***
Spiritual Sounding Board 
Now all the professing Christian men will flock to see the movie so they can learn how to be a better comp husband? Kind of like learning from the negative?
LikeLike
He sure put his foot in his mouth with this one. Should have just kept quiet. “Even fools are thought wise if they keep silent, and discerning if they hold their tongues.” Proverbs 17:28
LikeLiked by 3 people
L. Lawrence…I was just reading that proverb today to our son not one hour ago. Great verse.
LikeLiked by 2 people
No. The church has failed miserably in this area. Have we heard of such discipline even once? No.
LikeLiked by 3 people
Mr. Strachan continues:
“Those who work against biblical manhood and womanhood, who fight the Scripture’s teaching as marginalizing, are in fact undermining the last cultural defense that still stands against male predation and sexual suffering.”
Strachan makes this claim, BUT where are his statistics that prove his views “are the last cultural defense that still stands against male predation and sexual suffering?” He has no proof. It is smoke and mirrors and scare tactics.
Also, Christians who hold a different view are not claiming that the Scripture itself is marginalizing women but that CBMW’s interpretation of the Scripture is marginalizing women! He is misrepresenting many Christians. He is marginalizing Christians who hold a different interpretation of the Scripture. He is subtly implying that those with a different interpretation are adding to the pain of those abused.
Mr. Stachen is acting like a passive/agressive bully.
My two cent.
LikeLiked by 4 people
To answer your question: Apparently not, in all too many church groups. The statistics point to the fact that many church groups continually and whole heartedly support male dominance as a biblical and Christian way of life. Individuals and couples caught up in these groups have little to challenge their way of thinking and they continue to perpetuate this. The devastation in marriages continues to run high.
The flawed belief that ‘male dominance’ is a New Testament biblical view continues to be peddled. This belief does not enhance the Gospel but horribly detracts from the message.
The belief in ‘male dominance’ perpetuates spiritual imbalance and fosters discord in the home and in the church. Women and children are the brunt of this faulty belief. Every kind of abuse is the natural outcome of this defective system. It is grievous, to say the least!
LikeLiked by 1 person
I just read his entire article, Nowhere did I see him tell people to NOT see the film.
We know he is not averse to telling Christians what they should and should not do…how they should and should not think and act…(I read he banned football as a Christian thing to watch/do iirc) so why was there no imploring Christians to NOT see the movie? He certainly says the movie is not good, but leaves it there.
LikeLiked by 2 people
It strikes me that Strachan should have said something to the effect of “Scripture gives Christians the tools to discipline abusive men if only they will use them.”
And then flesh it out. And of course, we get to debate it. Fair by me.
And 50 shades? I’m thinking Dave Barry said it best in his column in Time, if anyone’s read that. Suffice it to say that when watching the Super Bowl last night, I did not have many strong incentives to start watching more TV and movies.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Perhaps “so-called progressive Christians” have a problem with consent (or lack thereof) in the Bible because it’s not just a twisting of that Ephesians verse. I have a problem when the Bible doesn’t seem to show justice for rape victims, like the unnamed woman in Judges who was gang-raped and later dismembered, or when someone like David is referred to as a “man after God’s own heart,” but let’s be real here: in all likelihood, he used his power as King to rape Bathsheba, a married woman who probably was unable to say no if she wanted to.
How do you use Scripture to defend the inappropriate power balance between characters like Christian and Ana, then?
LikeLike
Strachan says, “Christianity disciplines abusive men.”
Oh? Anybody else remember the advice that Paige Patterson dispensed to a woman who came to him for help with her abusive husband? He told her to pray for him. Then this happened: “She came to church one morning with both eyes black. And she was angry at me and at God and the world, for that matter. And she said, “I hope you’re happy.” And I said, “Yes ma’am, I am.” And I said, “I’m sorry about that, but I’m very happy.”
And what she didn’t know when we sat down in church that morning was that her husband had come in and was standing at the back, first time he ever came.”
http://thewartburgwatch.com/2009/06/16/a-call-for-paige-pattersons-resignation-from-the-ministry/
Notice how Paige was “very happy” about that woman’s black eyes.
I don’t know much about “50 Shades” and wouldn’t be inclined to endorse it, but it’s a joke that the church “disciplines abusive men.”
LikeLiked by 4 people
Good call on bringing up Eph. 21, JA. Strachan and his cronies–in fact, most of modern Christendom–forget that Paul’s letters were just that: letters. They weren’t written in chapters and verses; those came much later and are merely aids to finding one’s place or memorizing a passage. Ephesians needs to be read as a whole, not in bits and pieces cherry-picked to prove one’s theology. So, leaving any of the verses preceding v. 22 is ignoring the whole of Paul’s (and God’s) teaching.
Does anyone know of a Bible translation which eliminates the chapter/verse markings wherever possible? I think reading the Bible, particularly the New Testament, as an anthology instead of in bits and pieces might revolutionize Christian theology.
LikeLike
First off, wonderful, wonderful post! You made a host of good points!!
I couldn’t get over his claim that those who work against complementarianism are trying to erode the “last” stronghold against male abuse and sexual predation. Does he REALLY think that a SPECIFIC SET OF GENDER ROLES is the one and only reason that society is not a festering bog of sexual predation? If so, then I think his worldview is extremely, extremely skewed. I am a Christian, and I believe in egalitarianism, but that doesn’t mean that I think positive male and female relationships cannot exist outside of Christian egalitarian environments. Geez Louise! Does this guy live under a rock? Has his entire worldview been formed by the complementarian think-tank at CBMW with no input from the outside world?
LikeLiked by 2 people
Why was Owen watching the Superbowl in the first place?
“Strachan has never called for a full-fledged abandonment of football by evangelical fans, but he is asking them to seriously consider the reality of their rooting interest. He believes it’s possible football’s popularity could wane if mindsets change, noting that Christian participation in the anti-dueling movement of the 19th century ended the barbaric pastime. So when asked “What would Jesus do about football?” Strachan responded point-blank, “That is some major clickbait right there.”
He laughed and continued, “In all seriousness, Jesus believed in doing hard things. He was a hardworking carpenter who died in agony for our sins, so I think he would appreciate the physical challenges, the many virtues and risks that are all part of football, but point of fact, Jesus did not endorse aggression. He actively worked against needless violence. I’m not sure what he would think of football, but he did command us to put the sword away.””
(Taken from Vice Sports Oct. 7, 2014)
Jesus did not endorse aggression according to Owen, so why would Christians, who want to be like Jesus, watch violence (Owen determines that NFL football is a violent game)?
“Position #1: In a recent article for Christianity Today, Owen Strachan argues that the physical harm caused by football should lead Christians to reconsider the game’s violence:
Football, more than any other mainstream American sport, depends on violence—the cultivation of violent instincts, the use of violence in the moment, and the game yields positive reinforcement after successful acts of violence. Some training in violence is necessary—soldiers defending their country, for example. But the culture of football should concern Christians. The number of football-related arrests, assaults on women and tiny children, murders, drug charges, and more should not glance off the evangelical conscience. The physical brutality of the game likely factors in here. Many of the athletes who have gone off the rails and killed themselves and others suffered from CTE. This is not conjecture. It is fact. We kid ourselves if we don’t acknowledge the deleterious effect of continuously traumatic contact.”
http://www.thegospelcoalition.org/article/debatable-is-football-too-violent-for-christians
So we should “concern ourselves” about the culture of football which is violence, the physical brutality of it, the violent instincts football cultivates, the positive reinforcement such violence effects after successful execution of violence, the arrests, assaults, DV, drugs that football is related to according to Owen, and even suicides. Yet…Owen watched the Superbowl. Ho does anyone take this man seriously?
LikeLiked by 4 people
“If the NFL is effectively admitting that the game of football causes physical harm to the tune of nearly a billion dollars, does it behoove Christians to reconsider the game’s violence?”
http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2013/september-web-only/our-shaken-faith-in-football.html
Sure does, Owen. Why did you watch it, then? I just cannot get past this point to even discuss the comp issue he makes up with his 50 shades article.
“Page 3 of 3
Christians who like sports are right to enjoy football, but should know it is affected by the fall.
Football is not impervious to the effects of the curse of Genesis 3. This game is subject to fallenness as all of life is. Perhaps this sounds basic, but remembering this simple truth will help us to distance ourselves from an uncritical approach to the game. We are those whose thoughts have been transformed in every respect, not just in terms of momentary conversion (Rom. 12:1-2). It should not escape our notice that football fanaticism often gets described as “worship.” This doesn’t mean it’s disqualified for Christian consumption; it does mean we approach it thoughtfully and reflectively.”
I assume Owen spent considerable time in prayer Sunday before the game reflecting upon, thinking about and considering the violence of football and its many ills before grabbing his snacks and watching.
LikeLike
@Bike Bubba
“And 50 shades? I’m thinking Dave Barry said it best in his column in Time, if anyone’s read that.”
Ok, you made me google it. That. Was. Funny. 🙂 I remember reading something about 50 Shades being primarily a big hit with women. Which raises the question for me as to what Strachan is *really* concerned about.
LikeLike
One time I attended a public lecture at a Christian university. It was one session which was part of his course. This prof demonstrated a number of sociological benefits from sports–and looking at it from a Christian perspective. I was impressed. He discovered something that was well worth hearing and pondering. I would have to find those notes to give his detailed analysis, but I have always been glad that I went.
LikeLike
Beth asks a wonderful question; how does one use Scripture to defend power differentials and their (often) bad results?
My answer; can’t say that I do. Sometimes those power differentials–e.g. parents, government, church headship–are supposed to be there for our own good. Not an easy thing to swallow when that power is abused, obviously. What do you say, for example, to the parents of Bethlehem after Herod killed their children, or to the Israelites in Egypt after Pharaoh did the same and enslaved them? What about the suffering of the wives of Ahasuerus, deprived of a real husband while the emperor went on a half year bender after castrating a lot of the men who could have been real husbands to them?
Sometimes we just don’t see God’s justice for the perpetrators on this side of Jordan–and we simply have to trust that Hell is sufficient. I think that’s a reasonable guess. Sometimes we do–Paige Patterson’s story is theoretically about the repentance of an abuser of his wife. I hope it is true, and I’m glad that my sins are covered by Christ.
(BTW, BTDT, you’re welcome, and take a close look at the story about Patterson by Wartburg–I think the text indicates that Patterson was regretting the shiners and rejoicing at repentance, not rejoicing at the black eyes)
LikeLike
Owen Strachan interview a couple of days ago 32:35 min mark:
“There are right now about a dozen outstanding DV ah cases ah attached to NFL players and that’s just, uh, Christians, again maybe, maybe people in the broader culture can sorta excuse that, but if you correlate that with other sports, it’s basically an epidemic, uh that’s that’s unique to the NFL . It’s not unique to this one game in terms of broader society, there’s there’s domestic violence everywhere, but football has these high rates of domestic violence abuse and anybody who cares for the welfare of women has to take that very very seriously.
And in the church, men are not called to use their strength against women, and of course they’re called to be like Christ and sacrifice their lives, their own bodies, for the good of women and sadly be do not see that trend playing out in too many NFL relationships and marriages.”
https://player.fm/series/up-for-debate/should-christians-support-the-nfl
Owen is very very concerned about NFL football and how it, in his opinion, gives the impression that women are not protected (which would not be a Christian value and that goes against everything Owen teaches over at the CBWB), and that we need to take that seriously-dare I say very seriously…yet he watched the Superbowl.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Ok, notice he says “progressive Christianity (so-called).” So, those Christians who do not hold to CBMW’s views of male headship are now “so-called” Christians?
Yes. Remember, Julie Anne, this is a gospel issue.
As I just wrote in a “Three Views” piece for the January 2015 edition of Christianity Today, a man who sexually uses and abuses women will be excommunicated from the church, reported to the police, and opposed with the full force of biblical righteousness.
For the life of me I will never understand these people. Who is he talking about?
How is there any such thing as a married man who “sexually uses and abuses” his wife when by definition there is no such thing as non-consent since she said “I do”?
Is he limiting this comment to unmarried men, in which case we are dealing with fornication; and/or to adulterous husbands? But then, is the issue the sexual use and abuse of the woman, or is the issue really fornication and/or adultery, which we already have a case situation of in the Corinthian church? What is he saying here? What does “sexually uses and abuses” mean to Strachan? What does it not mean?
LikeLike
One good thing we can glean from the NFL is this; it’s often not a good thing for thus who are weaker (this would include me ) than the average NFL player when we spend billions in tax dollars to subsidize stadiums, wages for players, and (ugh) legal counsel to keep criminal players on the field (a la Al Davis/Oakland Raiders legend) and out of jail.
Sports? Fine. Paul uses the example of the athlete to describe the Christian life, as well as that of the soldier, in 1 Timothy 2. But it is worth noting that the soldier (who was generally the athlete in the ancient Olympics, FWIW) was told by John the Baptist to be content with his pay. That meant no pillaging and rape in conquered cities, and had all soldiers done this, it would have put the kibosh on most offensive war in the ancient Mediterranean.
Like I said a while ago, Christianity has the tools to deal with abuses by believers if we will only use them. “If”
LikeLike
@Bike Bubba
“–I think the text indicates that Patterson was regretting the shiners and rejoicing at repentance, not rejoicing at the black eyes”
The point is that Patterson should have referred that wife to a battered women’s shelter or offered her other means of seeking help. The wife could have prayed for her husband from a safe distance if she chose to. And, I’m sorry, but there’s something skewed about “rejoicing at repentance” at the expense of that woman’s two black eyes. He should have been horrified not happy. It’s as if the husband had more value than the wife.
LikeLiked by 3 people
Why are women reading 50 Shades of Grey?
Why is a pastor not outraged at a parishioner beating on his wife to the point of causing black eyes? Why tolerate anyone beating on a parishioner?
Who cares about the national Felon’s League?
Is the world crazy? It all seems turned upside down.
LikeLiked by 1 person
BTDT, agreed that there is reasonable room for discussion of what he did. Regarding what he should have done, I can’t say for sure, as I don’t know the situation. Separation sounds like a good idea except for one thing; it often takes a deal of convincing to get a woman to leave her current situation. It always frustrated my mom (who was abused and helped at a battered woman’s shelter) that many women wouldn’t just go there–and then she remembered that it had taken her some doing to make that step, too.
LikeLike
Because black eyes are Of The Flesh(TM) while wife-beater hubby’s show of repentance is Of The Spirit(TM).
As for FOOTBALL(TM), does it really surprise anyone that these Comp types are all for it? In the US, FOOTBALL(TM) is THE litmus test of Real Manhood, trumping all else.
In the immortal words of Forty-something loser Al Bundy from “Married With Children”: “I was a Football Star in high school. Once I scored Three Touchdowns in One Game!”
LikeLiked by 1 person
Now I see there was a (not so) Superbowl commercial for a mobile phone company which includes the line “Sorry its a boy” being said by some Silverman woman to a couple who have just had a child. She must be a “star” of some kind.
Wimpy pastors who don’t stand up to wife abusers. Pastorclaims abusers are dealt with, but presents no evidence.
Women reading a book about abuse labelled as “love”.
I am serious, sometimes the world is just nauseating.
LikeLike
“I am serious, sometimes the world is just nauseating.”
Keith, that’s the reason why some of us are on this blog and not a part of any church.
LikeLike
Do any men on here think Patterson was right?
Do any women support 50 Shades?
LikeLike
Some random thoughts:
Keith, I share your nausea. Sin makes this a messy world, and I recently had the chance to encourage someone to make a police report. Sadly, I don’t think she did. Sometimes, counseling is the art of the best you can achieve, rather than the science of getting the best.
And ugly, yes, but 50 shades is a bestseller. Someone’s buying it. I personally know a couple of fans–parents at 4-H–counting down the days until the movie is released.
Regarding Joshua Harris, I don’t know how much I can or should accuse him of, but it strikes me as interesting that he’s now going to seminary after over a decade of ministry. With his name, he might be hard to teach, I think. Great humility to (finally) go, but why not earlier? He certainly had the resources with the royalties from his books a decade ago. Wonder how much he’s learned on his own in the meantime.
Our gracious hostess linked an appraisal of the ESV vs. other translations a few days back, and it struck me that the core of the criticisms was the old dispute between word for word accuracy and idiomatic translation. My bias is towards the former, because understanding the original wording is important in how the passage would have been understood by the original hearers and readers. Grammatical gender (default “he” can refer to “he and she”) is also important in understanding a lot of older documents.
That said, even the KJV uses idiomatic translation at times. For example, many times the Hebrew says “sons” (bene’), but the translation is “children.” (like in Josh and the big wall) And yes, that is grammatical gender in the Hebrew.
Blessings to all!
LikeLike
The Strachan article reads pretty well, but does this actually occur in the real world?
Why the popularity of “Shades”?
LikeLike
Keith, sex sells. Interestingly, I was at a movie not too long ago and saw the 50 Shades trailer. I did not notice in that trailer any promotion of non-consensual sex. I’ve only read of its occurrence.
LikeLike
JA: BDSM is wrong. I don’t care if the Lib/Progs say it is OK. The only explanation I have heard was from a nice, well-respected woman who said “It is mommy porm” and “she did not do anything she did not consent to”. I have not read it, or watched the movie, but it sounds like ritual victimisation, which makes me want to puke.
LikeLiked by 2 people
People who buy it are abuse collaborators.
LikeLike
Keith, I don’t know all that this BDSM stuff entails, don’t want to know. What I have always believed is this: if two adults are consenting, what they do in the bedroom is their business. Key word is consenting. I do have concerns, however, that sex consisting of solely “consenting” bondage-type of sex may be related to earlier abuse issues.
I say this based on the fact that I know after a while abuse victims can in an odd way feel comfortable with abuse (which is why domestic abuse survivors remain with their abusers for so long). You can take that and extend it to spiritual abuse as well and why some of us remained so long at our abusive church – it felt “comfortable” and we didn’t want to rock the boat.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Ok, this has been floating around in my brain. To understand Strachan, we must understand that his entire ministry CBMW is based on their interpretation of Biblical roles for men and women and the key aspect of that is husbands as head of wives and wives being submissive. And it’s not just Strachan – it’s Grudem, Piper, Mahaney, Stinson, Dever, Mohler, etc.
That being said, if complementarianism is what they want to promote as being a safer place for women (even safer than the world), then wouldn’t you think they would be doing a better job of policing their own – – especially those in the public spotlight? If key movers and shakers in the complementarian world are messing it up in a public way, imagine how many non-public pastors and church leaders are messing it up privately?
LikeLiked by 2 people
‘Shades” grooms women for abuse and subjugation.
LikeLiked by 2 people
As I said on the FB, the problem that struck me with this post is that Strachan basically completely ignored the huge number of secular / non-Christian folks that called out 50 Shades for being abusive and unhealthy…including many BDSM practitioners (who are allegedly the subject of the book). People did the same thing with Twilight, which also features an abusive relationship. So yes, both those books were bestsellers, but that needs to be balanced against the fact that they were also both scathingly criticized and are actually pretty popular targets of mockery (and not just because they were both terribly written). Not everyone in the secular world thinks Christian Gray and Edward Cullen are awesome role models or cool sexy dudes, because let’s face it, you don’t have to be Christian to peg them both for abusive jerks. But Strachan makes it sound like you do, and he’s wrong about that.
As for traditional gender roles being “the last cultural defense” against abuse and perversion, both 50 Shades and Twilight are built on traditional gender formulations, because they’re both stories about a passive woman who is swept off her feet by a dominant man. Granted, they’re extreme examples on the creepy abusive end of the spectrum, but the basic narrative is the same. In fact it’s the same narrative used to sell courtship to teenage Christian girls in youth groups, except there they put a Christian spin on it (“wait and God will send you your Prince Charming,” etc.). It’s very old and highly traditional, and clearly hasn’t been preventing abuse and/or perversion for the past couple millennia, so I see no reason why it should be able to do so now.
In a similar vein, traditional gender roles within marriage aren’t only being used to facilitate abuse now, as outlined in the OP. They’ve been used to do that historically too. For just one example, see instances in which “corrective abuse” (to alter women’s “insubordinate” behavior) was seen as okay and even funny, such as The Taming of the Shrew and this ballad (which has other, supposed-to-be-humorous versions in which the husband is “clever” enough to beat his wife without technically doing so, because he wraps her in a sheepskin first):
http://www.contemplator.com/child/rugdau.html
See also this from one of my all-time favorite bloggers, a lawyer who was raised in Gothardism:
http://fiddlrts.blogspot.com/2013/07/on-domestic-violence-how-conservative.html
LikeLiked by 2 people
“Who cares about the national Felon’s League?”
That’s a broad brush stoke. I’m sure there are many upstanding men in the league who would disagree.
LikeLike
Further info on why I’m comparing 50 Shades and Twilight: they’re not just both bestsellers, but 50 Shades started out as Twilight fan fiction (see below from the Wikipedia entry on 50 Shades. Thus it clearly has an intellectual / artistic debt to that series, thus comparing and contrasting the two should be an informative exercise. Also, this pretty much constitutes hard proof that the same abusive relationship dynamics are at the bottom of both books. 50 Shades just lays them out a bit more starkly.
FULL DISCLOSURE: I haven’t read 50 Shades (and don’t want to), but I have read Twilight (the first book, and only to make sarcastic notes in the margins). Also my initial comment was not intended to be supportive of BDSM, just to point out that a lot of people within BDSM correctly identified 50 Shades as abusive and distanced themselves from it.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Publicity stunt?
We’ve heard of “slut shaming,” now there’s “women’s porn shaming.”
A Christian publisher offers to give a free book (anti-50-Shades of Grey) to anyone who turns the novel in during a certain time frame.
I wonder what kind of success they’ll have. It seems very ignorant and condescending. I imagine that the majority of books they’ll get back are from insecure husbands.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Does Christianity discipline abusive men? Are women safer in church?
No. and No.
Visit cryingoutforjustice.com and see all the accounts of women victims of domestic abuse whose churches have not only FAILED to discline the abusive husband, but have unjustly discplined the abused wife, and have eventually coerced or outright compelled her to leave the church, even when she tried to stay to sort it out and participate in ‘Matthew 18′ and suchlike processes. Some wives have even been excommunicated after they formallly resigned their membership of the church. Yeah, go figure — these punch drunk leaders have to have power even over the folk who have left the congregation (and left because of the leaders’ misuse of power).
Fools these leaders are. God is watching, and He is very very angry at the way so many churches and in particular male Christian leaders are failing to discipline abusive men, and failing to protect and fully support victims of abuse.
How do I know God is angry? Simple: I read my Bible.
We have a post today, the start of a series, about how a PCA church abused a wife whose husband was abusing her. The series will explore and document how both the local PCA church, the Presbytery, and *Peacemakers* mediation professionals all worked together to deal injustice by the truckload to this woman.
http://cryingoutforjustice.com/2015/02/02/abuse-in-a-pca-church-part-1-of-persistent-widows-story/
LikeLiked by 3 people
The hypocrisy is dripping with butter.
LikeLiked by 4 people
In essence, what Strachan is saying is “Women, just be submissive Christian wives and church members, and we will protect you. But if you do anything we deem rebellious, then we will withdraw our protection and leave you to the mercies of men. We will also not lift a finger to help women in the greater culture who are being victimized by men, because that’s what they deserve for not being submissive Christian church members.”
LikeLiked by 4 people
Exactly! But let’s act like we are protecting women by telling them how dangerous and evil 50 Shades is.
LikeLiked by 2 people
_Pastors Seldom Preach About Domestic Violence_ (page from Life Way Research)
_Pastors Rarely Preach About Domestic Violence Even Though It Affects Countless Americans_ (page on Huffington Post)
LikeLike
This post was spot on. I have a lot more I could write, but I’m kind of in the middle of a task this evening, so I may want to return to write some more of my thoughts, but for now- I might be able to pop on and off while doing my other project, but I don’t know if I can post a whole lot tonight.
Christian gender Complementarians seem to have a terrible track record with supporting abused wives, and many of them so make marriage into an idol, they won’t consider advising an abused spouse to divorce. They show more concern for keeping a marriage together, even a terrible, abusive one, than they do for the well-being of the women in these marriages.
I’ve read many Christian women say when they went to tell their preachers, or other church members, about the abuse, they were given the “submit” passage and told to bake a casserole (i.e., try harder to please and appease the abuser). That never works, either. When you keep trying to appease an abusive person, it’s an act of enabling.
Another example or two of Christian women not being safe from sexual harassment from a Christian husband.
Julie Anne, you already cited Driscoll, which is a great example, but there was also the Jared Wilson “50 Shades of Grey” post, where he quoted Douglas Wislson,
_Doug Wilson on The Gospel Coalition: How Christian Patriarchy Turns Sex into Rape and Pregnancy into Slavery_, which mentions “egalitarian pleasuring parties,” and men who “penetrates, conquers, colonizes.”
You have that Robert or Richard guy from a few posts ago on your own blog who believes that wives “owe” their husband sex, and he had patriarchal or complementarian interpretations of the Bible.
Sometimes, the pressure on wives “to perform” is more subtle and indirect. If Headless Unicorn Guy is on this thread, he can correct me if I’m wrong (I think he would remember this), but didn’t C J Mahaney (or some other big wig Christian) joke about how his wife “serviced” him even though she felt nauseated, was throwing up, because she was pregnant and had morning sickness, and he was joking about this at a Christian conference, on stage in front of all the audience?
Women in a lot of patriarchal / complementarian churches are taught it’s their “wifely duty” to “put out.” They get pressured to feel this way, if not out right screamed at about it. I see these sorts of messages in their blogs, or in sermons in TV.
One sub-issue wrapped up into that which bugs me is that assumption that men have sex drives, but women (especially married ones) do not.
This goes along with the other gender stereotypes perpetuated in complementarian (and patriarchal Christian) culture that men are visually stimulated, while women are emotinally attuned, which is why they lecture the women to never wear yoga pants or spaghetti straps, and basically teach that men are all uncontrollable horn dog potential rapists who will rape a woman the minute they see her in a mini-skirt.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I was reading SGM from the early days and remember reading about Carolyn Mahaney having to give sex to CJ while she was sick as a dog. And there was a marriage conference in which CJ mentioned this personal story – as if they were doing marriage the right way and all couples should emulate them. First of all, to air this kind of personal sexual story in front of a live audience shows a lack of discretion and lack of respect towards Carolyn, but it also shows something much more revealing: a sense of entitlement.
LikeLiked by 4 people
Daisy – – I had already removed 2 other stories from my post because it was getting too long 🙂 Interesting that there are so many public abuse stories from the comp camp.
LikeLiked by 3 people
Diane said,
Some radical Muslims have either banned soccer watching or have killed people for watching soccer. I just saw a story last week about ISIS killing some teen boys for watching soccer. It’s weird and scary when some Christians mimic extremist Muslims.
_Islamic State terrorists kill 13 teen boys for watching soccer_ (page on The Washington Times site)
I don’t think Owen Strachan has called for the murder of football-watchers, but to tell other Christians it’s wrong for them to do so is, IMO, a similar thing, in that he’s trying to control or micro-manage the lives of other believers.
LikeLike
‘In essence, what Strachan is saying is “Women, just be submissive Christian wives and church members, and we will protect you. But if you do anything we deem rebellious, then we will withdraw our protection and leave you to the mercies of men’.
My experience in a nutshell after I reported what I believed was fraudulent behaviour at a local Presbyterian Church in Victoria Australia. I was certainly treated like a submissive wife and left to the ‘mercies of the hierarchy’. The PCAustralia has close ties with the CBMW. What I found fascinating was some of their Codes and Regulations (state Church) and how these have been written to protect and uphold the reputation of the Church.
Now to put the next one in perspective I was excluded from their meeting when they met in Private because I am a women. These are a couple of my favourites:
‘In deciding whether to sit in private or not a court considers the interests of the church and the necessity to guard its ministers and members from charges which may prove to be ill-founded. In all circumstances a court seeks to uphold the reputation of the church’. and…………..
‘To keep its ordinary minutes free from the presence of undesirable matter every court keeps a record apart for use in cases where moral delinquency is alleged, or in other cases where it seems desirable to safeguard the church against damages or to protect the reputation of individuals………..’
So does Christianity discipline abusive men? It should however some churches have the idea that ‘upholding the reputation of the church (ministers/elders)’ is more important than bringing the abusive person to account.
LikeLiked by 1 person
tiquatue wrote:
Does anyone know of a Bible translation which eliminates the chapter/verse markings wherever possible? I think reading the Bible, particularly the New Testament, as an anthology instead of in bits and pieces might revolutionize Christian theology.
Katharine Bushnell said pretty much the same thing in her seminal work:
God’s Word to Women. In it she observes that it’s awfully hard to make sense of something that’s written in jammed together Hebrew and Greek letters with no punctuation on the one hand, and on the other, chapter and verse can get abused and misused too.
LikeLike
This is on The Washington Times site:
_‘Fifty Shades of Grey’ targeted by domestic abuse prevention campaign_
LikeLiked by 1 person
Misdaisyflower: Thanks for posting the link. This is one issue which I firmly line up with the secular groups. How people who oppose abuse could defend “Shades” is beyond me. A pig wearing a fancy suit is still a pig.
Anonymous2: My view is not “women’s porn shaming”. Rather it is opposition to media which normalise binding, spanking and dominating women.
LikeLiked by 1 person
There is a verse that Mark Driscoll conveniently ignored: Song of Solomon 4:16b “Let my beloved come to his garden & eat its choicest fruits.” ESV
The whole chapter is about the bridegroom admiring & describing his bride’s body from top to bottom. (Song of Solomon 4)
4:12-15 describe his bride’s (locked) garden as filled with all kinds of scents & asks that the north & south wind blow upon the garden to “let its spices flow.”
From the ESV – Song of Solomon 4:
“1 Behold, you are beautiful, my love, behold, you are beautiful! Your eyes are doves behind your veil. Your hair is like a flock of goats leaping down the slopes of Gilead.
2 Your teeth are like a flock of shorn ewes that have come up from the washing, all of which bear twins, and not one among them has lost its young.
3 Your lips are like a scarlet thread, and your mouth is lovely. Your cheeks are like halves of a pomegranate behind your veil.
4 Your neck is like the tower of David, built in rows of stone; on it hang a thousand shields, all of them shields of warriors.
5 Your two breasts are like two fawns, twins of a gazelle, that graze among the lilies.
6 Until the day breathes and the shadows flee, I will go away to the mountain of myrrh and the hill of frankincense.
7 You are altogether beautiful, my love; there is no flaw in you.
8 Come with me from Lebanon, my bride; come with me from Lebanon. Depart from the peak of Amana, from the peak of Senir and Hermon, from the dens of lions, from the mountains of leopards.
9 You have captivated my heart, my sister, my bride; you have captivated my heart with one glance of your eyes, with one jewel of your necklace.
10 How beautiful is your love, my sister, my bride! How much better is your love than wine, and the fragrance of your oils than any spice!
11 Your lips drip nectar, my bride; honey and milk are under your tongue; the fragrance of your garments is like the fragrance of Lebanon.
12 A garden locked is my sister, my bride, a spring locked, a fountain sealed.
13 Your shoots are an orchard of pomegranates with all choicest fruits, henna with nard,
14 nard and saffron, calamus and cinnamon, with all trees of frankincense, myrrh and aloes, with all choice spices-
15 a garden fountain, a well of living water, and flowing streams from Lebanon.
16 Awake, O north wind, and come, O south wind! Blow upon my garden, let its spices flow. Together in the Garden of Love She Let my beloved come to his garden, and eat its choicest fruits.”
And Song of Solomon 5:1
“I came to my garden, my sister, my bride, I gathered my myrrh with my spice, I ate my honeycomb with my honey, I drank my wine with my milk.”
Now it does lose a little in the translation when describing his beloved’s hair as a flock of goats leaping down Mt Gilead but it must have been a most beautiful sight in those days!!!
P.S. Maybe Mel Gibson will make a movie based on Song of Solomon as a biblical alternative???
LikeLike
Essay idea: Compare and contrast Christian Grey and Doug Phillips.
LikeLiked by 1 person
BBNB: The Song is beautiful. Not a hint of bondage or oppression. Complete absence of subjugation.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Fifty Shades should be targeted by domestic abuse campaigns. I can’t believe that garbage is a trilogy. I have not read it and do not intend to. I know just enough about it to stay away from it.
Also, no and no. I don’t think women are safe anywhere. Not that we shouldn’t walk out our doors and feel ok doing it or feel relaxed in our own homes, if you don’t live with an abuser, but the more I know about the violence against women in the world the more it gets closer to home.
Mel Gibson making a movie on the Song of Solomon. Blech!!! I am thinking I would stay away from that too.
LikeLike
Another essay idea: Compare and contrast romantic love as described in Song of Solomon/Canticles with the relationship depicted in “Shades”
Brenda R; You have got a lot of fight in you. Are you of Southern/Appalachian descent?
LikeLike
Keith,
I’m originally from Texas for the first 6 years. Raised by in a home with an abusive (all types) stepfather when my dad abandoned us before my sister was born and a mother who was oblivious and trying to keep the peace. After that we moved to Indiana then several places in MI. I’ve gone through abusive marriage and Jesus set me free in 2013. I speak now about abuse to whoever will listen and even those who don’t want to hear it.
LikeLike
I was a little down yesterday because all the codemnation for “Shades’ i would hav expected on this blog was a bit lacking. But I am punchy today.
Brenda R. Sorry for what you grew up in. Keep up the good fight!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Sorry for typos.
LikeLike
People could target it in domestic abuse campaigns, but there then remains the very interesting question of why so many women like 50 Shades. If you want to stop abuse–OK count me in that category–at a certain point you’ve got to address why a book/movie about treating a woman like **** (insert your favorite Anglo-Saxon here) is so **** (“”) popular.
One possibility–something that ought to have something of an “ick” factor–is that our culture has so few examples of real masculinity or femininity, people go for anything that has even a hint of it. Men go for sililcone-injected pornstar wannabees, women go for abusers.
Like I said, “ick”. But if it’s even partly true, maybe it’s a starting point so that we all don’t hear so much about women (or men) who are abused, no? Love to hear some other thoughts, too.
LikeLike
What’s interesting is that the trailer I saw showed absolutely none of this. It showed a very shy woman who was attracted to a nice looking guy who took notice of her. The scenes from the trailer showed consent.
LikeLike
Bike Bubba: Why? I wish someone would give an answer. The woman I posted about above really surprised me, mostly because I would not have expected someone in her profession would like it.
As regards the possibility you mention, I would be interested to know what others on here think.
LikeLike
JA: Consent? I have read up on the book series, and it seems to be about a “relationship” with a huge power differential, bondage, domination, etc. The consent idea could as easily be applied to a Domestic Discipline situation.
maybe women really do want to be dominated, spanked, bound etc. But i don’t buy it.
LikeLike
I guess I got modded because i just figured out I could log in with my Facebook. Sorry I am a slow cooker.
LikeLike
BB,
I don’t think that women who have actually lived through abuse try to find another abuser, they may not see the warning signs. I’m thinking that women who like these kinds of erotica books/movies might not really want these things to happen to them, but don’t understand the true consequences of being in the situation and can find it a turn on. Why? I’m not a psychiatrist, I have no answers. Unfortunately, there may be women who don’t understand that they deserve better than the evil they have already experienced.
For me there is a big “ick” factor. I realize that we cannot stop abuse entirely. We live in a fallen world, but I won’t stop spreading the message until I take my last breath.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Will my comments using my facebook be posted? I did not mean to gum up the works. I just figured out I could comment that way.
LikeLike
JA,
There may have been consent, but possibly coerced consent. In many cases that is how abuse starts. Nice good looking guy becomes a huge monster.
LikeLiked by 1 person
@ JA:
Trailers can’t really be trusted. I think we’ve all gone to a “comedy” before, only to find out that the only good jokes were the ones in the trailer.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Between the time I got up, woke up my boy, made him a bagel with cream cheese and then came back to check the posts, I saw your comments in moderation, Keith. They weren’t there before that. I’ve released them and you should be fine now 🙂
LikeLike
Obviously people who aren’t aware of the bondage stuff will be in for a rude awakening based on the trailer I saw. It just wasn’t there.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Keith – I have never read the books. I have only heard what the book portrays and I have not had an interest in reading them (plus I have heard that they are poorly written and I don’t want to fall into the Twilight – gag – trap again). I would never recommend them based upon the little that I know. That being said, I don’t think I could give a full condemnation review of the book because I don’t know anything about it beside the story line.
Why are women falling for this poorly written abuse story? Who knows. Erotica is a small niche market and this is probably the first book to break through to mainstream. I would guess it’s because our culture is not used to be entangled in stories where sex is the main reason for the story. Usually when sex is brought up in a book it is quick scene with enough language to let the reader know what’s going on. Sex – specific sex type that never talked about – is the main scene in this book. Maybe women feel for this character or wonder how she ever could have gotten in the place where she landed.
LikeLike
I really don’t know why women are attracted to shades, but from what I’ve read the books just take the popular bodice rippers up another notch. And AFAIK, the woman does consent. Naively, maybe but she does consent.
LikeLike
Brenda, you will get no argument from me on the premise that women who have been abused are not trying to find another abuser willfully. What I will argue is that those who repeatedly select alcoholic/abusive/mentally ill partners (and I know some people who have, unfortunately) may have personal preferences (height, weight, hair color, personality traits, chest, legs, tuckus, etc..) that correlate really well with abuse of various kinds. Hence they inadvertently select their next abuser because he “looks like” something they subconsciously want. Classic “John Wayne” example is that a woman wants a man who can protect her, but the signs of strength are really signs of aggression against her.
And one way of eliminating these situations is to either (a) show the sufferer that she (he) is inadvertently choosing this or (b) get down to what the sufferer is really wanting but without the abuse.
BTW, saw a touch of the 50 shades trailer, and it pretty much screams “this boy is not who your father wanted you to date.” The signs are the abrupt scene changes, the hurt in her face, the hardness in his face, and the affection is taken, not granted. It’s John Wayne in Danish Modern without the restraint Wayne was famous for (ha), definitely not Roy and Dale.
LikeLiked by 1 person
To expand a touch, the trailer in 50 shades is all but rape in tone, in my perhaps not humble enough opinion. To draw a picture, if I knew a man could complete the sexual act with a woman who looks at hurt as the woman in that trailer, I would not hire him for any position of responsibility because I would know a priori that he had no sensitivity to how others are treated.
Or, put differently, I would suggest that there is some happy medium between simpering Antioch College graduate who says “let’s sign a legal contract authorizing every act of affection” and Mr. Gray. Hopefully Mrs. Bubba and I are somewhere close….
LikeLiked by 1 person
I think there must be more than one trailer.
LikeLiked by 1 person
BB you said:
What I will argue is that those who repeatedly select alcoholic/abusive/mentally ill partners (and I know some people who have, unfortunately) may have personal preferences (height, weight, hair color, personality traits, chest, legs, tuckus, etc..) that correlate really well with abuse of various kinds.
I wish I could show you pictures of my dad, step father, husband 1 & 2 and men I have dated. I must be the exception.
LikeLike
Brenda, lots of exceptions, praise be to God. I know some of them. And would an amateur like me be able to tell you what personality traits you were looking for, if you were, just from a set of pictures? :^) I’m guessing no.
JA; probably, and I’m probably looking at what I did see somewhat differently, too.
LikeLike
From Wikipedia: “Features elements of sexual practices involving scenes of bondage/discipline,dominance/submission, and sado/masochism.”
I cannot see how one can make a Christian, Christian Humanist or Egalitarian case for these practices.
I am sorry for posting under two accounts. I did not notice until a while ago that one could post using Facebook.
LikeLiked by 1 person
That sounds like great grist for another post by our gracious hostess, Michael Keith. I will hold my fire on that one for the case that she does, or perhaps comment on it on my own blog.
LikeLike
Brenda R: Good point re: how such initial consent may be the opening for future abuse. Bottom line for me: sex and violence should not mix.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Amy E. Bonomi’s article in the Journal of Women’s Health is cited in the Wikipedia article. Apparently the scenarios are consistent with intimate partner violence.
LikeLike
Bottom line for me: sex and violence should not mix.
Keith, You won’t get any disagreement from me.
LikeLike
Kathi: I have read that 100 million copies were sold. Some writers of note have panned the book. There is no accounting for taste, I suppose!
LikeLike
I don’t know if many women actually like the 50 SoG book.
One of the only reasons I saw “Titanic” and read Harry Potter books about ten years ago is that the rest of the culture would not shut up about either one. Stories about Titanic and Harry Potter were all over the media for several years, online and in print.
So, a few years after Titanic was out of theaters, I rented a DVD from the local movie rental place and watched it.
When I saw the first three Harry Potter books were at sale in the book store near where I worked, I bought copies and read them. Just to see what the fuss was about.
I had no desire to read “Twilight” books, but someone in my family sent me a free copy of Twilight part 1, and I watched it to see what all the hub bub was about (it was a boring movie).
I also, later, watched Twilight part 2, 3, 4 and whatever, because some cable channel I have keeps showing them. I watched them all at least once to see what all the to-do was about.
I didn’t even enjoy them. I thought the characters, writing, plots, were ridiculous and insipid, and the movie sent a bad message to young single girls: that it it normal and good to fixate on a man to find happiness, and it’s okay if he stalks you everywhere, even to watch you in your room as you sleep.
But at least I get all the cultural references to the books (by way of having watched the films.)
Maybe all the ladies reading 50SoG are checking it out only because everyone else keeps talking about it?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Julie Anne, you are not mistaken.
I have read several internet reviews or discussions about the 50SOG movie, and reviewers who got early previews of it said it was way, way watered down from the books. Some people were fine with that, others thought it was a cop-out.
Some reviewers said that the S&M kinky stuff is not really shown all that much in the film, but only implied, like there are scenes where the couple is in the foreground and bondage gear is seen briefly in the background. (Stuff is hinted at but not shown, or not shown that much.)
Some sites are reporting that new clips from 50 SOG have been released in the last few days. I have not watched any of them so far.
TIME magazine online reports there is one scene where the lady is shown bound up and the guy flogs her. They have this other story on their site: “Fifty Shades of Grey Director Cut the Book’s Most Talked-About Scene.”
I admit to finding this a little amusing (parody poster):
_SpongeBob: 50 Shades Of Yellow Spoofs 50 Shades Of Grey_ (on Comicbook .com site)
(Possible Book Spoiler Alert)
I’ve not read the book, but some reviews I saw about it over a year ago say that towards the end, the woman turns the table on the man and forces him to submit or to back off.
She refused to put up with his nonsense anymore and threatens to leave him, and he backs down, and their relationship becomes equal, and she finds out that the reason the man wants wacked out, violent sex is that he was sexually abused as a kid, so the reader is intended to feel sympathetic to the male character.
That’s just what I’ve read, so I don’t know if that is accurate or not.
LikeLike
Stacham does not want to protect women. There are more women moved into a city for sex trafficking during the Superbowl than any other event. Why didn’t he bring this up? The actors in 50 Shades of Grey are not coerced into acting their roles. No one is forced to watch the movie. But many underaged, poor and disenfranched girls and women are brought into the city by their brutal handlers to sell to men who have flocked in to attend the Super Bowl. This is not hidden knowledge. If Stacham cared about the relationship between the sexes, his heart would break over the way men are taught to objectify women’s bodies as well as use them to make a profit.
LikeLiked by 3 people
Bridget says Strachan says,
What is biblical manhood and womanhood?
I find it funny that CBMW think their interpretation of what constitutes biblical manhood/womanhood is the only correct one, or the only “godly” or “biblical” way of looking at the issue.
I was raised in a Christian household, a Christian family, that believed like CBMW does about marriage, men, and women.
After studying the Bible more, I realized that the Bible does not say about gender what they THINK it is saying, so I moved away from the gender complementarian position.
I now feel that the gender complementarian biblical interpretation is not borne of a plain reading of Scripture, as they would claim, but from various factors, including, but not limited to,
-unconscious bias against women;
-American secular cultural ideals (e.g., Betty Crocker, or 1950s June Cleaver TV show housewives), and
– a tool or method to bludgeon secular liberals and progressive Christians with
I am socially conservative myself, so it’s not that I disagree with CBMW’s positions on other topics, like they are probably pro-life on the topic of abortion. Well, so am I.
But, I don’t think the way to defend pro-life views, or stand for ‘traditional marriage,’ and to keep the divorce rates down, and so on, is to hold up a misguided, bogus view of gender roles.
In the name of defending or preserving traditional values, they want to oppress women in the process, and I don’t see that the Bible is on board with that.
LikeLiked by 1 person
tiquatue said,
They also forget other passages such as Jesus telling his disciples they are not to lord authority over one another.
Yet Christian gender complementarians believe it is fine or God’s design for men to lord authority over women.
They insist upon interpreting passages that talk about wifely submission or husbandly headship as meaning, “The husband is in authority over the wife,” which contradicts what Jesus taught.
Matthew Chapter 20
LikeLike
Regarding all the discussion about Strachan watching the Superbowl.
I am only surprised that he, or other complementarians, do not harp on the lady cheerleaders at the game and complain about what a shame it is they do not dress modestly, because their short skirts and pom-poms will cause a Christian man to stumble.
In the Christian gender complementarian universe (which is also where Sharia compliant Muslims reside), men are weak, frail things who cannot control their sexuality or thought lives, and it’s up to strong, tough women to control men by what they wear.
By the way, the Puppy Bowl (usually with the Kitten Half Time show), on Animal Planet channel, is far, far superior to the Superbowl. 🙂
LikeLike
Daisy,
You have a point. People seem to go along with the crowd. Books and movies are big in that respect. I own Titanic on DVD but never read the book or went to the theater to see it. I couldn’t tell you what Twilight is about at all. My youngest daughter (27) still has her Sponge Bob pillow, blanket, dvd’s and other trinkets. I’m sure she would love to see/read Sponge Bob: 50 shades of yellow. She also has all of the Harry Potter books and dvd’s including one signed copy that I paid a small fortune for as a Christmas present one year. I watched the first HP movie with her after that I told her she was on her own.
In order to get an R rating they would have to suggest there was creepy stuff going on in 50 shades rather than showing it. X rated would not draw the crowds, or at least I don’t think.
LikeLiked by 2 people
I’m going to agree with Hester (way up above). 50SoG should NOT be considered a representation of the BDSM community and many of my friends who are in that lifestyle (I haven’t read the book) don’t have enough bad things to say about that. BDSM is about trust and consent.
People are reading it because it’s different, it’s in your face provocative. It’s also showing people a glimpse into a lifestyle that isn’t talked about publicly very often. I think with the advent of the internet, taboo topics and alternative lifestyles are easier to research and explore. Many people have no idea what BDSM is, and that book is introducing people to a different way of enhancing the bedroom (hopefully with a bit more research and personal analysis to make sure it’s the right choice for them – because it is a choice).
LikeLiked by 1 person
Ann,
You are so right about the girls that are in bondage and being sold at not only the Super Bowl, but any large event. This is happening world wide. I don’t believe sports in themselves are evil, but evil people find ways to spread there evil any way they can.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Bike Bubba said,
That story exposed Patterson’s totally warped idea about women, and domestic abuse.
Patterson placed more importance on the abuser having a “come to Jesus” moment than on the immediate safety and well-being of the wife. He was sort of using the wife as bait to win the husband over.
I thought the Bible says it is the “goodness of God” that causes a man to repent, not a man giving his wife a black eye?
Substitute “young child” or “puppy” for “wife” and see how it reads. Or put your name in there. Do you have a daughter? Pretend you have a three year old daughter named Tammy. Like so:
“Well, it’s a shame that the man keeps abusing his
[five year old son / dementia afflicted grandma / one month old puppy / Bike Bubba / three year old Tammy],
but you know, if the suffering, bruises, emotional trauma that will take years to recover from, and broken bones of the
[five year old son / dementia afflicted grandma / one month old puppy / Bike Bubba / three year old Tammy ],
leads that man to repentance, then praise Jesus!!!”
It’s a lot easier to cheer on how awesome it sounds when you’re not the recipient of the black eye.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I have not watched the Superbowl in years. I would rather see Messi score a goal or Neuer make a save. Never understood the role of cheerleaders.
I don’t see that anyone has made a Christian, Christian Humanist or Egalitarian defense of Shades. As regards the BDSM “lifestyle”, it is hard to see any difference. Violence and sexuality should not be mixed. Being bound and dominated is violent, no matter how it is viewed.
If the Grey character’s excuse is that he was molested, what does this say to all the folks who have been molested and don’t act like that?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Keith Blankenship said,
Keith, there are kinky, warped conservatives out there.
Being kinky or a perv is not the bastion of liberals only.
Understand I am a right winger on theology and politics, but I’ve come to realize that folks on the right and who are pro-life and who vote Republican are not all angelic and can be deeply flawed.
You have various conservative pastors who either esposue kinky bedroom sex stuff, even if the wife doesn’t want to participate in it (see JA’s example of Driscoll and women and oral sex as one instance), and conservative preachers, such as fundamentalist Baptist Jack Schaap who is in prison for having sex several times with an under-aged girl.
I think what makes conservatives worse in a way, is that most of them claim in public to be against perversion, forced sex, etc, but then, in their private lives, they are involved in rape, child molesting, having affairs.
At least the liberals who do support that sort of stuff are up-front about it. They are not pretending to be about mom, apple pie, and family values.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Would anyone want the BDSM “lifestyle’ for their wife, daughter or mother? If not, why not?
LikeLike
missdaisyflower: I know there are so-called conservatives who are into this stuff. That is why i said I am with the feminists and liberals on this one. To the extent any conservatives share my opposition, I am with them too.
I am just flummoxed by the popularity of the book, and some of the people I know who have read it.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Keith Blankenship said,
I don’t necessarily disagree with you on that, but the same thing can sadly be said of Christian gender complmentarianism.
Gender complementarianism is a dash of sexism with a big, heaping of codependency being taught as God’s intent for women on the side.
Christian gender comp teaches women it is wrong for them to have boundaries, make decisions for themselves, it is un-feminine for them to be assertive, and some types of gender comp teaches women they “need” a man to make it in life (they must have a “male covering” in church, home, job, school).
Women repeatedly get the message from gender comp material, books, churches and blogs, that they are easily deceived and not qualified to be leaders.
These sorts of teachings (being taught by Christians, no less) set women up to be ripe and easy pickins for controlling and abusive people.
Bringing women up to be that way also keeps women naive and child-like, and so makes it harder for them to navigate the world of adulthood and to even recognize when or if they are being taken advantage of or abused.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Daisy, I think the point Patterson is trying to make is that the man’s wife’s audible prayers for him after the husband was a total jackass shames the husband into repentance.
Again, plenty of room for fact-checking, Biblical appraisal of his methods, secular appraisal of his methods, and more, but let’s be fair to his argument, K?
And, for reference, I do know of a situation in my life where my forbearance in a tough situation did bring a young man to repentance. So it’s not entirely preposterous–though thankfully I must admit that I didn’t get any shiners out of the deal. He got a nasty case of poison ivy, though.
LikeLike
Re Hester FEBRUARY 2, 2015 @ 4:12 PM said,
_50 Shades of Broken – How romance novels condition women for abuse_ (on Christian site CBE)
LikeLike