To review last time, the enablement of the base instincts and desire of women throughout society was discussed.
[26:06] They need each other, we can not live without men and women. The novel Lord of the Flies tends to be or we tend to think of it as people in isolation tend to turn into savages. What that book is really about is boys who are separated from adult supervision and the influence of women, girls, become savages. So men and women need each other, and we’re going to end up on that point later. They need to cooperate with one another.
Glenn Stanton likes the fictional Lord of The Flies as an example. However, what Stanton doesn’t see is that we are living in a real-life Lord of the Flies where women have literally become uncivilized savages. Yet Stanton refuses to see.
Stanton’s Views Simplified
We move on to the bulk of what Stanton is advocating in this talk. I’ll stay away from dealing with much of his “sources”, leaving that to people more versed if they want to contribute. As I understand, all of them have been discredited anyway. Even a cursory search of Sir Thomas Dale (Fact 11 & 12) proves Glenn Stanton to be quite wrong. Sir Thomas Dale did crack the whip, instituting the death penalty “for even minor offenses such as stealing grapes, killing chickens, and trading with Indians.” Hard, fast justice controlled things at Jamestown, not women.
But what I am interested in is addressing Stanton’s main arguments. Please feel free to watch the whole video to get the idea of what he is saying. I’ll distill his argument in this way:
[15:20] And that’s we’re going to talk about tonight. That marriage is a feminist institution. And of course, when I say feminist I mean that in the best sense of the word. It empowers the woman, that a married woman is the most powerful player in any society. She wields more power than anybody else.
[36:50] How do women regulate sexuality? They are the regulators of it. And that’s not a responsibility, it’s a privilege, as we’re going to see. Women regulate sexuality by determining which men will have access to sex, when and under what circumstances. Think about that. That power and that decision-making is the most powerful force in the universe. Human-wise.
So, Stanton alleges that women are the most powerful players in society because they control access to sex. Therefore, Stanton alleges that there is a sexual economy wherein women sell sexual access in exchange for good and services (or resources).
Sexual Economics – The Sexual Marketplace
[41:45] Brown’s key phrase “women being the limiting source”. It could also be phrased “women being the governing source”. Women control the sexual economy. Here’s this study, there’s this course of study or this area of study, sexual economics. It’s an interesting joining of words, but it’s very important, sexual economics. Economics is simply the exchange, the study of the exchange of goods. And at what rate and what price are they exchanged where both feel like they are getting a good deal. Sexual economics.
A quick search of “sexual economics” reveals that it is far from an accepted principle. Furthermore, it reveals the whole idea is a crack pot one from a human universal standpoint. But unfortunately, the idea has its roots about 500 years ago in the idea of traditional feminism. As described, you need a hook for men to get them to chase after women and offer themselves up on her altar as chattel.
That hook is sexual access. You stoke the lusts in men by painting sex as the be-all of existence, and the possession of the beauty as absolution for the sin of being born a man. You paint men as having the “the unrefined animalistic basic male nature” (47:36) that absolutely MUST be controlled. You even sexualize the culture, putting women out there in less modest clothing and increasing sexual exposure. So, falling in with tradition he chases after the beauty, willing to give anything and everything for her.
[46:03] So, how do women control the sexual economy. They run the cartel. They do. If the women come together and go “ladies, we got what they want, and they can’t get it anywhere else. We want to set this bar high.” and typically it’s at marriage, and guess what? If you set the bar high there, men will respond. They’ve been doing it for millennia. But if you lower the price, guess what? Men will be quite happy to pay that price. In the hookup culture, what we have today, here’s hamburgers, they cost a penny, but if you don’t have anything that’s fine too. Women giving sexuality away. Absolutely free, no strings attached, because they don’t understand who they are as women, and the power that they have.
The traditional feminist cost has typically been everything from a man. His soul, his life, his things, you name it. According to Stanton, this is the mistake women are making. Not that the whole sexual economics model could be flawed, but that women don’t know their own power.
Sex As A Commodity
Let’s dig deeper. If sex is exchanged for the perpetual provision of resources, and prostitution is “the act or practice of engaging in sexual intercourse for money”, then it seems Stanton is advocating for prostitution? It’s natural that Stanton might be confused, as prostitution is indeed the oldest profession and his sources will reflect that. Then as explained earlier, if the concept of sexual economics is a valid one, then prostitution is a valid concept as well. Yet the same traditional feminists sought to put limits on prostitution, pornography, and fornication. Could it be that they are trying to limit this sexual marketplace they have constructed? But what is this regardless?
Applying any market place concept to sex turns the female into a sexual commodity.
But to go on, I won’t refer to other sources first, but to Scripture.
Do not prostitute thy daughter, to cause her to be a whore; lest the land fall to whoredom, and the land become full of wickedness. (Leviticus 19:29)
They shall not take a wife that is a whore, or profane; neither shall they take a woman put away from her husband: for he is holy unto his God. (Leviticus 21:7)
For a whore is a deep ditch; and a strange woman is a narrow pit. She also lieth in wait as for a prey, and increaseth the transgressors among men. (Proverbs 23:27-28)
Marriage is honourable in all, and the bed undefiled: but whoremongers and adulterers God will judge. (Hebrews 13:4)
The message seems clear that God doesn’t think too highly of making sex into a commodity now does He? It sure seems that God wanted sex in the Biblical plan of marriage to just exist without it being something bought and sold. That the wife shouldn’t be playing prostitute with her own husband, as Focus On The Family and other groups continually encourage. As I wrote in addressing Dr. Mohler:
So we are taught by Mohler, if the man pleases her by following her direction, making her feel good, saying the right things to her, spending enough money on her desires, and generally doing everything she says, imagines, or desires (giving the perfect personal Jesus to her here on earth), then he is rewarded by sexual access from her.
Who Is Really A Woman’s Friend?
This view of sex as a commodity drives these things. Now what’s interesting is delving into the things you get in return for searching “sex is a commodity”. There’s much feminist (that “good kind of Stanton’s”) outrage to the “Economics of Sex” video. But there’s a few gems. In this publication “Do Women View Sex as a Commodity?”, the abstract itself is interesting:
That is, men were more likely to suppress female sexuality because they resisted female empowerment and automatically associated sex with money more than women did. It appears that women are not invested in sexual economics, but rather, men are invested in patriarchy, even when it means raising the price of sexual relations.
Men are driving this show, not women. When you put the prospect of sex up on a pedestal, don’t be surprised that the manipulated men are driving the concept more than women. This paper entitled “Conceiving of Sex as a Commodity:
A Study of Arrested Customers of Female Street Prostitutes” has another interesting sentence in the abstract:
Conceiving of sex as a commodity significantly predicted rape myth acceptance, attraction to violent sexuality, less frequent use of condoms while with prostitutes, support for prostitution, and the attitude that prostitution is positive for women. We argue that that conceiving of sex as a commodity has a number of negative implications for the men involved, their sexual partners, and for gender relations in general.
So it seems in the end that Glenn Stanton, Focus On The Family, and their ilk aren’t really being women’s friends by casting women into “Sexual Economics” and into a sexual market place. It seems also that God perhaps had it right in prohibiting prostitution, or a woman turning her sexuality into a commodity to be brought and sold. Women are better off when sex is simply a part of marriage, and men are better off when sex isn’t turned into a weapon against him in the name of controlling him in the marriage. Sex just is free and just…is in a healthy marriage. Finally (for this section):
[50:23] But it was the feminists that were supposed to make women happy. Giving themselves away sexually and competing on the man’s terms, and not marrying. And not requiring anything of the man. And guess what? Women’s happiness declined because there is a female nature that is elevated, strengthened when she gets what she wants from the sexual and emotional and romantic relationship. When she is giving hamburgers away for free or a penny, guess what? You as the business owner not so happy, this just isn’t working, I thought people would be happy getting free hamburgers and I thought my business would be great. Same thing with women. This is just not working.
Could it be possibly that the women were happier when they were controlled, and civilized, instead of them being unleashed feral savages? Could it be that like the prodigal son, they’re finding themselves in that field, feeding swine, and eating the husks of what they eat, and thinking that “patriarchy” isn’t so bad after all?
Could it be that as a part of that unleashing prompted by feminism that they’re finding that the sexual market exists, that beauty is a premium, and the ones that aren’t the most beautiful are finding that they have to lower their costs from everything to something where men will notice them? Could it be that this endless drive for beauty in women that drive them batty, and makes them unhappy stems from this sexual marketplace? When you set up a sexual marketplace, don’t be surprised when you find that there will be competition. The ones that don’t have the beauty will lower their prices so they will be selected. Hence the hookup culture.
Could it possibly be that the “Christians”, as Glenn Stanton says, really aren’t the women’s friends?