The author says he’ll “never electrify the bedroom in the way our pornographic media culture broadcasts as the norm”. The media can show a lot, sometimes too much, but that doesn’t mean we don’t recognize when something isn’t real. For example, I love this youtube video (warning: mature, you can hear them) about lesbians watching lesbian porn. It’s hilarious and shows just how unrealistic pornography is. It also reveals how violent and degrading it can be (heels?! Really?!).
We hear too often how men are “like a switch”, and women are “like an oven”, but we must understand that not all people have the same sex drive. Sex is complicated and it depends on the individual. Sex is also about communication. So when the author problematizes the pressure that media places on sex, he’s mistaken if he thinks the problem is that electrifying the bedroom isn’t the norm. The problem is when they degrade people as sexual objects, and normalize unhealthy behaviors. Thankfully, the media can be good about this, but only because of the audience’s response. I was happy to see that there was such a backlash against Alice Eve’s undressing in Star Trek. Having Kirk sneak a peak perfectly demonstrates just what is going on when we exploit women in media, we’re condoning voyeuristic habits that doesn’t respect Starfleet members as people. I appreciated the director’s response that they’ll be smarter about these kinds of things in the future. It was funny to see the cut clip of Benedict Cumberbatch because it was unnecessary, and demonstrates the exploitation that keeps happening to women in films.
The author also links cohabitation with test-driving. I agree with problematizing the logic that one night stands leads to long term commitment. But cohabitating is not about allowing “someone into your life at the highest degree of vulnerability, and give them this priceless delicate gift without asking them to commit to you past tomorrow morning”. Nowadays cohabitation is recognized as legally binding (in Canada it’s after two years), just without the traditional venues. If they were to break up and weren’t able to do so amicably, they could still get lawyers and it’d be like any other divorce battles. The problem is that some Christians believe marriage is “sanctified by God” if it happens a certain way. What we miss is that certain traditions in marriage ceremonies are highly problematic. Do you know why the bride wears white? To loudly broadcast that they’re virgins. Do you know why the father walks his daughter down the aisle? To give her away. Why can only he give her away? Because traditionally, a woman is her father’s property until her rights are transferred to her husband. You can read more here.
What if I don’t want to be married before a minister? What if I don’t want to be “given away”, or even be married in a church? What if we just decided to be committed to each other without all the traditional pomp and ceremony, does that make our relationship less of a marriage because I didn’t wear a white gown, and he didn’t “receive” me from my father? The author is mistaking Christian traditions, which isn’t always right, with non-religious ones, which can offer a more egalitarian view on marriage ceremonies. As we shouldn’t be bound to all sex only being one kind of sex, we shouldn’t shackle marriage to one style. I’d suggest that traditional marriage ceremonies has too much politics and patriarchy to be taken seriously, and something more egalitarian should be practiced.
The author missed a beautiful opportunity to talk about love and soul mates because he was so focused on the disappointments marriage can bring. He also confuses Christian relationships with non-religious ones. Christian marriage and relationships is very different from non-religious dating. Christian relationships do not have pre-marital sex and are generally more like courtship than dating. Christian relationships also involve God. Their commitment isn’t only to each other, it’s also to God. This is why traditional weddings are done at Church, before a minister, and vows are exchanged before God. This is also why there’s so much commotion about this verse:
“For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, of which he is the Savior.”
The Bible is a handbook that instructs Christians on what a marriage should look like by how husband and wives should treat each other. Of course Christians try to negotiate what being the “head of a wife” means, or what “submitting” to your husband means, but this further demonstrates how different a Christian marriage is from non-religious ones. Some of us are trying to be feminists, but also good Christians, and wonder if that can even work. This is also why there can also be such abuse in Christian relationships, whether in marriage or in families, because the men and women are having a power-struggle that was cursed on them since the beginning (Genesis 3:16 ).
My Name is August 