Last week I attended a teen dating violence workshop. It scared me, even though I knew most of the information. Every time I hear things like this I get scared because I realize anew that the church is not doing its job to promote awareness. In reality, I do not see the church as much different from wider culture in this regard. Maybe I am wrong.
My first issue is what we are teaching young men. They are being told that their sexual desire cannot be helped; that this desire is so overwhelming that they will be unable to control it. Young men are taught that they are allowed to have a sex drive. A lot of things end up following this, but I do not believe that in the church I have heard anything different. While I think it is okay to teach young men that having a sex drive is healthy, I also think it is wrong to teach them that it is uncontrollable. I am married. My husband tells me it is controllable. I believe him.
My second issue is what we are teaching young women, which is much more under the table. Media and culture are teaching that women are sex objects. What women are good for is pleasing men. Again, this is not overt, but I think we can all agree that at least in the media, this is the dominant teaching. In the church we never say this out loud. But I think it is what is being taught, by action more than words. Young women are told to guard themselves and be extremely modest because young men cannot control themselves. Young women are taught how to say no and what to do if a young man attempts to engage in sexual activity with them. Young women are not being told to embrace their own sexuality and drive. Now, I agree that modesty is good teaching, I agree that we should teach young girls that they control what happens on and to their bodies. But I disagree with the teaching if it stops at the girls. Why aren't we teaching young men to not look at young women as sex objects? Shouldn't we be teaching young men that if a girl says no, it means no and that is final? Why are we teaching girls that it is their responsibility and theirs alone to remain pure? Therefore, if something happens, and people have sex or someone gets pregnant, or abuse happens, we blame the woman because the man couldn't control himself because his sexual desire was too great. I don't like this teaching and I think it is wrong. It makes me feel fairly sick.
We need to be teaching both genders what it means to be a healthy, sexual, faithful human being. We need to be teaching that both men and women have sex drives. God created us with them. We should be grateful for that. But we also need to be teaching healthy boundaries on both sides and calling all people to account for their actions. Abuse happens for a variety of reasons. The abuser may have never had good examples set for them, they may have grown up in an unhealthy family environment. The abusee may have never been taught a healthy self image, they may believe that they have no choice. They may be saying no, but not being heard. But no matter what, abuse is unacceptable and the victim should not be blamed.
There are a lot of other things about this that I am mulling over. Currently in the church there is the problem of spiritual authority. Pastors are actually sometimes telling women to go back to their abusive husbands because the husband is their authority and divorce is wrong. This is sick. A lot of aspects of this 'spiritual abuse' really bother me and I may address them later. But I think the real problem is what we say and when. From the beginning of life, we need to be teaching children healthy self-image and how God created all parts of their existence, even their sexuality. Sexuality has to stop being a dirty term in the church. End of story. And parents need to realize that if their children don't hear it from them, then they are hearing it at school, in the media, from their friends, from their games, from sports, from billboards, from church. Kids know more than we give them credit for. Let's treat them as though they can handle it because the truth is that the adults are often the ones who cannot handle the truth. Let's talk about it. If you disagree with me in any way I would be really interested because all of these thoughts are a work in progress. They are just things I have been mulling over since my workshop last week and I am wondering if they are true.
09 October 2007
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
Wow, it sounds like a powerful workshop experience. I've also often thought about these things. Imagine that.... I do think you're right. I've always wondered why we stick to patriarchal forms of sexuality explanations in the church. Well, I know why, but still, we are ALL responsible for our actions--male and female. I've often resented the "stay pure" talk I received as a girl. Its goal was a very subservient-minded, female-dependant purity. It didn't make much sense that I was to be the sole bastion of purity in my romantic relationships, and I resented that I had the same feelings but was the only one in the relationship that was supposed to control them actively. I would say the "church" did let me down. However, there were people within the "church" that did view equality within sexuality/responsibility as a good thing. If it wasn't for them, my life would have been very, very messed up, I think. Also, please don't read Lady in Waiting or anything by Ruth Graham if you're looking for an equal view of sexuality. They do have good insights...and they are as biased as anything. I've said enough and will now climb off this soap box.
Clarissa
Post a Comment