Quoting Quiverfull: Combating Pornography?

by Vaughn Ohlman of Persevero News

So the worldly social reformer is faced with trying to tell the women themselves not to act in demeaning ways. But let’s face it, they aren’t preaching to the choir. Like the issue of gun control it is the very people they want to reach that won’t be listening. Seriously, you are going to try to reach a porn star with the idea that what they are doing is demeaning? These people strip naked for a living!

And while stripping naked may be shameful, the women know full well that only certain women get invited to strip naked, or to pose in swimwear. They are typically given the number ’10′ and, at least  given the categories they are using to compare themselves with, they don’t think a ’10 is ‘demeaning’. A 9.5, sure. A 5 or a 2… definitely. But the girl who makes the modeling ‘cut’ is not the one who goes home in tears… however much she should be.

OK, so the world is nuts. We knew that. The problem is the church isn’t any better! Or not much. When the church isn’t parroting one of the world’s solutions, they are busy coming up with some super spiritual solutions… read your Bible more, pray, take cold showers.

And what they aren’t doing, indeed what they seem to be actively opposing, is following the actual, Scriptural, solution… indeed command… on this issue.

Because Scripture has not left us void in this area. Scripture has specifically told us what to do to combat the problem of pornography. Specifically, not buried in the midst of a vague passage on holiness. Pornography, as part of sexual sin, that is. “Because of ‘porninea’ (sexual sin),” the Scriptures say, “Let every man have his own wife, and every woman her own husband.” Seriously. That’s what it says. Oh, and it goes on to say that the wife must not deprive the husband, nor the husband the wife, of their sexual ‘due’… their body in bed. That to do so is fraud, and will tempt the spouse with… sexual sin.

But the church has other ideas. The modern American church, far from seeing sexual temptation as an indication that the young man is commanded to marry, sees it as an impediment to marry. Scripture says, “Because of porninea let every man have his own wife,” and the church says, “Except in case of a young man struggling with porninea, some men should marry.”

The church historical literally said that the young man struggling with fornication must marry, the church American says he may not. “Not to my daughter!” Where the church historical insisted on an immediate marriage for the person struggling with lust; the church American treats anyone (that would admit it) as a pariah, an outcast.

Comments open below

QUOTING QUIVERFULL is a regular feature of NLQ – we present the actual words of noted Quiverfull leaders and ask our readers: What do you think? Agree? Disagree? This is the place to state your opinion. Please, let’s keep it respectful – but at the same time, we encourage readers to examine the ideas of Quiverfull honestly and thoughtfully.

NLQ Recommended Reading …

Breaking Their Will: Shedding Light on Religious Child Maltreatment‘ by Janet Heimlich

Quivering Daughters‘ by Hillary McFarland

Quiverfull: Inside the Christian Patriarchy Movement‘ by Kathryn Joyce

 

About Suzanne Calulu
  • newcomer

    There is so much ick here I don’t even know where to begin. Thinking to just focus on the whole doling out women (and more specifically, unlimited access to the inside of their bodies) as the ‘cure’ for someone ‘struggling with’ pornography (which could mean everything from ‘someone who watches porn occasionally’ to ‘someone with extreme compulsive sexual habits’). If a woman wants to marry a particular man who consumes porn, it’s a non-issue. If a woman is shoved into a marriage with a man with serious sexual problems to be the sole receptacle of those sexual problems in their entirety, without even supporting her right to set limits on what he is allowed to do to HER body, that’s a grossly sick system.

    If the man ‘struggles with’ child pornography, do you propose the same solution? Do you really think assigning him a woman will combat the problem? Or does everyone draw straws to see whose child is to be the ‘cure’?

  • Joy

    A question for you, Mr. Ohlman…if a young man who struggled with fornication came to you and requested your daughter’s hand in marriage, what would your answer be? How comfortable would you be with the idea of this young man becoming father to your granddaughters?

  • http://twitter.com/TrollfaceMcFart Trollface McGee

    I love how a woman’s consent or personhood is completely absent from this entire discussion. Man’s lusting? Quick give him a woman. And who is objecting to this marriage? Not the woman to be married of course but her current owne…er father.

    • gimpi1

      I also wonder, has he ever noticed that married men and women view porn, cheat, and such. If marriage is the “cure” for “the world” being “nuts” it doesn’t appear to have a high success rate.

  • Lynn Grey

    I wonder if someone like Mr. Ohlman would be quite as forgiving if the situation was reversed. Would a young woman struggling with chastity be worthy of his son?

  • Kristen Brennan

    Leaving aside the incomprehensible trainwreck of the first few paragraphs, this guy is really set on the idea that men are entitled to wives and to complete sexual access to those wives. We saw a bit of that in the “True Love Waits” response, where he read a blog about how a woman gave up on waiting for a husband and turned her mind instead to waiting on God. His confusing response to that (which becomes less confusing if you see the spiritual coersion involved) is that women should marry any Tom, Dick, or Harry that comes their way so that they can “become perfect,” I guess with the implication that “true love” as most understand it is a myth. So, there’s a strike against the road block of a woman’s resistance. Now, with this strike against “the modern American church,” we get the message that even if a woman, her family, and her community think they have very good reasons to reject a particular man, he should be allowed to marry whomever he wants anyway. In fact, they are accused of impeding his spiritual growth if they don’t allow him his “due.”

    Meanwhile, it surprises no one that he has once again positioned himself as an expert on “the church historical” without providing any evidence to back up his claims.

    And as an interesting side note, he seems to live in a fantasy world where porn stars and swimwear models have awesome self esteem and never feel demeaned by their line of work. Interesting. Other than that, I really don’t know what he was trying to say nor how that bit of shaming connects in any way with his later assertion that porn addicts should get married right away. I guess if you follow that to its natural conclusion, it would mean that porn stars also should get married right away.

    I know he follows these posts, but I don’t know what I can say that might get through other than this: Men are not entitled to sex. Women are not entitled to sex. No one is ever entitled to sex and they should not be having sex with someone who doesn’t have a burning desire to be having sex with them.

  • Nightshade

    ‘But the girl who makes the modeling ‘cut’ is not the one who goes home in tears… however much she should be.’ Sez who? We could argue on and on about the damage done by pornography, but assuming that A. The woman is not being forced into it, B. Is getting paid enough to be worth what she does, C. Is not being harmed or otherwise abused in the process, I’m not going to tell her she should go home in tears (of shame, I presume). That’s just slut shaming and not acceptable to me…I know, porn stars are a fairly extreme situation, and the above conditions in many cases are not met (which changes the whole story IMO) but still!

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Suzanne-Harper-Titkemeyer/1605911351 Suzanne Harper Titkemeyer

    I think the next time I quote Vaughn on anything porn or sexual or modest related I’m going to have to rename his site Perverto News

  • Baby_Raptor

    Women should be shamed because they do things I don’t like! Obey me, because I can claim I’m an expert!

    Newflash, you sexist little twit: Women are people.I know that thought terrifies and threatens you, but that’s reality. Every time you try and shame us for not adhering to your purity BS, or you advocate completely erasing our autonomy, or you talk about how we’re supposed to be subservient because we’re inferior, all you do is show how pathetic you are and how much the thought of an independent, healthy woman makes you want to wet your pants.

    You’re not good. You’re not godly. You’re not big, or powerful, or honorable, or right. And one day, that fact is going to dawn on you, and it’s going to wreck your life, just like it does every other person who advocates this tripe. I hope for the sake of all your victims that this happens publicly. Karma can be a real ass.

  • http://www.facebook.com/retha.faurie Retha Faurie

    He sees pornography firstly as harlotry – illicit sex.

    But here is someone else explaining what it is:

    porn addictions can’t be fixed with more sex because the two things are not on the same line. A body and mind that’s hard-wired into porn is addicted because of the chemical dopamine release. Long term porn usage usually winds up with him watching more and more extreme stuff in order to get the same ‘kick’. After a while the man doesn’t physically respond to real sex anyway, it’s not stimulating enough for him.

    Physically, it a chemical addiction that is not solved by sex. Spiritually, it is usually an attitude of sinful lording fantasies: Most women in such material are treated as mere objects (and may be asked to act like they enjoy it, for the sake of the pornography). Real women, on the other hand, have needs of their own, and watching porn is a way of meeting your needs without caring about anyone else’s.

    Yes, the Bible say that having your own wife is better than sexual sin, and tells people to marry rather than do sexual sin. But the sensible application is not “make some female marry the sexual sinner” (or, for that matter “get some man to marry the female sinner”) but: “Sexual sinner, rather become someone worth marrying.”

    There are many texts on handling sin: Asking forgiveness, practicing self-control, getting the Spirit to help with it, and marriage cannot be proclaimed as if it alone is the solution.

    Pornography, for that matter, cannot be seen only as a sexual sin, but also an addiction, and most likely a sinful desire to usurp authority and an unwillingness to care about the needs of another. I once wrote something that is related to that:

    http://biblicalpersonhood.wordpress.com/2013/04/11/is-this-the-worst-kind-of-husband-in-the-world/

    • persephone

      This is the same reason married men vo to prostitutes, the men pay for it and they don’t have to worry about the women’s needs. But this seems to be the same attitude underlying fundamentalism, that men should not have to worry about women’s needs, that women should efface themselves so completely that men do not have to even think about anything having to do with women and the home.