Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise

'Sex-Crazed' Evangelicals Talk Spanking and Anal Sex

By Amanda Marcotte, RH Reality Check. Posted February 24, 2009.


There is a growing movement of 'sex-positive' evangelicals, who bluntly talk about how to have better (married) sex.

Share and save this post:

      

      

Share on Facebook       

AlterNet Social Networks:
follow us on twitter
find us on Facebook

In Special Coverage

Belief:
Nobel Laureate Slams the Bible, Calls It "A Catalogue of Cruelties"
Mario de Queiroz

Corporate Accountability and WorkPlace:
As Foreclosure Nightmares Increase, Will More Homeowners Pay Off Their Bankers in Violence?
Scott Thill

DrugReporter:
Lies About Marijuana Drive People to a Much More Harmful Drug -- Booze
Steve Fox

Environment:
Why the End May Be Coming for Coal
Christine MacDonald

Food:
Despite Censorship By Beef Magnate, Michael Pollan Spreads Message About the Real Price of Cheap Food

Health and Wellness:
Do We Really Want to Enshrine Insurance Monopoly into Law? This and 5 Other Complaints About the Health Bill
John Nichols

Immigration:
NYC Marathon Raises Question of Who Is American Enough?
James E. Johnson, Jr.

Media and Technology:
Study Claims Even the Most Sophisticated Readers Can Be Manipulated
Melinda Burns

Movie Mix:
The Yes Men: Pranksters Out to Fix the World
Mark Engler

Politics:
What Michelle and Barack's Marriage Has in Common with 56 Million Other Ones
Annabelle Gurwitch

Reproductive Justice and Gender:
Fetus-Shaped Potatoes? Going Undercover Inside the Weird World of Right-Wing Abortion Foes
Ann Neumann

Rights and Liberties:
"My Kids Want to Hide Their Identity; They're Scared Someone Will Attack Us": U.S. Muslims Being Targeted
Jaisal Noor

Sex and Relationships:
Instant Sex: Has the Digital Age Destroyed Relationships or Made Them Better?
Vanessa Richmond

Take Action:
G-20 Meetings: Nothing Much Happened in the Suites, and There Was Too Much Punch in the Streets
Laura Flanders

Water:
Why Natural Gas Is Not a Clean Energy Panacea
Stan Cox

World:
With Unemployment at 40 Percent, Afghan Teens Enlist in Army, Police
Lal Aqa Sherin

More stories by Amanda Marcotte

Advertisement
Upcoming AlterNet stories on Digg

We all know that the growing evangelical movement is one (with a few left-leaning pockets exempted) obsessed with sex.  Controlling it.  Punishing it.  Using it to control women.  Stomping out most versions of it completely.  Shaming people who enjoy it.  And now, believe it or not, promoting it as an important part of healthy marriages.   

Wait, come again?  Sex-positive evangelicals?  Well, sort of. While they're not bringing in enough numbers to drown out the dominant attitude of shaming, there does seem to be a trend in the evangelical community of promoting more and better sex within marriage -- for the good of the marriages.  There are now Christian sex shops, Christian sex advice columns, and Christian sex blogs.  Most of it is tame compared to secular counterparts, but the fact that it exists at all gives pause to those of us who spend quite a bit of time wrangling with evangelicals who want to ban abortion, restrict contraception, put virginity rings on girls, and teach nothing but abstinence-until-marriage. 

But should this trend surprise us?  Upon further reflection, the whole thing makes perfect sense.  One of the favorite selling points for abstinence-only, reiterated endlessly by abstinence-only "educators," is that waiting until marriage means that the sex will be even better, with the implication often being that it works seamlessly without the learning period the rest of us have to go through, and that it's so hot that others couldn't even imagine it. (It's a false promise -- just listen to reports from couples who waited, only to find out that they had compatibility issues.  But it's never been beyond fundamentalists to treat the truth as disposable in pursuit of a larger agenda.)  Evangelicals have an investment in making sure that married sex is hot, so they can push the abstinence-only line with more confidence. 

But there's another aspect to it that's even more important -- people come to evangelical churches because they need help running their lives, and if the churches want to keep members, they need to offer that help.  In fact, one of the most remarkable aspects of the modern evangelical movement is how self-help-y it is. Matt Taibbi discovered this when he went undercover at James Hagee's San Antonio megachurch.  Most of the work done in the church borrowed heavily from the dreck of the self-help world, except with demons thrown in as a twist.  Certainly Rick Warren has exploited the melding of Christianity with the self-help section of the bookstore with his book "The Purpose-Driven Life," which, from the title alone, sounds just like a self-help book.  

Since the evangelical movement is basically competing with self-help for an audience, it makes sense that they'd have to branch out into one of the most popular forms of self-help, which is advice on how to make sex better inside relationships.  This kind of thing isn't exactly new to evangelical Christianity.  In the 70s, the right wing power couple Beverly and Tim LaHaye co-authored a sex manual that at least said female orgasms were important -- but scolded people who used the popular oral sex method to get there.  Modern sex-positive evangelicals are a lot more open-minded about oral sex, I discovered as I perused various Christian websites.   

What I found in my research was a surprising diversity in attitudes about what sex acts were acceptable, though a shared fondness for obsessing over the potential sinfulness of each act.  Of all the people pushing the "more sex for marrieds" message, I found Joy Wilson, who owns the sex shop Book 22, the most pleasant person who really seemed happy to be helping people have more and better sex.  Like the rest of the sites I read, Book 22 had the same nit-picking "sin or not?" specificity -- dildos are out -- but on the whole, her website sells the same kind of products that feminist sex shops do, with the same goal of making sure that women are getting as much pleasure out of sex as men do. She blogs about sex in a blunt, generous style that I found appealing.   


Digg!    Share on facebook   submit to reddit    Bookmark on Delicious   Stumble This  

See more stories tagged with: sex, women, evangelicals, christianity, men, sexuality

Amanda Marcotte co-writes the popular blog Pandagon. She is the author of It's a Jungle Out There: The Feminist Survival Guide to Politically Inhospitable Environments.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »


Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
This comment has been removed from the site due to non-compliance with AlterNet's community policies.
For people who hate sex, they have a
Posted by: bitsfick on Feb 25, 2009 3:52 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
lot of children, the fundies down the road from me are creating their own army of Christian soldiers. They say that Viagra only works if it is a physical problem, not a mental problem. So if she is crazy you can't do her, but if she is ugly you can. He must use a lot of Viagra, because she is one homely woman.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Christian Myth Created by Rome Posted by: edgar_michel
waking up in the uinverse
Posted by: masthead on Feb 25, 2009 4:04 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"I suspect if the pro-sex movement in Christianity starts to really take off, we're going to see...." that christianity, in the end, is irrelevant and will foreshadow the end of religion. there are few "old believers" left; with all these modifications to christianity, it's hard not to notice that religion is part of the evolutionary process of our species, that the faith-heads are doing what they can to keep themselves relevant for the time being.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» The End of Religion? Posted by: nen
» RE: The End of Religion? Posted by: mythmorph
This comment has been removed from the site due to non-compliance with AlterNet's community policies.
What exactly is an "evangelical?"
Posted by: Jasonix on Feb 25, 2009 5:43 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Can an AlterNet editor please weigh in and post what the definition of "evangelical" is according to AlterNet's style guide? It seems like the site's writers play fast-and-loose with a term that has no real agreed-upon meaning. If "evangelical" simply refers to Protestants who worship in a relatively non-liturgical manner and take the Bible somewhat seriously as a source of theology, then it's not surprising that there are "evangelicals" who are all over the place on various issues. You might as well be talking about "white people" or "Americans" as if they were some kind of definable group.

It seems like AlterNet wants to use "evangelical" as a synonym for "Religious Right" in most cases, even though there are strong Mormon and Catholic elements in the Religious Right. Once in a while, they notice a non-liturgical, theologically-minded Protestant group that isn't interested in politics or has views that aren't Republican, and AlterNet declares that there is some reformist movement afoot in this strange, ill-defined beast called "evangelicalism."

The truth is that America is simply a Protestant country, and that despite fantasies of Episcopalians and U.C.C. Congregationalists that they're some "mainline" of American religion, the liberal Protestant sects are merely the left-fringe of a broad theological spectrum that goes from the Episcopalians on the left, through Christianity-Today Magazine and various "non-denominationals" like Willow Creek Community Church in the center, to the Southern Baptists on the right, to the independent fundamentalists on the rabid right fringe.

That's a lot of people in a lot of places along that spectrum. Trying to lump everyone from the Protestant center to the Protestant far-right under a one-word label distorts the whole issue.

It's time we retired the word "evangelical" in political and social discourse.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

This is what an Evangelical is
Posted by: curiousdwk on Feb 25, 2009 6:16 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
An Evangelical is more than just a Protestant. It is a person who feels compelled to "evangelize", that is, feels compelled to impose their beliefs and values onto others by converting them. Normal Christians don't do that. Evangelicals have never learned to love other people as they are only interested in relating with them in order to convert them.

I know. I used to be one when I was preparing for the ministry at Moody Bible Institute. Before I learned what it meant to love others.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: What are you now? Posted by: mythmorph
» RE: This is what an Evangelical is Posted by: edgar_michel
» RE: This is what an Evangelical is Posted by: one's quest
What's The Percentage of Sex-Crazed Evangelical Women Who Prefer Anal Sex To Vaginal Sex?
Posted by: tony_opmoc on Feb 25, 2009 6:54 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I admit to being completely ignorant in this area. However, when I was a child in hospital a female nurse stuck something up my bum because I was constipated and it was one of the most painful things I ever experienced.

I never even thought about inflicting anal sex on any girl I have ever met - and none requested it. Maybe a little finger but nothing more.

I mean even now - if I get constipated and eventually do a great big hard one - it is really painful.

How can any girl actually prefer it? So far as I am aware the female anatomy isn't equipped with any specifically sexually sensitive organs in this immediate area under discussion.

Maybe I'm just ignorant and have been doing it the wrong way.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Nerve endings and more! Posted by: morticia
» Happy Buttsex Posted by: nen
» RE: Happy Buttsex Posted by: tony_opmoc
» You're ignorant Posted by: hurricane hugo
Independent Fundamental Baptist
Posted by: whisperingsage on Feb 25, 2009 7:51 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Hbr 13:4 Marriage [is] honourable in all, and the bed undefiled: but whoremongers and adulterers God will judge.

That means just about anything goes in the marriage bed, it is undefiled. As long as you don't include animals or human third parties.

I am 46 years old and spent many years not understanding or obeying the chastity principle. Men in my life were aggressive and I gave in. I felt helpless with them. I meant nothing to them. I left them all, some, it took me too long. I was too nonjudgemental and too tolerant.
It took listening to Dr. Laura's callers and her advice for me to understand the practical applications of waiting.
When I decided to start saying no to fornication, I attracted a man who was a gentleman. We became fast freinds and found out we were very alike in our tastes and values and beliefs. That goes a looong way toward a happy marriage. I was 41 when we married. Our courtship was about 8 months. We didn't kiss till the wedding day. The wait was worth it. I found a very sweet and kind man, and those are rare.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Freud was right...
Posted by: RegK on Feb 25, 2009 8:07 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...repression leads to perversion. These wacko fundamentalists are good old-fashioned repressed pervs.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Freud was right... Posted by: eklawson
Confused
Posted by: esornew on Feb 25, 2009 9:10 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
How the heck can a female be pure, chaste,totally ignorant of sex, never even speak about it, told it is "dirty" even to think about it, and then - and then marry and be the hot, sexy siren, know how to satisfy her partner and self and willing any and all times? This American culture confuses me.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Well, no wonder.... Posted by: mythmorph
» RE: Confused Posted by: rickiey
grrreat...
Posted by: hurricane hugo on Feb 25, 2009 11:07 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
now they're gonna ruin BDSM and anal, too. Just keep 'em away from watersports, mkay?

#@!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: grrreat... Posted by: chaztmac
Got to be good
Posted by: Perry Logan on Feb 25, 2009 11:17 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Anything that will get these people to stop obsessing about gays has got to be good.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Got to be good Posted by: LCSW
LaHaye and cunnilingus
Posted by: Agki on Feb 25, 2009 11:59 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"the right wing power couple Beverly and Tim LaHaye co-authored a sex manual that at least said female orgasms were important -- but scolded people who used the popular oral sex method to get there."

But it's the ONLY way my girlfriend CAN get there! We've tried everything and since my dick is pretty big, I last a long time, have good motion and variety ... and I've made every other woman I've had sex with cum by vaginal sex, it's what she needs!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: LaHaye and cunnilingus Posted by: camanokat
» RE: LaHaye and cunnilingus Posted by: tony_opmoc
» RE: LaHaye and cunnilingus Posted by: rickiey
as long as they aren't morality police
Posted by: maxsmart on Feb 25, 2009 3:14 PM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
That's great and if they don't try to force other people to live the same way they do that's fine. There too much sexual repression codified and forced on society as it is so I would hope they might work to relieve that as well, but if not at least leave the other non married and anyone else alone and they can live how they want too. Monogamy is a particularly oppressive religious institution posing as civil law particularly if it is forced onto everyone.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

HOT
Posted by: soowee on Feb 25, 2009 7:36 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I'm getting "hot" just reading about this stuff!

H. W. Ellerson

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Abstinence or Impotence?
Posted by: cashelboylo on Feb 26, 2009 6:35 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Why don't Rabid Rightist Republican Right-to-Lifers have more Kids?
Sarah Palin has five.
Who else has more than one or two?
How do they all avoid having kids without contraception or abortion?
Rhythm Method? Are they all Catholics?
Abstinence?
Impotence?
Incompetence?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Interesting, but somewhat academic
Posted by: one's quest on Feb 27, 2009 7:55 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I'm glad this Article came out. I think it's important we separate ourselves from more destructive influences in our recent past. Still the Article is written is if to imply that we are striving towards a goal set by the author to achieve.

We should not strive toward such a goal. We risk losing our way if we do.

However Christianity (& evangelicalism) here in America is still dealing with philosophies that don't belong like Capitalism, Victorianism, and Americanism. We built up a legacy of rules for ourselves that God never called us to follow (yes while ignoring others that he's really clear on). Jesus had no kind words for this.

So one could say we are only getting back to living like we were meant to live.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

MYOB
Posted by: shd1230 on Feb 27, 2009 8:12 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
All you religious nuts get something on your mind besides what other people are doing that you want to do and are scared to OR CAN'T. Other people's sex lives are NOT YOUR BUSINESS. If there was a God and it didn't want people to have sex it would have found another method of reproduction for them; since there isn't and we are after all just another warm-blooded species that reproduces via live birth sex is an instinct, purely and simply. How and where and by what method orgasm is achieved is also irrelevant--it is just another enticement to perform the act. Get a life of your own, you idiots.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Terrytom I avoid Christians as dates.
Posted by: terryton on Feb 28, 2009 4:06 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
As I peruse profiles from various dating sites on the Internet when they mention how they are Christians I delete. I guess that makes me a bit of a bigot. It’s really not that serious but in my experience those that wear that born again crap are really strange. It seems that repression leads to some strange behaviors. All that Christian male dominance nonsense produces bad sex and poor government. I bet G W Bush was a really bad lay. Worse than he was as president.

I recall some famous sports personality saying, ”nice guys finish last.” That sure has worked for me.
Terrytom

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Evangelicals, Kiss My Ass!
Posted by: AlteredStates on Mar 1, 2009 2:54 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I think for a start, Evangelicals should evangelize the Church. But, this time, "get it straight". Is this article by Alternet about sex, evangelicals, or sexy evangelicals. I don't think the Evangelicals know what the word evangelical means.

According to the Holman Bible Dictionary, evangelical means this: "Evangelism is derived from the Greek word euaggelion, meaning "gospel" or "good news." The verbal forms of euaggelizesthai, meaning "to bring" or "to announce good news" occur some fifty-five times (Acts 8:4, 25, 35; 11:20) and are normally translated with the appropriate form of the word "preach." Evangelism has to do with the proclamation of the message of good news". That's the official definition. What we have today is all over the place.

After reading all these comments, I had to take a deep breath and stretch my muscles a bit, just to get all the weird vibes out of my head. Enough already!! It's no wonder that the world is so fucked-up. The people who are supposed to "have the truth", don't. And, the ones who do, usually keep their mouth shut.

As for bringing a woman to orgasm; guys, you can't do it with your dick; the "clit" is in the "wrong" spot. If your mate says you made her come with just fucking the "regular" way, she is bullshitting you. The "clit" has to be touched in a way that can't be done with your dick. So, what is left? Oral sex is a good place to start. But, the Catholic Church has put the whammy on oral sex, except with altar boys, of course.

Has anyone reading these comments, ever been counseled by a Catholic priest? What a joke that would be. Having a "guy" like a priest explain sex to couples who plan to be married, is a test that defies reason. Again, why bother with this kind of counseling? They don't have a clue.

Evangelicals aren't much better. The tentacles of religious teaching has spread far and wide and affects more people than I care to think about. We learn more about the "proper" way to have sex from our parents (who get it from their parents) than we do from anywhere else. But, as social mores change, each generation finds its' own comfortable niche, leaving the preceding generation to recoil many times in horror over the idea that their children are "loosing their way".

So, what do we have? The world the way it is today. But, asking Evangelicals to "show you the way" will most likely leave you confused and cold, not knowing what to do after you try what they espouse.

So, if you want to have good sex, "let her rip" (not a gender driven idea), and enjoy it while you can. Sex is just one of several ways to pleasure the psyche.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Why not?
Posted by: mikacct on Mar 1, 2009 8:57 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The marriage bed is undefiled. www.nsyfforum.com

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Fantasizing
Posted by: KateMc on Mar 1, 2009 2:03 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The author writes, "What I found most amusing was their acceptance of fantasy was contingent upon making sure that you only fantasized about sex between married people."

So I guess that leaves out Superman and Lois Lane, huh? And the cowboy and the schoolmarm...?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement