Monday, May 26, 2014

Book Review - Holy Sex Part 1

Holy Sex The Way God Intended by Michael Pearl

I had no intention of reading and reviewing another book considering I'm way behind on reviewing both “A Love That Multiples” by Jim Bob and Michelle Duggar and the book by the Duggar daughters, “Growing Up Duggar”. Lately I've been approached about doing book reviews for various folks uninvolved with NLQ and my reviews of the Duggar products has slipped to the back burner.

After looking at the Pearl's author page on on Memorial Day afternoon I saw that Michael (Woman do it MY way!) Pearl had written a book on sex. As much as the idea of Michael Pearl having sex with anyone skeeves me out I could not resist downloading and starting to read through Michael's thoughts on having sex.

The reading so far has been by turns laughing and wanting to hurl!

First, let me apologize. I am not Libby Anne so this isn't going to be an intellectual take down of Pearl's mostly vile ideas. I am someone that laughs, loves to laugh and loves to poke fun at things. This book is giving me lots of fodder for fun.

It starts with a warning. The type of warning you might see at the beginning of a Christian porn film (yes, there are Christian porn films or so I've been told)


This material is intended for mature audiences. Don't read this book unless you are married, have definite plans to be married in a next few weeks, or you are an older teenager whose parents have first read it and approve of you doing so.”

What? Is the material racy enough to send some poor innocent into the arms of Masturbation Land? Will it defraud them?

On the next page Michael states:

“If you don't think God meant for sex to be fun, this book is definitely for you.”

I think everyone would agree that sex is fun and sex in marriage is meant to be fun. How does Michael rationalize that sex is God given fun?

“The first gift God gave to man was a beautiful, naked woman”

Wasn't that so thoughtful of God.

Then he moves on to the 'dirty' part of the Bible – The Song of Songs. The fact that there is such frank talk and poetic blathering on about sex and the bride and bridegroom impresses Michael Pearl with the comfort ancient people had with 'erotic text'. Seems like that alone might make him open to erotic fiction. Not so.

“Unlike us, they had not surrendered the pleasures and art of lovemaking to the depraved and base elements of society”

Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't these the same ancient people of Israel that were mentioned in Genesis as being completely sexually immoral during the days of Lot? The book of Genesis had a lot of incest, prostitution, sexual idol worship and sleeping around in it, didn't it? Sounds to me like we started with some depravity and base elements. You can't entirely blame that on modern society.

“The drama gives an account of the bride being beaten by the night watchmen of the city.”

Now that is something Mr. Pearl is familiar with, tormenting women.

Michael goes on to claim that most of the Song of Songs is about the woman feeling desire for her coming bridegroom, that sh e is the initiator and pursues him to bring him to her bed. Lots of flowery Biblical language is used in this poorly-written tome to indicate sexual desire and sex acts. Poetic imagery instead of more prosaic straightforward language that might serve to educate.

“His world is a crescendo of sensual experiences.”

Real world translation – Horny, horny, horny. Come on, Michael, say it with me 'Eee-Recc-Shun' It's not scary. It's natural and created by God.

“In this godly song there is no carnal versus spiritual; all of self is unified in the experience of marital love. The whole person --- body and soul --- is integrated with the physical nature in perfect harmony with everything without and within. It is only when that love is interrupted by circumstances that there is tension, which is resolved when the lovers are once again in passionate embrace. It is a most simple and basic view of life, not complicated with guilt, shame, inhibition, or cultural expectations”

Normally I might say this is actually a good way to view sexuality... but... have we not all seen in his wife's book, Debi Pearl's “Created To Be His Helpmeet” that this isn't the reality for the Godly Christian Woman. It's put out the sexual favors whenever requested no matter how ill, busy, inappropriate the timing or any other possible reason you might not be inclined to. Not only drop your drawers and jump into the bed, you better be enthusiastic about it too, fake it if you don't feel it, make him think you are just dying of desire for him and whatever sexual request he might make.

Makes me wonder if there's some orgasm-fakery going on too.

Michael asks these questions:

“Can erotic pleasure be as sacred as prayer? Can the sensual and the spiritual both be the creation of God, with equal standing?”

You know, if you didn't know Michael Pearl and his poisonous views on women, children, discipline and how his relationship with Debi was conducted via her book, then you might think this book is pretty good. But sadly he's demonstrated over and over again in his writings, Youtube videos and on his website that he's all about control, with his as the patriarch doing the controlling.

I leave you with these words from this book to ponder till next week.

“Contrary to popular sentiment, it is only the righteous who truly enjoy the pleasures of sexual love.”

What a load of self-deluded crap!

Thursday, May 15, 2014

True Love Exibits True Servanthood

Today for NLQ I posted a bit in Quoting Quiverfull out of the mouth of Nancy Campbell, guilt-tripper-inducing controller of everyone in her sphere like many Evangelical extremists. She was trying yet again to tell mothers that they were to serve in their household as servants to their children and husband.

I don't have a problem with people acting as servants or servers of those they genuinely desire to do as a blessing. It's like I don't mind serving my own husband dinner as he sits heavily down at the dinner table, tired and worn out from a hard day at work. I want to bless him and honor him for the work he does to support our family out of his love by serving him out of my own love for him.

Where the problem is with Nancy and her insisting that all mothers must sacrifice and serve is in the hide-bound insistence that this is the only role a woman should have and the only way to run a family. Things like this simply make my blood boil -

As the years have moved on, I realize more and more that it is a privilege to serve. It is innately in us as mothers to serve. We only reject it because of our selfishness, and in the end we miss out. For God blesses us when we serve. We are fulfilled when we serve. We are born to serve.
No, I don't think it is innately in anyone to serve and to pretend otherwise is disingenuous, like much of what Nancy claims. Most of us that serve and serve our families do it out of love, not duty, not gender role, not out of hormones but out of deepest love for our family.

The whole gendered aspect she pushes for service is repellent to me as well. Last night I watched a documentary on a woman who falsely confessed to a murder she didn't commit in order to protect a beloved family member. It's a film named "Half Ton Killer" 

Now, that's not the service/servanthood I'm talking about, it's what her husband did to lovingly serve her, Mayra Rosales, for you see Mayra was significantly impaired by lypodemia and obesity. He alone cared for her, bathed her, helped her with her daily needs without complaint. When asked why he said he did it because he loved Mayra.

Under Nancy Campbell's guidelines of women serving their families and men being the leader/taskmaster/head there is no room for a man to serve his wife, or his kids. Servant hood is a female designation related to motherhood. What would Nancy say to the gentle massaging of lotion into her flesh that her husband does. The helping her empty her bladder?

Personally I thought it was touching to see a man helping his wife with serious medical issues stay alive with such tenderness.

Serving others is such a necessary thing, such a good work that I always admire those that do it selflessly without any hope of compensation. This world needs more Mr. Rosales, Mother Theresas, Jesuses, the lady that volunteers at the soup kitchen, the man helping kids to read in the schools, hospital visitors, lovers of people and way less Nancy Campbells with their limiting to what serving others should be.

For me personally serving others always makes me feel like I'm the one getting. But I'm not willing to put up with that service being limited by small mindedness.

Plus there is a happy ending to Mayra Rosales sacrifice of trying to cover for a family member. It brought Mayra and her day to day challenges with her health into the spotlight of those that had the power to help her. She's now lost over 800 pounds and has hopes to adopt her sister's children. I hope she is successful in getting the children.

When I googled for an image or a servanthood mother to put with the NLQ piece most of the images were of Mother Theresa and other nuns, not smiling Stepford Evangelical wives, which really tickled me.

Serving others is a beautiful thing, not a duty.