When I think about contraception, my thoughts generally run to things like this:
“Is this condom on inside-out? Oh, crap.”
“I guess IUD’s aren’t necessarily a good idea for some women unless they like bleeding from their vagina every day for six months.”
“Has anyone ever actually used a female condom?”
Over on Complementarian Loners, an MRA-adjacent “relationship” blog written by a couple of Catholic converts, the bitter divorced dude who calls himself 7man has some more, well, advanced ideas about contraception. By “advanced” I mean, of course, “odd and terrible.”
He starts off with this proposition:
A man and a woman cannot develop a great relationship if contraception is part of it or if they met while she was using hormonal artificial birth control. REAL committed, trusting, exclusive sexual intercourse is essential.
Oh, it gets weirder from there:
Birth Control is a misnomer since this is her speaking through her body saying, “I control when I will give birth, not God, not a man.” It doesn’t require any respect for fertility since fertility is subverted. This puts the woman in the dominant position and she then determines when and under what conditions she will ACQUIRE his seed rather than being open to RECEIVE. (Is woman not a vessel?)
I’m pretty sure a woman is a person, dude.
Usually the contraception is done by the woman, it messes with her body; she blocks the ability to receive and the whole exercise becomes taking pleasure from the other. Of course, she can always lie about taking it or not taking it. This is in essence lying with the body. A man can lie too if he withholds his gift by vasectomy or by condom.
In his profile on the blog, 7man refers to his ex-wife as “BatShitCrazy” (apparently that’s just one word now), but I think she demonstrated some pretty clearheaded and rational thinking in getting herself away from a guy who can refer to his semen as a “gift” without giggling.
[I]t is women acting as succubi. And so the ultimate end of a failed attempt to block PROCREATION is abortion. After all, God surely did not do his part and create a soul for the life that she did not intend to receive, right? Does her hamster prevent God from fulfilling his part of creation? Not likely! …
I am left with the impression that subverting fertility may be just as much an abomination to God as is divorce.
I hope you mention that right up top in your Match.com profile, dude, because that’s the sort of shit women need to know right off the bat before they send you any misguided “winks.”
Oh, and apparently men and women can’t have good sex unless the man controls everything and the woman cannot leave:
Can men and women have what they so deeply desire (in a relationship) while withholding the central gift of self? Have Christians stopped to consider the word PROCREATION? We participate in the CREATION of God in our act of sexual intercourse. We assist in CREATION of a body, but God provides the soul. CREATION is intended to occur in conjunction with a COVENANT. Can intercourse be unitive if this element is totally removed from the act of marriage, in the one-flesh-union?
A COVENANT is an OATH, a BINDING and a COMMITMENT. This is more than a contract or a whim. The sublime pleasure of sexual intercourse cannot happen when such aspects are blocked. The kind of fulfilling sex that every person longs for and rarely experiences is also precluded when the woman endeavors to control the relationship. In order for her to feel the fullness of the union, she must be claimed in a COVENANT to one man PERMANENTLY.
I can only imagine Mr. 7man explaining all this very earnestly to his date as they munch on breadsticks at the local Olive Garden, after which the unfortunate woman excuses herself to go to the ladies room and, as soon as she is out of his eyesight, slips out the back door of the restaurant and literally runs the entire way home.
7man closes with this little puzzler:
[S]uccumbing to passionate desire is easier without the risk of pregnancy and therefore commitment is not essential prior to the parting of thighs. Does this ever turn out for the good?
Yes. Yes it does.
Sadie, I’m sorry that you get a lot of heat for being a single mom. Single moms are just as valuable as anyone else is.
Also equality =/= superiority. We’re arguing that women are equal to men, not superior to them.
Some outright misogyny from CL for the amusement of the Boobz:
http://curmudgeonloner.wordpress.com/2011/09/20/pleasing-your-man/
Terrible MRA writing is the gift that keeps on giving.
“We participate in the CREATION of God in our act of sexual intercourse.”
So if I fuck without contraception I might get pregnant with the new messiah? Sweet!
(I know that’s not what he meant to say, but unfortunately it is kind of implied due to his shitty sentence structure.)
“Can intercourse be unitive if this element is totally removed from the act of marriage, in the one-flesh-union?”
Marriage is an act? I guess getting married is an act, but marriage on an ongoing basis?
…Wait, does he mean fucking? Why not just say so. You can say “having sex” if “fucking” offends you, you know.
“(Is woman not a vessel?)”
No. Glad we could clear that up for you.
Being free to choose, or free to speak, or free to be, does not mean we aren’t free to disagree with your choices or mock your speech. You want to be some sort of submissive puppy to an all-powerful man? Go for it. Doesn’t affect me in the slightest. You want to come in here and tell everyone and their brother that they’re horrible wrong people (and P.S. going to h-e-double-hockey-sticks or some other such made up afterlife punishment) without getting pushback? Suck it up and deal. You think we’re wrong, fine, we think you’re wrong. Are we up in your space condemning you to eternal torment? Or are we just sitting around laughing at you? *hint* We are laughing.
She’s arguing that men are superior to women.
Equality in human rights movements mean equal in value and opportunity. originally she claimed the mra’s are proponents of the equal in value part of it, but in the way that women have this particular strain of value, and men have that particular strain of value but they wind up equal. In reality that dynamic assures that women are not equally valued, this blog is evidence of that.
The problem is she avoids this blog addresses abuse that the headship principle of SPIRITUAL headship does NOT support.
Sadie needs to realize there is abuse leveled out by these folks under that dynamic that they so detest and mock. Yes, that’s right, they speak with a forked tongue. These same people call women parasites. I suppose their line of thinking would be if women won’t acknowledge that they are in a needy position relative to men, and won’t bow to improper dominance over them, then heck they can be called parasites. It’s because we deny nature dontcha know. We want it both ways, dontcha know.
” This blog addresses abusers, and you would do well to not stick up for them. God doesn’t”
Nope, God doesn’t like abusers…I am single because my “husband” chose a girlfriend over me…he’s in prison now for “Solicitation of Capital Murder”. Easier to kill me than pay child support… Call me out as you will, but, after much research…fail…when you have had you life on the line, not your academic “principles”, get back to me.
I stand behind 7man and CL… NOT you feminist apologists. Live it. Then Preach It.
Biggest fail yet.. Some of the people you’re talking to are abuse survivors. They know exactly what they’re talking about.
Sadie, many people on Manboobz have been directly affected by DV, rape, and abuse. It is 7man’s beloved manosphere, however, that would hand-wave and make excuses for your ex-husband and label the child support he should have paid as “slavery”. The “red pill” does unpleasant things to a person.
OH. sorry, Shade… exactly how many have a contract on their head? Or do they say they were abuse because they were “unhaaaaaapy” and filed for divorce and now have all their bills paid by their ex husbands? Lol, what Ev…
So your husband was not superior to you, and submission to him could have meant your life.
I know you think you’re on some righteous crusade, but you’re contradicting yourself and not representing God very well.
A lot of us here are not “academics”, and I am a survivor of domestic abuse and a single parent.
One of the problems with the group of abusers you are defending here, and dragging God’s name through the mud to do so, is that they deny domestic violence. They deny people like your husband exist. (Unless he’s committed adultery, btw, he’s still your husband, although he likely has done so.) Do you think God always blames the women for domestic violence? I think God would hold a violent person accountable for his actions regardless of provocations. Jesus was a clear example there, there’s no misinterpreting his stance on that. Also Paul was very clear with an admonition to men that they would not hurt their own flesh, so they should not hurt those under their care.
The people you are defending here support the abuse of women in DV in rape, etc. Read over what they say and support. Also it’s alarming the only time they lift a finger for real activism is in causing trouble for women who are victims of domestic violence. Anything documented here comes with a link to the original source. Some of it is so shocking that you will wonder if it’s made up, so make sure to verify. Also I don’t know if you suffer from PTSD due to your past, but this blog also comes with a trigger warning because the topics covered are extreme. The blogs David exposes mock a trigger warning. That seems to belie their claims that men are oppressed, but ahh well.
If you are not a vile hypocrite, you will make sure that what you’re spouting here does not misrepresent God in any way. You don’t seem to be taking those admonishments seriously.
That leads me to believe you have more of a political/ academic bend yourself, versus a spiritual one.
ladysadie1, you know not of what you speak. still, i just feel pity for you more than anything. your hollow sad comebacks remind me of an aunt i have who was molested by her own very religious uncle when she was a small girl and retreated into SUPER RELIOUSNESS to try to convince herself that men should protect her and everything was some kind of god’s will. (To which i say, if that kind of bullshit is the will of any god, that god is a total asshole.)
To YOU i say, i wish you peace, really. It sounds like deep down you are really really really sad and wounded.
“A lot of us here are not “academics”, and I am a survivor of domestic abuse and a single parent.”
Not meaning to set these up as a dichotomy.
@Sadie- you are aware that MRAs have advocated everything from “trading up for a younger/hotter model” to “getting out of child support no matter what it takes,” right?
These are not people who respect, “cherish” or care for women. They *say* these things to vulnerable women in vulnerable situations and then they rope them into a cycle of abuse where the woman must submit to being used and abused until he’s done with her.
There are not two choices here. It’s not just “whore around” or “be used by an abuser in an abusive relationship but at least he sticks around.” This is a false dichotomy.
There are great, amazing and respectful men out there. There are men who don’t feel the need to constantly go on about how superior they are to you just because they have a penis. And, for goodness sake, if you’re going to drag religion into this, you have to understand that even most religious modes of thought do not advocate abuse (where in the Bible does it say that it is a man’s right to do whatever they want to women and that women should be beaten, raped and abused, “pumped and dumped” and then left to fend for themselves with the resulting babies?). Even submission is not being a doormat- you’re still allowed to be a person.
While I do not believe in religious “submit to husband” drivel as a model for everyone to follow, I do think that TRUE “submission” in a relationship is much more like the “Captain/First Officer” model than the “Master/Slave” model. Sure, one person might have the final say and be the one to defer to for the Big Decisions, but the other person is still a fully competent and fully realized person. Not all women want to defer to men, and that’s fine- but there’s a huge difference between being at a man’s mercy as though he is a God in his own right, and being with him as a partner who defers to him in certain situations because he’s still the “head” of the household for you because you like submission in your relationship.
And 50 Shades of Grey was horrible, horrible drivel. It’s like watching an accident on the freeway- you might be fascinated and get a thrill from seeing the blood and guts, but you don’t want to be *IN* it. And this is coming from someone who has a myriad of fantasies, some of which involve sexual submission.
Having a vagina doesn’t mean you’re naturally inferior. If you think that this is the case, perhaps you need to do some soul searching instead of surrendering yourself to the first abusive fucktard that looks your way because you feel that it is your “place” to do so.
My apologies to everyone on manboobz for my long posts taking this person seriously.
OH well, chalk her behavior up to one more reason to despise the fruitage of religion.
(Yes, more likely politics and not true spirituality, I know.)
Sadie your disrespect of God and women here indeed makes the original assessment of misogyny leveled at you absolutely correct. Stop shitting on God please. Why do you want to disrespect women that have been abused? Is that true for men that have been abused, too? They should be mocked for being “Un haaaapy”.
Is that why your husband wanted to kill you because you were “unhappppy”
I don’t believe you, that you could experience something so terrible and then mock other survivors. WHAT is wrong with you, woman? You are way out of line here. Your speech is also not seasoned with very much salt. You’re like vinegar to the teeth, really.
Ok, no more taking this troll seriously. I have things to do. BAH what a waste of time. I’m so stupid how I spend my mental energy sometimes.
Wow. I am dizzy from the circular logic.. Calling it “logic” is quite generous on my part…O dp not “defend” abusers in anyway…If I “know not of what I speak” then the entire justice system is false… Whatever, there is no fixing stupid… I will keep using my Birth Control (which is what this was supposed to be about) Y’all keep saying women deserve to die if they don’t lay down to get fucked at random, and I will enjoy my acceptance by your most hated and feared enemy – folks who are tolerant and express their opinion…
@indifferentsky you seem more compassionate than ‘stupid’ to me, with regards to how you are spending your mental energy. Still though, agreed, she’s not worth your time.
Who said that?
Ladysadie said: ” Y’all keep saying women deserve to die if they don’t lay down to get fucked at random,”
Yes. Yes clearly in every comment every single one of us has been saying that repeatedly.
o_O
i thought ladysadie was a poe after her first post, i ducked out for an hour and holy shit, this thread is all kinds of fucked up.
wut? i seriously missed that advice.
(As an aside- Why am I on moderation? Did I do something wrong? O_o)
PS: Sadie- I find it really weird that you have this disconnect between what happened to you and what happens to other women. Might it be that other women who divorce due to abuse or cheating or other such reasons are NOT receiving child support, and may in fact actually have threats on their lives as well? Only a few weeks ago, a man who was estranged from his wife slit the throats of their young daughters when they came over for a custodial visit and then went to where the woman was staying, beat the shit out of her and then murdered her by slitting her throat. There are plenty of examples of men killing their ex-wives (and sometimes the children). Do you think that your “men are superior to women” argument allows such men to take a life- that it is their right?
Also, out of pretty much every single mom I know, pretty much none of them receive actual child support. I mean, yeah, there’s a case file and stuff in place, and sometimes the judge will even raise the payment, but none of them seem to receive any money whatsoever from the man who is supposed to be paying. And the men, to my knowledge, are not in prison or any of the other dire horrible consequences that MRAs blare on about. Sure, there are some guys who pay child support, but most of them don’t. And in the case where there’s a divorce- if both parents have joint custody and co-parent well, no one is forced to pay child support to the other person. So if one of these MRA’s really wanted to get out of the dreaded child support, he’d step up and get joint custody and parent his damn kids.
Or maybe, just maybe, he shouldn’t have children in the first place- there’s this thing called a condom and a vasectomy that can suit the man who wants to fuck forever without having to worry about having a child.
Was it because you used the word whore? I thought this was a place where context determined whether you could use naughty words, not a place like ShitRedditSays.
NWO: Although a man, pecunium is fully vested in the feminist faith as his moral guide. His reinterpretation of all text is best known as the gospel according to, Saint pecunium. It’s a cross between, Greer, Steinem, Morgan, Valenti, with a bit of Rosin tossed in. The first edition of the bible according the Saint pecunium is quite progressive. Normally dispensing with old timey morals, Saint pecunium gently engages the reader into a more progressive style of worship by acknowledging women for their obvious perfection, while generously allowing men to redeem themselves for their failings through women. It’s most enlightening.
Gee… and here I thought I was citing people like Popes, and Professors of Medicine at Harvard (in the blessed fifties of which you are so fond) and referencing other popes, and Ronald Reagan, and theologians.
Here it turns out I made all those people up out of whole cloth.
Who knew.
ladiesadie1: Hmmm, as a single mom, I am a misogynist?
What precludes it, pray tell?
you might want to check out the definition of “tolerance” …
What’s to check. I am tolerant of your right to live your life as you see fit, so long as you harm no one else. That doesn’t mean I have to say it’s right, or swell, or allow you to proselytise it without check or hindrance.
Can you say you do the same? That you have never voted for someone who wanted to prevent someone from doing something which harmed no one else (and same-sex marriage is such a thing)?
I’ll bet you can’t say that, so your moral high ground is below sea-level.
Plex… they view women as a holy vessel to be held, protected and cherished. We aren’t all as fortunate as that… Lots of women don’t even see themselves as having that value to a man…the just want to get fu**ed/ and feel empowered by being a receptacle for man’s seed.
A holy vessel… that describes a chalice. Filled with wine, drained, and put in a cupboard until th next time it’s desired.
Lots of women enjoy sex, they engage in it for that reason, the same way a man enjoys Shrimp Escoffier, or Cassoulet Castelnaudry, or Vin Scully calling a ballgame on the radio.
CL and 7man are guiding the pathway to all of use who aspire to please a higher power
Speak for yourself. I don’t know that my religious beliefs are designed to, “please a higher power”, in fact, for all that I have a personal sense of the divine, I work to, “see the light in everyone”, to borrow a phrase from the Religious Society of Friends. I can say that I know a lot of religious people… some who make their entire lives an effort to “please a higher power”, both those in retreats, and those who walk in the world… and none of those whom I call friends would have any truck with your views.
They are reductionist and make God out to be a thug.
Fucking is an earthly pleasure, not actually different in kind from food, drink, paintings, petting the cat, or having a bout of russle-tussle with the dog.
Thinking of them as, “receptacles of man’s seed”…, sounds a lot like any number of porn titles… reducing women to objects, rather than treating them as people.
That’s the reason I think you are a misogynist.
I do think that TRUE “submission” in a relationship is much more like the “Captain/First Officer” model than the “Master/Slave” model. Sure, one person might have the final say and be the one to defer to for the Big Decisions, but the other person is still a fully competent and fully realized person.
Bingo! If you read our blog, this is exactly what we advocate. We have never advocated Master/slave.