I have seen the face of God and he looks like Nate Ruess (and you).

family#funSo last night we went to see Fun. in concert. To say they were freaking amazing is not even a worthy attempt to explain, so I will try more words because I really feel the need to share my experience with you.

There is something transcendent to me about being at a concert like that. There is something electric. Something like magic. I stand in the crowd, just one in a sea of humanity and a part of me feels like the whole thing is like an elaborate flash mob that someone lovingly crafted just for me. Nate Ruess, must somehow know me, the way his words peek into my soul and subconscious and give flight to things I didn’t remember I wanted to say. And his voice pierces my heart and I stand with my eyes closed and just give myself to the music. And. The Music. Gives. Back. And We Dance.

How is that lovelies? How is it that when I hear the words of Carry On or It Gets Better I feel like my heart will explode? And I feel more connected? And I feel more alive? I am not sure how that happens. All I know is that when I see the face of Nate Ruess, I see a glimpse of God himself and I am reminded that his image is EVERYWHERE. It is in Nate. It is in me. And, lovelies, it is in you.

There is a line in The Gambler (which is about Nate’s parents) where he talks about himself in the third person, he says, “He believes we’re all just lovers, he sees hope in everyone.” Me too Nate, me too.

So there is an article about the “8 Reasons to NOT send your daughter to College” on the interwebs and it makes my head want to explode.

Photo © News4Education

Photo © News4Education

Here is a link to the article (which I heard about from David Hayward and his thought-provoking cartoons of awesomeness) should you be interested in having your brain leak out your ear… 8 Reasons to NOT Send Your Daughter to College.

It is full of gems like #1 She will attract the wrong types of men.  or #3 She will not learn to be a wife and mother.

I. JUST. CANNOT. EVEN.

As you can imagine, my first instinct was to write a snark filled response going through each item one at a time.

example: #1 You mean like college educated men who value her for something more than her tuna casserole recipe or her child-bearing hips? See, not a good idea. Not loving.

I also thought about just reposting the list with the gender pronouns reversed.

example (emphasis added):
His: “So if it is unnecessary for one to be in a near occasion of sin, is it prudent to willingly put oneself there?  This is no small matter we’re dealing with here.  Is a degree worth the loss of your daughter’s purity, dignity, and soul?  Catholic OB-GYN Dr. Kim Hardey [notice this is a FEMALE doctor who presumably went to a TON of college] notes that a woman is naturally very observant of a man’s faults as long as she is in a platonic relationship with him.  Once she becomes sexually active with him, she releases hormones that mask his faults, and she remains in a dreamy state about him.”
Mine: So if it is unnecessary for one to be in a near occasion of sin, is it prudent to willingly put oneself there?  This is no small matter we’re dealing with here.  Is a degree worth the loss of your SON’S purity, dignity, and soul?  Catholic OB-GYN Dr. Kim Hardey notes that a man is naturally very observant of a woman’s faults as long as he is in a platonic relationship with her.  Once he becomes sexually active with her, he releases hormones that mask her faults, and he remains in a dreamy state about her.

Instead lovelies, I am simply going to give you EIGHT 20 REASONS WHY YOU SHOULD ABSOLUTELY SEND YOUR DAUGHTER (and son for that matter) TO COLLEGE.

  1. A college education will provide her opportunities to learn and experience things she may not otherwise be exposed to.  College provides not only classroom learning opportunities, but also opportunities to meet people from other cultures and faith backgrounds, which will make her world simultaneously bigger in her understanding and smaller in that she will make personal connections with people from around the country and the world. When she spends time with people different from herself it will make her richer and helps her realize that the image of God is present in all people.
  2. A college education will teach her to question things she has been taught are truth. This is always good because all truth is God‘s truth and truth has nothing to fear of questions.
  3. A college education will give her the confidence and security of knowing that come what may she can take care of herself. This will give her the power to leave an abusive relationship, survive the breakup of her marriage (God forbid), help to provide for her family, or provide completely if her husband dies.
  4. A college education means that she is more likely to marry, to stay married and to be happy in her marriage. She is also more likely not to say the #1 benefit of marriage is financial security.
  5. A college education will help her find her passion in life and help her to pursue her dreams even if that passion and dream is to be a stay at home mom.
  6. A college education will open doors to her that would otherwise be closed and she will be able to earn more money for any job she takes.
  7. Her children (your beautiful grandchildren) will be happier, healthier and more likely to get an education themselves. For example, obesity rates for children of college educated people are approximately 1/2 of that of the children of high school graduates.
  8. Education is its own reward. Your daughters as well as your sons will benefit far beyond their ability to get a job.
  9. The unemployment rate for people with a college degree is half of what it is for people with a high school diploma and one-third of what it is for people who didn’t graduate from high school.
  10. She will be less likely to smoke. “The percentage of four-year college graduates who smoked declined from 14% to 9%, while the rate for high school graduates declined from 29% to 27%.”

  11. She will be less likely to be obese and will be in generally better health. According to BMC Health and Carnegie Mellon, A high level of education has been linked to lower blood pressure and that college degree holders have lower levels of cortisol, a stress hormone, compared to people with less education. Also according to a 2008 study published in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute, men and women who earned a college degree are also at a lower risk of developing colorectal, prostate, lung and breast cancer.
  12. She will be more likely to have health insurance coverage. (According to a 2008 report by the College Board, nearly 70 percent of college graduates had employer-provided health insurance, while only 50 percent of high school graduates had benefits.)
  13. She is more likely to report high job satisfaction according to the Education Pays survey.
  14. If she is college educated she is more likely to marry someone who is college educated. When both parents are college graduates, their children (your grand babies, God bless them) will be more likely to go to college and reap all these benefits. It is a cycle of awesomeness.
  15. She is less likely to be incarcerated. Only  .1% of all college graduates are incarcerated compared with 2% of the general population.
  16. She is more likely to volunteer and will spend more hours doing it. According to the Education Pays survey:

    “Among college graduates, the volunteer rate is 46 percent, over twice the 22 percent rate for high school graduates.”and”Among those who volunteer, the median number of volunteer hours increases with educational attainment, with the 46 percent of college graduates who volunteer averaging 60 hours during the year, compared to 52 hours for those with some college, and 48 hours for high school graduates and for the adults with less than a high school diploma who volunteer their time.”

  17. She will be more likely to vote and have her voice and concerns represented. Again, according to Education Pays:

    In the 2000 presidential election, 74 percent of U.S. citizens who were college graduates between the ages of 25 and 44 reported voting, compared to 45 percent of high school graduates. Among citizens between the ages of 65 and 74, 86 percent of college graduates and 72 percent of high school graduates reported voting.

  18. She will be almost 3 times as likely to donate blood to help others.
  19. According to the CDC she will live longer; almost 9 years longer than people without a high school diploma and about 7 years longer than those with only a high school diploma.
  20. And believe it or not, she is more likely to attend worship services regularly. A survey from the Association of Religious Data Archives shows that college graduates are the educational group that’s most likely to regularly attend weekly worship services.

The Hall Boys, Miley and the Moral Compass.

madonnaSo this week I watched as my feed filled up yet again with talk of modesty. The cascade of digital atta girls, also known as reposts by people I know and love were of an article by Kimberly Hall called, “FYI (if you’re a teenage girl)” (If you haven’t read it yet, go check it out. I will wait right here).

These reposts were prefaced by statements like,

“parenting win”
“it’s about time”
and
“as a mother of sons, thank you”

I was also encouraged by a number of response articles. Some grace filled, some snarky; some from other christians and some from non or former christians. Posts such as Seeing a Woman by Nate Pyle, which said in part:

Unfortunately, much of how the sexes interact with each is rooted in fear.  Fear of rejection, fear of abuse, fear of being out of control.  In some ways, the church has added to this.  We fear each other because we have been taught the other is dangerous.  We’ve been taught a woman’s body will cause men to sin.  We’re told that if a woman shows too much of her body men will do stupid things.  Let’s be clear: a woman’s body is not dangerous to you.  Her body will not cause you harm.  It will not make you do stupid things.  If you do stupid things it is because you chose to do stupid things.  So don’t contribute to the fear that exists between men and women.

A woman’s body is beautiful and wonderful and mysterious.  Respect it by respecting her as an individual with hopes and dreams and experiences and emotions and longings.  Let her be confident.  Encourage her confidence.  But don’t do all this because she is weaker.  That’s the biggest bunch of crap out there.  Women are not weaker than men.  They are not the weaker sex.  They are the other sex.

I’m not telling you to not look at women.  Just the opposite.  I’m telling you to see women.  Really see them.  Not just with your eyes, but with your heart.  Don’t look to see something that tickles your senses, but see a human being.  

My hope is that changing how you see women will change how you are around them.  Don’t just be around women.  Be with women.

Or this gem from Renegade Mothering (Language warning): FYI (If you’re a Hall boy)

In other words, it places the responsibility of YOUR morality on the shoulders of others, and that is wholeheartedly idiotic. I mean, how could anybody ever be a decent person if circumstances beyond our control determined what we think and how we behave? It also, incidentally, fuels what we like to call “rape culture,” wherein the girl is raped by the boy because she was a “slut” and therefore “asking for it.” The boy was the real victim because he was rendered powerless by her unprotected vagina and lack of bra. Your mother’s idea that GIRLS need to cover themselves so YOU can behave like a gentleman is the exact same mentality that fuels rape culture, and results in things like Steubenville or 30-day sentences for pedophile rapists.

And this one. THIS ONE. I want to post it in its entirety because it is just that good. But I trust you, go read this one yourself. It is called An “FYI” to My Daughters by The Lippy Lactator. Here is a small taste of the greatness:

Don’t get caught up in it all, my darlings.  Don’t wear that mini skirt because you want the attention of that guy.  If that guy is worth your time, he will like you regardless of what you wear.  Sex obviously sells, which is a sad thing.  You see it everywhere, I know you do.  Remember that you are MORE than just sex to the world.  You deserve to be treated that way, and the way you dress doesn’t make you any less deserving of that.  However, if you love how confident you feel in that mini skirt, or that bathing suit is *just* your style…by all means…rock it, sister.  Wear the clothes you love for you.  But be sure to take the time to get to know you.  Take the time to learn to love you.

Parents need stop with the gender stereotyping.  They are doing much, much more harm than good.  They teach their boys that girls who dress a way they don’t find appropriate aren’t worth the time and acceptance of their son.  They teach them that girls are just temptresses out to muddy the thoughts of their precious little boy.  They teach their children that it is OK to sit down as a family and scroll through their social media and shame anyone who doesn’t fit in the tiny little box they keep them in.  They teach them that girls who act or dress or believe differently than them have no character.  No self respect.  No right to be respected by others.  They are doing nothing but perpetuating this horrible cycle.  And trust me, no matter how much you try to be *perfect* for their son, this type of person will always find something “wrong” with you.  No girl will ever be deserving of their perfect little son.  Ever.

Now, let’s flashback to the VMA’s of a couple weeks ago when my feed was full of Miley & Robin. Well, actually if we are being honest, it was full of Miley, because frankly we all know Robin Thicke had nothing to do with what happened to him on that stage. He was the helpless male totally at the whim of Miss Cyrus and his own libido. I mean if presented with the opportunity no man alive would have the power to make another choice. Nevermind that Ms. Cyrus was nowhere to be found when he made his Blurred Lines video. But I digress.

I have been thinking about writing about “The Performance” on and off since it happened. Part of me was exhausted by just the thought of trying to organize my thoughts on the topic and part of me was just bored of it all. I mean, a shock value performance on the VMA’s? Ho Hum. Hasn’t that been happening like, forever? First there was that grandmother of all shockers, Madonna, then came her offspring… Brittney, Christina, Gaga and Miley. [Special mention to Prince and his assless pants: what you don’t remember that?] I guess the girls are the ones we remember most] Its like 4 generations of powerful women shocking people all the way to the bank.

Admit it. America kind of gets off on feigning shock and outrage over these performances. And yes, I agree they don’t do much to elevate the conversation on gender equality. Except, I suppose, when they shine a bright light on our tendency (as made blatantly obvious by the general pass given to the married, 36 year old father, Robin Thicke) to throw out the boys will be boys cliché and make sure we tell the women involved to cover up and be a lady.  I mean, Mrs. Hall, back me up on this one…have the women of our generation who ran around dressed like Madonna in bustiers, crinoline and rubber bracelets forgotten that a little rebellion and a little sexuality didn’t kill us like so many thought it would? Or that most of the women who were doing that are now grown up productive members of society, some even of churches?

This morning I read a piece by Christian Piatt over at Patheos in which he discusses the Miley post fest and I couldn’t help but think of it in light of Mrs. Hall’s letter to teenage girls. He writes:

Although in some respects, women and girls have made strides toward gender parity in our culture, there is still a persistent, if sometimes subtle, subtext narrated to our girls, which is that sex is the most efficient and potent mean of access to power they have. Yes, my daughter is told now at such a young age that she can be anything she wants when she grows up. And I hope that is true, but I already hear the comments from friends, family members and teachers about her appearance and anticipated future success with boys, and how it affects her behavior. and honestly, it only gets more pronounced as girls reach puberty and beyond.

So perhaps, rather than men in power resisting the progress of women being the greatest current barrier to parity, it now is the unpleasant reality that sexualizing young women works for innumerable purposes in our world. None more so, perhaps, than the popular music industry. So it’s really a bit disingenuous of us to express shock or disgust when Miley Cyrus fondles herself or engages in orgiastic dance numbers in front of an audience of millions. After all, the culture set up the rules of the game long ago and, in spite of our assertions to the contrary, the economies of power, money and fame depend heavily on appealing to our baser instincts.

So judge Miley if you must, but in doing so, realize that she is only a speck that is part of a much larger log in our collective cultural eye.

Do you see lovelies? When Miley states that she told people her performance was going to make history and then it becomes one of the most tweeted events ever we expose our morbid fascination with the perceived sins of others. We are all stuck with Miley on a merry-go-round that is very hard to get off. The cycle goes something like this:

  1. Women/Girls are slut-shamed and told they are responsible for the sins of men and protecting their morality –>
  2. Women/Girls act out in an attempt to grasp power not afforded to them in equal measure by other means –>
  3. People say “see, Women/Girls really are sluts at heart and must be told to cover up before they corrupt men who are just being who God/nature made them (visual creatures who are compelled to spread their seed and are slaves to their anatomy)” –>
  4. Society believes and perpetuates through feigned shock and shame that women/girls are responsible for the sins of men and protecting their morality.
  5. Repeat steps 1-4.

And around and around we go.

side note: I actually read one article today posted by a friend that made many good points. But then he lost me. He kept saying that the reason the church is obsessed with modesty is because of get this, “the church has become feminized”! Once again, it is made the fault of women. The reason women are told to be more modest is because we have believed the lie that we have power over men. He says,  

“I believe the Church has become feminized in this: we talk about the Woman as being in control over the Man.  She can dress one way to seduce him, or dress another way to leave him free to choose.  This is not so.  The Man chooses to be seduced or not seduced.”  

While I agree that the man is free to choose, I emphatically disagree that this is the result of the feminization (the shift in gender roles and sex roles in a society, group, or organization towards a focus upon the feminine) of the church. This idea that women are responsible for all sexual sin including having the power over a man’s impure thoughts comes not from women or feminism but from the church fathers. Look it up. John Wesley, Tertullian, Thomas Aquinas, Martin Luther, Saint Augustine and many more including scads of popular pastors even today espouse this very doctrine.

Honestly it is hard for me to blame Miley (as uncomfortable as her performance made me). She has followed the script and played a role played by many before her. She has taken the reins of power away from the people who have held them in her life and is attempting to chart her own course. Yes, IMHO she is making the mistake of confusing notoriety for respect and fame for admiration. But it is a mistake I have seen over and over. People who were given little or no freedom or autonomy to make decisions, and yes even mistakes (PKs, Quiverfulls, Ultra Conservatives, Child Stars and kids with over protective helicopter parents and yes, perhaps even the Hall boys) sometimes, when they finally get an opportunity to taste freedom, make some pretty destructive choices before they figure out how to lead a balanced life and what course they want to follow. For child stars, children of politicians or mega church pastors they have the unenviable lot of having to do it in the public eye. Their mistakes and missteps while trying to figure out how to live a life of freedom that doesn’t lead to destruction can be very difficult and some sadly won’t live through it. [Here is a question, how could we actually increase the odds that they do live through it? Perhaps a little grace or maybe even just a little less judgement?]

For me lovelies, it comes down to this: Growing up is hard. Raising kids is hard. Stopping the cycle mentioned above is hard. I certainly don’t have all the answers. I empathize with Mrs. Hall in that she really thinks she is helping by joining in the chorus of voices telling girls to cover up and blocking people we deem unworthy by virtue of their perceived shortcomings. But here is the thing: We do not learn to make good choices by turning over our moral compass to someone else to police and we cannot teach our kids to find their moral true north on their own by never letting them hold their own compass. We do not do them any favors when we tell them that an entire gender, a preacher or even we can read the compass for them and that if they follow the bearing of our denomination, gender philosophy or political party they will be safe. Sooner or later they grow up, and they must navigate the often choppy waters of this life for themselves. Hopefully by then the compass we give them has a needle that points them straight to the true north of love, grace and mercy for others and for themselves. And hopefully they know how to read it for themselves.

In the end, it is for me like this song…and I pray that what we have taught both our daughter and our son is enough. That they use the love of Christ as their compass. Love that covers a multitude of mistakes. Love that forgives and keeps no record of wrongs. Love that sees past twerking and selfies and awkward teenage hormones. Love that speaks truth and healing. Love that gives second, third and ninety-fifth chances. Love that says we are all valuable and equal and bear the image of the living God.

The Boat
Billy Falcon

I built this boat
The best I could
With hands of love
From the finest wood
I braced the bow
I stitched the sail
I blessed every brass screw and nail

Lord, go with her when the sea is angry
Lord, go with her in the raging storm
Lord, go with her when the days are cruel
Lord, go with her when the night’s too long

Studied the stars, searchin’ to find
The safest course, and the kindest tide
Lifted her down the stony trail
I set her in the water, and raised her sail

Lord, go with her when the sea is angry
Lord, go with her in the raging storm
Lord, go with her when the days are cruel
Lord, go with her when the night’s too long

Worrying from the watchtower
As the red sky fades
My heart drops to my stomach
As she tumbles through the waves
She slips past the horizon
That’s when I realize
She was always yours
Never really mine

Lord go with her when the sun is golden
Lord go with her when way is clear
Lord go with her when the whole world loves her
Lord go with her When I’m. no longer..

Lord go with her when the sea is angry
Lord go with her in the raging storm
Lord go with her when the days are cruel
Lord go with her when the night’s too long

P.P.P.P.S. This is a thought provoking article called The Moving Target of Morality. I couldn’t figure out how to fit it in so I am just tagging it on as a value added bonus.

In defense of the F-word. WARNING: GRAPHIC LANGUAGE (duh.)

Don’t throw your verses at my sins like stones.
My Jesus ain’t your sword.
Your scripture bombs don’t work on me.
My bindings have been torn
Your flaming tongue can’t touch me now.
My standing has been set.
I don’t need you to approve.
I’m not your fucking pet.

Don’t say my sin turns Christ away
He touched the lepers’ sores
Don’t tell me he can’t stand by sin
He crashed tradition’s mores
His insane love fills in my gaps
His righteousness my own
Keep your judgement to yourself
His grace to me he’s shown

Keep your righteous indignation please
that turns people away
I can’t look you in the face
When with people’s soul’s you play
You cover your ass when things go bad
Instead of coming near.
You protect what’s yours when faced with truth
Actions that come from fear.

Throw your body on the flames
to protect the threatened child
Bring cold water as a drink
to those convicted in trial.
Cover and feed, Defend those in need
Break down your prison wall
Let those who need a doctor in
Isn’t that us all?

Sometimes life is too fucking hard. This was that kind of week. I have friends who are in pain; the kind of pain that denies purpose and defies explanation. I have another friend who was told that her worship was not equal to theirs because of who she loves and her perceived sins.

We had a discussion in the car the other night about swearing or cursing and specifically “the F-word.” Some people are of the mind that there is never a time to use the F-word. And although I believe it to be vastly overused, it is my contention that there is absolutely a time to utter a well placed F-bomb. Let’s-be-face-it* lovelies, there is a time when saying “that is messed up” just doesn’t get the job done.

Fuck is the most powerful word in my personal lexicon that I am willing to use. I don’t use the C-word nor do I use the N-word because they demean people no matter the context. One reduces a person to their skin color and one reduces a person to their body parts. But I’ll tell you what, when the love of your life dies, when your leg is blown off by an IED, when your child has been abused… “That fucking sucks!” might be the most loving thing someone can say to you.

There is a song by Billy Falcon that sums it up perfectly. It is called When and you can and should listen to it here:

Did you watch?

“Sometimes life is so fuckin’ unfair…” Yes it is Billy. Yes. It. Is.

* Let’s-be-face-it is a term coined by my husband in the jacuzzi one night during a deep discussion with friends. It was created when my husband couldn’t get out either “let’s face it” or “let’s be honest” so what came out was, “let’s-be-face-it”. And a phenomenon in our social circle was born. Feel free to use it with reckless abandon.

AWOL from the Christian Culture War.

“Let them vote ‘no’ to this ordinance, and ‘yes’ to the reign of the kingdom of God,” Pastor Charles Flowers said at the rally. He said this right before joining the crowd in booing Eric Alva, an openly gay Marine staff sergeant who became the first U.S. soldier injured in Iraq when he stepped on a landmine, spoke in favor of an ordinance that would protect people against discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity at a San Antonio City Council meeting on Wednesday night.

Sigh. I find the culture war exhausting, distasteful and confusing. I am overcome with the cloud of war and have become convinced that the people who sit in the Christian War Room drawing up plans and maps are fighting for the wrong causes for all the wrong reasons.

So, as of today, I am going AWOL. I am out of here. I am trading in my faith fatigues for flowers and my Bible bombs for hugs.

In reality, I actually defected in my heart a long time ago, and have expressed my dissent and disagreement with the Christian Culture War Machine long and loud on many an occasion. The difference today is that I am declaring my independence and leaving the ranks.

I mean why do people who claim to follow Christ want to fight a war that Jesus never asked them to fight?

In Jesus’ day many people were looking for the Messiah to come in and politically and militarily take over and set up a physical kingdom right then. Many people were actually quite disappointed to find out that Jesus was not interested in removing Caesar or even the Sanhedrin from power. Almost as disappointed perhaps as some might be to learn that Jesus has no interest in impeaching President Obama.

Jesus was also faced with a woman caught in the act of adultery (an offence according to Jewish law that had very specific and dire consequences) he did not stand on the side of the powers that would have chosen to see this woman stoned to death. He stood on the side of the woman and extended radical grace to her. The men who accused her were testing Jesus to see if he would uphold the law. He did not. Do you think there would be the same level of disappointment  on the faces of people today when Jesus stands by the side of a woman who chooses abortion and extends radical grace to her?

When people were upset by the company Jesus kept and the parties he attended, when they called him a drunk and a sinner, he didn’t stop to please them. He didn’t cut them off either. He simply continued to be who he was and let people make their own decisions about him. I try to apply this principle on Facebook when people disagree with me. I have yet to sever ties with friends who disagree with me, I continue on being who I believe he calls me to be and allow people the freedom to choose to sever ties or stay friends. I always hope for the latter.

Jesus, though he was able to call down the power of heaven to free himself from the cross, instead chose to absorb the hate and give back forgiveness. I am afraid there were people there who were disappointed that he did not call down the fire and wipe out “the enemies”. Even people who had lived with him and had heard his teachings. How often are God‘s foot soldiers caught up in forcing people to conform to what they believe by passing laws which do nothing to change people’s hearts?

*side note: This isn’t just happening here at home. American Christians are also instrumental in influencing laws in other countries. A prime example of this can be found in Uganda’s Anti-gay Legislation, which you can read about here: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/04/world/africa/04uganda.html?_r=0

As far as I can tell, Jesus was/is on the side of the lepers, the women, the overlooked, the underestimated, the ones who drink too much, say too much, feel to much. He also was/is on the side of the privileged, the zealot, the religious, the goody-two-shoes and the ones who are just too tired to go on. He loves us all. His kingdom is a kingdom of peace. His law is a law of love. His righteousness is a free gift that is neither bought nor earned by any of us.

My allegiance is to this king and this kingdom. Not to some misguided war machine that is dedicated to fighting against the people they were sent to love. Too often they have used Jesus himself as a weapon and his words to wound instead of heal.

The very people Jesus intends to be the Red Cross to a dying and imprisoned world; who he sends to deliver the good news that their imprisonment is over and that God is not holding their sins against them; instead point to the bars and make sure the prisoners knew their captivity is their own damn fault.

Here is the commission I believe Jesus offers and I gladly accept: Ambassador of the God who came near. I will willing and joyfully serve as the Minister of Reconciliation for the one who took all the wrath that humans could dish out and said, I choose love.

Repent or else! [a poem]

Repent or else!

Repent or else?

Or else what?

Is that a threat?

Love me or else.

Obey me or else.

I love you so much I laid down my life.

But I will hold my breath and throw a fit.

Lightning bolts and into the pit…

If you don’t love me back

If you don’t repent.

Fuck that.

My love veils no threat.

It is not dependent

On what you do

My love, it carries no or else and

No condition

To be a part from you

Tears my being

And splits my heart

But I do not throw stones

I don’t push away

In the dark

On your bed

In the shards of your heart

Through the doubts in your head

I am there

In the air

In your dreams

In the wounds you bear

In your desires and

In your fears

In your questions

Laughter hiding tears

I don’t ever go away

I came near

Your wounds to share

Separate is not Equal & Together is Awesome

1010073_10151428607366735_362495096_nThis is a concept you have heard over and over if you were raised in church; you may have even heard it in some other marriage book or seminar. It is a distinction without a difference (a type of logical fallacy where an author or speaker attempts to describe a distinction between two things even though there is, in fact, no actual difference) and that as my wise husband said upon seeing this meme, “I don’t know whether this is accurate or not. But it seems to me that if men do derive more self-esteem by being respected instead of loved, this is likely due to men’s psyche evolving in a patriarchal society. And it also seems to me that many Christians have taken one small comment made by Paul and blown it up into an entire doctrine. I think everyone should be loved and respected and everyone wants to be loved and respected. Mutuality is the way of Christ.”

Because of this doctrine we as Christians (and others) often divide up like junior high kids at the roller rink or a school dance, boys on one wall and girls on another. So without further ado, here are my top reasons why all this division stinks and why togetherness is effing awesome.

1. Separating the genders fosters misunderstanding and fear and also contributes to the “battle of the sexes”. Togetherness shows us that we need not be afraid of each other and that men and women should not be in competition. Moreover it shows us that we should be in cooperation and community with one other. ONE BODY. Not two bodies, one male and one female.

2. Separation of the sexes during bible study fosters the idea that men and women are not equal in God’s eyes and that women cannot teach men about the Bible. For TONS of amazing FREE material on this check out CBE’s Biblical Equality 101 page. Penis≠Power.

3. Separation also confirms the fallacy that we have nothing to learn from hearing how others feel and encourages us to “tune out” when we are together and someone from the opposite sex is speaking. We can all benefit from another person’s point of view no matter what equipment they have.

4. Keeping boys and girls apart (or single men and women apart) will not stop them from having sex. Take a gander at these bullet points lifted from a Christianity Today article…

  • Three surveys of single Christian adults conducted in the 1990s determined that approximately one third were virgins—meaning, of course, that two thirds were not.
  • In 2003, researchers at Northern Kentucky University showed that 61 percent of students who signed sexual-abstinence commitment cards broke their pledges.
  • Of the remaining 49 percent who kept their pledges, 55 percent said they’d had oral sex, and did not consider oral sex to be sex.
And this is with keeping the genders separated most of the time. If we put the genders together in almost every context what we would find is less fear, more respect and more understanding. When we have that, we may not have lower rates of premarital sex, but we probably won’t have higher rates either. At the very least we will have people who are able to communicate, love and respect one another, which will make (at the minimum) casual sex rates decline.
5. But what about separating when it comes to talking about the deed itself? Surely then Michelle you think we should divide up based on parts, vaginas to the left and penises to the right. But seriously…my answer is no, not even then. When we discuss sexuality separately it encourages secrecy and says that sex and sexuality is something to be ashamed of. We train our kids and ourselves to be ashamed/afraid to discuss intimacy with even our spouse. I know for me (and most of my friends) the way we were raised to keep such issues quiet and certainly not to discuss them in mixed company. It took me YEARS to undo the effects of this training with my husband and I am STILL working on it. When we stigmatize sexuality the way we have we do serious harm to our marriages. All we teach our girls right up until they are engaged is only how to say no. Oh wait, we also teach them how they are like a chewed piece of gum or a glass of water every boy in the room has spit in and no one is willing to drink if they fail to do so. And then we condemn these same women when they are sexually clueless and have nothing but negative thoughts about sex. Also, separating the sexes by parts has another issue. NOT EVERYONE IS HETEROSEXUAL. Sooo, yeah. There’s that.
6. Lastly, for now, it plays into the myth that women cannot be understood by men and/or men cannot be understood by women. Perhaps the reason we can’t understand each other is because we have been separated since the day we were born. Ironically, especially at the times it matters the most. Do you want to know a secret? The way to get to know someone is to SPEND TIME WITH THEM! Shocking, I know. We learn about each other when we stop dividing ourselves into us and them, boys and girls, mars and venus. We learn about each other when we listen and speak even when we are uncomfortable or afraid or even mad. We must overcome the awkwardness that we feel because of how we have been taught and allow our children to know a better way. The way of togetherness.

Excuse me but the “Modest is Hottest” logo on your t-shirt draws too much attention to your chest.

Remember the other day when I said every guy has a different “line”? Well…

According to The Modesty Survey, I am a stumbling block to at least some men NO MATTER WHAT I DO OR WEAR because I might stand, sit or walk the wrong way.

I humbly submit to you that you cannot follow all of these “guidelines” that are meant to be “helpful”. Just for grins I went to a website by a woman who is trying diligently to dress modestly.

STOP HERE and go check it out: http://inspiredbyfamilymag.com/2012/08/24/how-to-dress-modest-and-stylish/

Ar you back? Cute right?

Every outfit on that page is immodest to at least some of the 1600 men who answered this survey.

Here is a simple list of the percentages of men from the survey who either agree or strongly agree that a particular action or garment or way of wearing said garment is immodest.

The Headings are theirs. The underlined comments are mine.

GENERAL

Girls should always wear clothes that show little body definition (e.g., jumpers or loose dresses). 16.9%

Exposing the chest below the collarbone, even without cleavage, is immodest. 26.1%

Denim jackets with faded sections on the chest draw too much attention to the bust.  31.9%

Girls with less curves can wear clothes that girls with more curves should not. 34.2%

Leotards, sheer skirts, and tutus in theatre or dance performances are immodest. 35.8%

Even modest pajamas are inappropriate for a girl to wear in public. 48.6%

Zipping a form-fitting jacket to just below the chest draws too much attention to the bust. 56.8%

Nude colored clothing looks too much like bare skin. 57.5%

A technically modest outfit can be a stumbling block when it has attached sexual associations (e.g. a “school girl” outfit after Britney Spears released a music video where she was dressed as an “innocent” school girl, but acted very provocatively.)  61.8%

Showing any cleavage is immodest.  70.4%

A modestly dressed girl can still be a stumbling block because of her attitude and behavior. 93.8%

SWIMSUITS

A one-piece swimsuit with shorts on top is immodest. 14.3%

A two-piece swimsuit consisting of a long tank top and skort is immodest. 16.4%

A one-piece swimsuit is immodest. 25.7%

It is a stumbling block when swimsuit ties stick out from under clothing (e.g. tied around the neck). 35%

A tankini with shorts is immodest.  41.8%

A tankini with a bikini-bottom is immodest.  62.6%

It is not okay for a girl to wear a revealing swimsuit (e.g., a bikini) if she wears a t-shirt over  it. 55.1%

Halter-top swimsuits are immodest. 56.1%

UNDERGARMENTS

Halter-top bras (i.e. bras with string straps that tie at the back of the neck) are a stumbling block. 56%

Showing bra straps, even unintentionally, is a stumbling block. 57.4%

It is a stumbling block when a girl reaches into her shirt to adjust a bra strap. 65.4%

The lines of undergarments, visible under clothing, cause guys to stumble. 71.6%

SHIRTS/DRESSES

Dresses that are fitted at the waist (e.g. with a belt or waistband) are a stumbling block. 8.4%

Fitted dresses are immodest, even if they do NOT show skin (e.g. a high-neck prom dress). 11.2%

Shirts with floral designs across the front draw too much attention to the bust. 11.9%

Shirts or dresses with chest pockets draw too much attention to the bust. 18.6%

Semi-transparent sleeves are a stumbling block. 19.1%

Sleeveless shirts or dresses (i.e. bare arms) are immodest. 21.1%

Shirts or dresses with cap sleeves are immodest. 21.2%
(Seriously? Cap sleeves?)

Sweatshirts with messages across the front draw too much attention to the bust. 25.1%

Shirts or dresses with empire waists draw too much attention to the bust. 27.5%

V-neck shirts or dresses are a stumbling block, even if they are not revealing. 34.4%

Shirts or dresses that show the shoulders (i.e. more than a normal sleeveless top) are immodest, even if they are not otherwise revealing.  38%

Shirts or dresses (long or short-sleeved) with slits in the sleeves are a stumbling block. 40.8%

A shirt buttoned to just under the bust is a stumbling block, even if a modest shirt is worn underneath.  41.6%

Shirts with messages across the front draw too much attention to the bust. 47%
       (Wait, Even if it says, “Modest is Hottest? I am so confused!)

Girls should not wear thin shirts or dresses since they tend to be clingier. 48.3%

Lace-edge camisoles sticking out of the top of shirts look too much like underwear. 50.9%

Shirts or dresses that are gathered around the chest draw too much attention to the bust. 57.1%

Tank tops are generally immodest.  57.6%

Shirts or dresses that are low in the back are immodest, even if the fronts are modest. 58.8%

Shrugs, the short shirts and jackets that just cover the chest, draw too much attention to the bust.  59%

Spaghetti-strap shirts and dresses are immodest. 60.9%

Shirts with a low crisscross in the front draw too much attention to the bust.  61.2%

The same standards of modesty should apply to wedding and bridesmaids’ dresses as to everyday attire.  65.1%

Strapless dresses are immodest.  65.9%

The lacy, lingerie look of some tops is a stumbling block. 66.1%

A camisole is immodest if worn alone.  67.5%

Seeing even an inch of skin between the bottom of a girl’s shirt and her pants is a stumbling block.  71.3%

Halter-tops (shirts or dresses) are immodest. 73.5%

Tube tops are immodest. 85.6%

LAYERING

It is not a stumbling block if a girl’s shirt creeps up, as long as she has a camisole tucked in underneath so that no skin shows.  15.8%

Wearing spaghetti-strap tops over modest shirts is a stumbling block. 24.7%

Seeing a girl take off a pullover (i.e. a shirt that must be pulled over the head) is a stumbling block, even if she is wearing a modest shirt underneath. 37.3%

Wearing a very low shirt (e.g. a shirt with a neckline that reaches the belly button) is a stumbling block, even if a modest shirt is worn underneath. 42%

Wearing a tight shirt under an open button-down shirt or a jacket is immodest. 48.7%

Wearing a semi-transparent shirt over a sleeveless shirt (e.g. camisole, tank top, etc.) is immodest. 52.8%

PANTS/SHORTS/LEGGINGS

It is immodest for a girl to expose her calves (i.e. knee downward). 6.8%

Jeans are generally immodest, even if they aren’t tight. 14.4%

Nude colored nylons are a stumbling block. 14.5%

Wearing nylons is more modest than having bare legs, regardless of the length of the skirt or dress. 24.1%

Wearing short skirts or mini skirts over jeans is a stumbling block.  27.4%

Skirts are more modest than pants (even loose fitting pants).  28.6%

Any shorts that are shorter than knee-length are immodest. 34.2%

Tights with designs (e.g. polka dots or stripes) draw too much attention to the legs. 38.8%

Decorative stitching and designs on the back pockets of jeans draw too much attention to the rear. 44%

Jeans with worn marks across the bottom, on the thighs, etc. are a stumbling block. 47.6%

It is immodest for a girl to expose her legs up to mid-thigh. 64.5%

Miniskirts, long shirts, or short dresses over leggings are a stumbling block.  64.9%

Fishnet stockings are a stumbling block. 66.8%

Skin-tight jeans are a stumbling block.  76.2%

Any shorts that are shorter than mid-thigh are immodest.  83.8%

Wearing pants with words across the backside is a stumbling block. 84.3%

SKIRTS

Sparkly, shiny skirts are a stumbling block, regardless of length. 9%

Skirts with slits are immodest. 29.1%

An ankle-length skirt with a knee-high slit is more modest than a knee-length skirt. 31.6%

Form-fitting skirts are a stumbling block, regardless of length. 32%

Seeing a girl’s slip through the slit in her skirt is a stumbling block. 34.3%

A skirt that is tight around the hips, but loose below the hips, is a stumbling block, regardless of length. 36.8%

Skirts made out of many layers of semi-transparent material to form an opaque skirt are a stumbling block, regardless of length. 38%

Full skirts are more modest than narrow skirts. 48.1%

Skirts that fall above the knee are immodest.  58.3%

Slits that go above the knee are immodest. 71.8%

Miniskirts are immodest.  93.1%

POSTURE/MOVEMENT

It is a stumbling block for a girl wearing pants to sit cross-legged (i.e. Indian style). 14.3%

It is a stumbling block to see a girl lying down, even if she’s just hanging out on the floor or on a couch with her friends.  22.5%

Lifting a long skirt any higher than the knee in order to step over something is a stumbling block. 47.4%

It is a stumbling block for a girl to sit with her legs spread apart. 51.3%

Seeing a girl stretching (e.g. arching the back, reaching the arms back, and sticking out the chest) is a stumbling block. 56.8%

A girl bending over and exposing her lower back is a stumbling block. 63.6%

The way a girl walks can be a stumbling block. 74.9%

A girl’s physical posture and/or position can be a stumbling block. 84.7%

MAKEUP/JEWELRY/HAIR/SHOES

Necklaces that create a “V” are a stumbling block. 14.8%

Playing with jewelry, such as a necklace, is a stumbling block. 18.6%

Anklets draw too much attention to the legs. 23.2%

High-heeled shoes (2″ or higher) are a stumbling block. 24.5%

Putting lip-gloss on in front of a guy is a stumbling block. 27%

High-heeled black boots are a stumbling block. 29.3%

Wearing heavy perfume is a stumbling block. 32%

High-heeled shoes cause girls to walk in a suggestive way. 35.8%

Wearing heavy makeup is a stumbling block. 37%

Shoes with straps that lace all the way up to mid/upper-calf are a stumbling block.  40.6%

A purse with the strap diagonally across the chest draws too much attention to the bust. 47.5%  (yes your purse strap is immodest!)

ARE YOU AS EXHAUSTED AS I AM?

And before you say well some of those statements are only approved by less than 10% of the 1600 guys who replied, remember that is still 160 dudes!

I have a query in to the creators of the survey as to denominational demographics of the men (aged 12-50+) who participated. I have not received a response as of yet. You can read all the available demographic information here: http://www.therebelution.com/modestysurvey/overview

The Modesty Survey grew out of The Rebelution website’s gender segregated chatrooms. The Rebelution was created by Alex and Brett Harris of “Do Hard Things” fame. Their older brother is known for writing “I Kissed Dating Goodbye” and their father was one of the catalysts behind the modern homeschooling movement.

The folks behind The Modesty Survey describe it this way on their website:

The Modesty Survey was not intended to serve as a scientific measurement of what the average man thinks about modesty. In the strictest sense, it isn’t a survey, but a discussion between Christian guys and girls who care about modesty. Over 200 Christian girls submitted their questions. In less than twenty days, over 1,600 Christian guys (12 and up) responded. Close to 200,000 separate pieces of data were collected, including 25,000 text responses.

After presenting women with all of this they are kind enough to say that the ultimate responsibility for lust lies with men…Oh good. Thanks for making that clear.

Aside

Let’s get these girls in school!

banner-educationToday is my 44th birthday and I would like to see if together we can send 44 girls to school for the year.

I am hoping you all will help me.

  • For each year, a girl stays in school, her future income can increase by 15-25%.
  • Girls with secondary schooling on average have 2.2 fewer, yet healthier children.
  • If 10% more girls attend school, a country’s GDP increases an average of 3%.

For $52 you can send a girl to school for a whole year. That is only $1 a week.

Come on, let’s change the world for the better this year!

I am starting by paying for one and my church is also paying for one. that only leaves 42 to go.

Click this link to get started.  http://gifts.rescue.org/product/education/year-school

When you are done please leave a comment on this post and we can all keep track as we approach our goal together!

Bikinis, Sepulchres & Bathing Machines

Hey lovelies, I started this post several days ago and since then the brilliant and talented Rachel Held Evans has chimed in with a fabulous post on this very topic titled: Modesty: I Don’t Think it Means What You Think it Means. You should read it too even though I am going to quote it a couple times. 🙂

Bikini Girls from a Mosaic found at Villa Romana del Casale a 4th century Italian villa.

If with Christ you died to the elemental spirits of the world, why, as if you were still alive in the world, do you submit to regulations—“Do not handle, Do not taste, Do not touch” (referring to things that all perish as they are used)—according to human precepts and teachings? These have indeed an appearance of wisdom in promoting self-made religion and asceticism and severity to the body, but they are of no value in stopping the indulgence of the flesh. (Colossians 2:20-23, ESV)

Putting on regulations that look and sound good because they make us feel like we are safe from ourselves DO NOT WORK. They are of no value when it comes to stopping the indulgence of the flesh. You want to know why lovelies? Because keeping the “rules” doesn’t change your heart. As Jesus said to the Pharisees, that is just a whited sepulchre: Pretty and clean but full of death.

Summer is upon us kiddos and you know what that has meant (at least in my Facebook feed)? A plethora of articles from my well meaning Christian friends that tell me what I can and cannot wear at the beach or even in my own swimming pool if I am going to claim to be a proper Christian lady. Bikinis are taboo my friends and not just for me but also for my 10 year old daughter if I don’t want her to grow up to be some sort of floozie. The logic goes, men are visual creatures, they can’t help themselves. They are unable, you see, to overcome their biology. They are weak and they need me to cover up so they won’t think about having sex with me and in so doing commit adultery in their heart.  So if indeed I am a kind and loving person I will help them out by wearing a one piece. Oh wait but not any one piece, that can’t be too revealing either. Perhaps a cover up over it. But why stop there? Bathing suits are form fitting. Maybe they should be looser. Maybe I should just wear board shorts and a t-shirt. But wait, not if the shorts are too short.  Maybe we should go back to some of the old suits or even bathing machines? Where does it end? Where is the line between too sexy and just sexy enough? Because the same folks who tell me there are rules about me wearing a bikini also tell me there are rules about not “letting myself go” and making sure I am still sexy enough for my husband. Sigh. It is exhausting.

Side note: I have friends who say, just ask any man he can tell you where the line is. Well, I’ve got news for you lovelies, every man has a different line.

Several of the articles I have read quote a Princeton study that says,

“Brain scans revealed that when men are shown pictures of scantily clad women, the region of the brain associated with tool use lights up.”

Men were also more likely to associate images of sexualized women with first-person action verbs such as “I push, I grasp, I handle,” said lead researcher Susan Fiske, a psychologist at Princeton University.

[You don’t want to be seen as a mere tool to be used do you? is the question that comes next. But wait we will get to that later.]

Tamara Smith-Dyer (Full-time data analyst at the University of Pennsylvania and Cabrini sociology professor) asserts that the sample in this study is very biased. “Including 21 undergraduate males from Princeton does not provide a representative sample of the population. For example, the age is limited. Race and socioeconomic status will be skewed in this sample as well.”

“The sample size, 21, is very small. While the scientific community typically holds a minimum acceptable sample size to be 30, which is more than the current study’s sample size, statisticians including myself know that even 30 is very limited and samples should be much larger than this when possible in order to prevent ‘false positive’ study results,” Dyer said.

Not only that, the Christian “anti bikini” articles that I read liked pointing out that, “the part of the brain associated with analyzing another person’s thoughts, feelings and intentions was inactive while viewing scantily clad women” however this statement is out of context and is also misleading. When performing the study “the participants, 21 heterosexual male undergraduates at Princeton, took questionnaires to determine whether they harbor “benevolent” sexism, which includes the belief that a woman’s place is in the home, or hostile sexism, a more adversarial viewpoint which includes the belief that women attempt to dominate men.”  The study goes on to state that for “the men who scored highest on hostile sexism, the part of the brain associated with analyzing another person’s thoughts, feelings and intentions was inactive while viewing scantily clad women.” One analyst put it this way, “those who viewed women as controlling and invaders of male space—didn’t show brain activity that indicates they saw the women in bikinis as humans with thoughts and intentions.” Do you see the difference that one little fact that these were the men who held the most sexist attitudes prior to the study makes? So now these are not all 21 young men who took part but only those of the 21 who scored highest for hostile sexism.

SO… of the 21 college men those who had the most aggressive sexist attitudes did not see women in bikinis as having thoughts and intentions. Hmmm. It seems to me they thought that before seeing them in bikinis.

It would seem to me that the way we teach our boys to think about women has a bigger effect on whether men see them as objects than what they have on. Don’t get me wrong, I am not naive, I know men will look at women in bikinis and find them sexually attractive. They will also look at women in shorts, skirts, pants, blouses, dresses and for some even shapeless denim jumpers and find them sexually attractive. As RHE stated in the post linked above,

The truth is, a man can choose to objectify a woman whether she’s wearing a bikini or a burqa. We don’t stop lust by covering up the female form; we stop lust by teaching men to treat women as human beings worthy of respect.

Contrary to what some think I personally do not believe the mere biological, chemical and psychological processes involved in sexual attraction are in and of themselves sinful.

I am the mother of one middle school aged son and one middle school aged daughter. My daughter wears a bikini. The other day we had a conversation about this topic. I assured my daughter that if someone looks at her and is sexually attracted to her she is not sinning. I assured my son of the same. I also assured them that if they were sexually attracted to someone they were not sinning. Sin enters the picture between our ears and in our hearts when we choose to objectify that person and look at them as something to be possessed. I will quote Rachel again here,

It is important here to make a distinction between attraction and lust. Attraction is a natural biological response to beauty; lust obsesses on that attraction until it grows into a sense of ownership, a drive to conquer and claim. When Jesus warns that “everyone who looks at a woman with lust has already committed adultery with her in his heart,” he uses the same word found in the Ten Commandments to refer to a person who “covets” his neighbor’s property. Lust takes attraction and turns it into the coveting of a woman’s body as though it were property. And men are responsible for their own thoughts and actions when this happens; they don’t get to blame it on what a woman is wearing.

I promised you I would get back to the tool thing so here we go…this part of the study was actually done on both male and female undergraduates and suggested that men are more likely than women to link women wearing bikinis with first person action verbs such as “push,” “handle” and “grab.” However when the men looked at fully clothed women they associated them with the third person forms such as she “pushes,” “handles” and “grabs.” The researches felt this implied that the men viewed women who were fully clothed as in control of their own actions. I just think well, duh. It is kind of obvious that heterosexual men would be more likely than women to see a woman in a bikini and think push, handle grab than they are to think those words about a woman in say a business suit. I don’t think this implies a dang thing about their motives or whether they will choose to sin or not.  Also, as far as I can tell in this portion of the study no questionnaire was given as to what sexist attitudes any of these men (or women for that matter) may or may not have had and so we do not get to know if there would be the same correlation as before with people’s preconceived attitudes about male and female roles/relationships and what they thought when presented with images of women in bikinis. I suspect there would be. Once again, just because one has a thought come to mind or a biological process kick in, does not mean that person, either the man who’s tool sector (see what I did there?) is kicking in or the woman in the bikini at the pool, is sinning. It just means they are attracted, they see something they want to touch. What seems to matter most (at least to me) is the attitudes they already brought to the table about the roles, relationships and motivations of men and women.

All that said, I think it is up to each woman whether she wears a bikini. Some women are comfortable in one and some are not. Here’s a fun little exercise. Let’s have a look at Romans 14 and how it might look in re to our current conversation…

As for the one who is weak in faith, welcome her, but not to quarrel over opinions. One person believes she may wear anything, while the other wears only what is “modest”. Let not the one who wears a bikini despise the one who does not, and let not the one who does not wear a bikini pass judgment on the one who does, for God has welcomed her. Who are you to pass judgment on the servant of another? It is before her own master that she stands or falls. And she will be upheld, for the Lord is able to make her stand.

One person esteems one bathing suit as better than another, while another esteems all bathing suits alike. Each one should be fully convinced in her own mind. The one who does wears the bikini, wears it in honor of the Lord. The one who wears, wears in honor of the Lord, since she gives thanks to God, while the one who does not wear, does not wear in honor of the Lord and gives thanks to God. For none of us lives to herself, and none of us dies to herself. For if we live, we live to the Lord, and if we die, we die to the Lord. So then, whether we live or whether we die, we are the Lord’s. For to this end Christ died and lived again, that he might be Lord both of the dead and of the living.

Why do you pass judgment on your sister? Or you, why do you despise your sister? For we will all stand before the judgment seat of God; for it is written,

“As I live, says the Lord, every knee shall bow to me, and every tongue shall confess to God.”

So then each of us will give an account of herself to God.

So to all my Jesus loving women friends out there (yes you!) rock that suit, bikini or not for you are beautiful and it doesn’t matter if the whole world knows it. Being attractive is not a sin. Judging your sister is. Being attractive does not cause sin any more than being hungry causes gluttony.  And to all my Jesus following male friends out there. Sexual attraction is not sin. Treating a woman as less than you is. Admiring beauty is not sin. Treating a woman as something to be possessed is.

BONUS CONTENT…

Hey, I just thought of this on my laundry folding break…

We don’t say:
The chef caused me to be a glutton, they are sinning by making the plates look so beautiful and the food taste so good.
They should have to make it less delicious and less appetizing so I won’t over eat.
The car manufacturer caused me to envy, they are sinning by making the cars too fast and stunning to look at. They should design uglier cars so I won’t envy.
The clothing store caused me to shoplift, they are sinning by setting the price higher than I can pay. They should lower their prices so I don’t steal.
He was working with his shirt off, he is sinning by being out where women can see him. He should put a shirt on so women don’t lust after him.

We do say:
Her dress is too short (or she is wearing a bikini), she is sinning by being too sexy. She should wear a longer skirt so men don’t sin.They did something I find annoying, they are sinning by causing me to get angry. They should stop doing that so I don’t lose my temper.

I wonder why this is? I guess that is fodder for another post.