We had an amazing Theology in the Raw podcast with Preston Sprinkle.
It dropped on Thursday, but I’d like to tell you about it, because we’ve never had this opportunity before to answer (friendly!) pushback about our views on modesty and consent.
We were on the podcast talking about our new book She Deserves Better, which drops on April 18!
Usually when we’re on other people’s podcasts, we just explain what we say in our book. But Preston was really pushing back, talking about how boys DO have higher sex drives, and girls need to understand that what they wear DOES influence how men look at them, because men are creepy–and Rebecca especially answered so well.
Sometimes you may read something we write, and think, “but I know my husband will never listen to this,” or “but I keep hearing all these objections in my head.” I think Preston gave voice to many of those objections, and then we were able to dismantle them. By the end I think Preston even agreed with us!
So it was almost more of a debate, and a really educational one at that.
The really good stuff starts around the 30 minute mark and goes to the end, but the whole thing is great:
Some of the great lines that we got into the podcast
I’m making graphics of these to go up on my Instagram stories later today, but just some of the great lines that Rebecca especially said:
“Sex drive has nothing to do with someone’s ability to respect consent. Sex drive does not make it more likely that someone will have to rape you.”
“We can’t add caveats to boys’ ability to respect consent. There are no hormone levels that make one commit rape.”
“Too often we tell our girls that it’s harder for boys to stop, and boys have to learn to respect consent. But our daughters are not object lessons. They are not learning opportunities. Our daughters are not homework. They are not the ones who are supposed to teach the boys around them to respect women. It is not our daughter’s responsiblity to help a boy learn to honor her ‘no’.”
“The idea that ‘boys are just like this’ and ‘boys can’t help themselves’ breeds sexual entitlement.”
Let’s look a little more closely at some of the issues raised in Theology in the Raw.
Preston Sprinkle said some interesting things that align with what many evangelical writers and pastors teach:
- boys have an incredibly high sex drive that girls will never understand;
- girls are more at risk when they show some skin, because men will ogle them;
- girls need to understand that boys find it really, really hard to stop.
Many of these things mirror the teachings that our survey of 7000+ women for She Deserves Better found were harmful.
Dr. Laura Robinson, who just received her Ph.D. in theology from Duke University, and podcaster on New Testament theology, wrote some really interesting, long Twitter threads about the podcast:
- Laura Robinson’s thread #1: A closer look at modesty
- Laura Robinson’s thread #2: A closer look at consent
I’m going to pull out a couple of quotes from each of the threads (they are really long, so I can’t quote them all here) to get at some of the issues.
I think the thing Preston is trying to explain is that he feels uncomfortable when people find his daughters attractive, which is a normal dad feeling and I don’t blame him for it. I just think he’s mixed up his discomfort with the feeling that this must be a reason to act on women’s clothes.
So here is my objection to this: Let’s say Preston is right that if a woman is covered up, men aren’t going to look at her. My response to that is: who cares?
It doesn’t make women safer. As 1/4 women can tell you, being covered up doesn’t protect from rape. There’s no correlation between looking sexy and being raped. Toddlers get raped. Elderly women get raped. Women get raped in sweatpants and prison uniforms. It doesn’t matter.
I get the impression that Preston has a hard time believing this but this is widely, widely attested. The reason why we say “what was she wearing” is a bad question about rape isn’t that it’s politically incorrect. It’s that it literally doesn’t matter.
A Christian might say, “Well, if a man looks at you and lusts, he commits adultery in his heart.” Man, that sounds serious. It also sounds like it’s not my problem. Jesus agrees with me – if your eye causes you to sin, tear it out and throw it away. Your problem, not mine. If you stole someone’s wallet while I was in a train car with you, I’d laugh you out of the room if you told me that I should have noticed and prevented it so you wouldn’t feel bad. I don’t see why this is any different.
****
But I think Preston has a hard time believing it doesn’t matter because it’s so baked into church culture that it MUST matter. It HAS to matter that a man looking at a woman’s butt is really important, because everything at church has taught us that it’s really important!
It’s not. It’s not important. If she’s in danger, it’s not the pants. If he’s in danger, it’s still not the pants. It’s not the pants. The pants don’t matter. In fact, it may be a totally frivolous interaction that two healthy adults never think about again, if they did at all.
And here’s Thread #2:
Becca tells a story of a woman who was date raped when a man constantly pushes her boundaries. At a certain point, she rationalized that she’d let him get to the point where he couldn’t stop, and stopped trying to escape. He raped her.
Preston is confused. By this story. Doesn’t that prove that the guy couldn’t stop?
Becca, clearly miffed, says no, of course it doesn’t prove that. Of course the man could stop. If a rabid raccoon had jumped in the car and attacked him, he would have presumably stopped trying to rape this woman.
Preston keeps arguing: isn’t it more difficult for him to stop? Men have a higher sex drive. To be clear: the “stopping” that Preston is asking about is “stopping yourself from raping someone.” Becca points out that sex drive has nothing to do with the ability to honor consent.
***
He says he has to be careful with his language, as though the way he’s phrasing this is the problem. It’s not.
He keeps going back to the fact that men have a higher sex drive, which of course means that they don’t have a right to rape, but they also are more tempted sexually.
***
There’s a move evangelical men make a lot when they’re talking about pastoral sexual abuse or rape that involves coercion by non-physical means where they’re trying to find this elusive “third thing” between rape and sex. There’s rape (man forces woman), there’s sex (everyone wants it), and there’s this thing in the middle where a situation just gets out of control, who can say what really happened.
Okay, let me be clear about this.
THERE IS NO THIRD THING, PRESTON. There’s no Diet Rape! There is no situation where someone has sex with someone else against their will and there’s blame to go around! There’s no situation where someone doesn’t consent to sex but wasn’t raped!
There is sex, and then there is rape. If it’s not consent, then it’s rape. A rapist who is really into the rape he is committing is still a rapist. This does not require qualification.
***
So let’s take this to “it’s innately harder for men to stop themselves from assaulting women than the other way around.” If I find out something is innately harder for you than it is for someone else, my instinct is to be patient with you and give you as many chances as you need.
This is (and Preston agreed) the exactly wrong message men and women need to get about *consenting to sex.* You don’t need to be patient with yourself if you find yourself not respecting boundaries – you need to get your act together.
You don’t need to be patient with people who don’t respect your boundaries – you need to get away from them.
The second thread especially is really insightful, and includes takes from her husband who didn’t grow up in evangelical spaces. Also, her conclusion is spot on.
So, please, listen to the podcast and the pushback!
And then read Laura’s takes on it, which summarize it well.
I was so glad that Preston gave us this valuable opportunity. He wasn’t afraid to have a real debate, and he gave voice to what so many are thinking, and allowed us to show how we would answer it.
It’s even a good podcast to listen to with your teenagers–boys or girls–so that you can talk through issues of consent and modesty.
And then, of course, remember that in She Deserves Better we give you role playing ideas, scenarios you can talk through, and more to make sure that your daughter has a firm understanding of consent, because, as Laura said, there is no Diet Rape.
What did you think? Did you listen to the podcast? Why is it so hard to understand that rape is not about sex drive? Let’s talk in the comments!
Thanks so much Sheila and Rebekah you both were great! I listened to this podcast twice to get a better understanding and like I have been told for so long in purity culture. That modesty message, there is so much guilt and shame built into it. This podcast really helped clear up
So much faulty teachings that I kept hearing as a woman. Your changing the church and the world! Keep on!
Thank you, Laura. Thank you, Rebecca and Sheila.
Love, Kay (Yes, that Kay)
I have so many things I want to say in response to this episode but am struggling to gather my thoughts. Because honestly, I am angry. So, so angry. At Preston. I am not convinced he gets it. At all.
For now, I guess I want to mention that Preston’s logic is not merely dangerous for girls but for BOYS too. “It was too hard to stop” will NOT hold up in court. Reject this line of thinking immediately. The ONLY option is “You must respect consent or you could go to jail.” Because if you can’t be trusted to not rape someone, then you shouldn’t be allowed to have access to the public.
This is NOT normal behavior, Preston. DO NOT NORMALIZE THIS.
Thank you for pointing this out. No rapists have ever even tried
to use the blue balls defense in court cause they know it won’t fly. (Can you even imagine it? “Oh, come on, [male] judge, you know how it is.” No, the way all rapists defend themselves is by saying that she wanted it, that she consented, and later changed her story. They KNOW consent is important. I just wish Preston did. I have a lot more to say about that podcast, but that will have to wait till after work.
“But all that money was just sitting there in the bank, and I like money SO MUCH! If they didn’t want me to take it, they shouldn’t have had it all together in one place like that.”
Except lots of judges are way more sympathetic to men’s plight than women’s rape. It’s easy to find examples of rapists getting very light sentences because the judge blames the woman for her own rape. She was wearing jeans, he’s a good person generally, nonsense like that. It SHOULDN’T hold up in court, but sometimes it does.
Agree that we need to press on those who make the “but higher sex drive!” argument and respond with “so what?” Imagine someone is applying for a job, or going before a parole board. Would they say that their sex drive is so high that they wouldn’t be able to stop themselves from raping someone? Or would they realize that the implication is that if this is the case, they can’t ever be trusted around anyone and may need to be locked up.
Could you please speak more about the damage to female libido when an orgasm isn’t reached on her first sexual experience. I would also appreciate any resources that could help increase libido. I’ve been married 36 years with a mostly satisfying sexual relationship. Recently it has been almost impossible for me to experience pleasure. Thank you for any insight that might be helpful.
Rape is **absolutely** entitlement. It is believing that “My desire to continue this sexual activity trumps her desire to stop it.”
Exactly! It’s the very definition!
I just finished listening to that podcast. Wow! Even beyond the specific crucial message you were teaching, it could be part of a master class on how to engage with someone in debate. Too often, especially with social media, we either engage with people who already share our views or we jump on people at the first sign that they aren’t perfectly in step with the approved views. This was an honest conversation. Pushback, even if it makes us cringe, is part of that and is somewhat necessary because without it, the other person isn’t working through their views and objections. I noticed that there were some parts where Preston was going on about boys having higher sex drives where you let him express his thoughts and sort of just stared as he was spluttering through, before then challenging and correcting some of what he was saying and getting him to really think it through. Initially, it takes more time but doing that ultimately works better because he leaves the conversation having already worked through his objections.
Why not just flat out say, “In some cases, not only is a man raping a woman morally acceptable, but he’s actually required to rape her”?
I think that one of the issues with consent is that BOTH parties need to feel that the other party will listen and honor their wishes.
For the men, I have seen some half joking ideas that both parties sign a physical document that they consent to acts up to a certain point. This might not be a horrible idea since it would clearly state expectations and could be used later if one party breaks the agreement.
This is where many people get into trouble, not just in dating but in relationships in general. Unstated expectations.
Jim, you’re ALLOWED to break the agreement. She’s allowed to CHANGE HER MIND AT ANYTIME. If you start, and she says, “wait, no, stop,” you have to stop, even if she initially said she was up for it.
Sheila,
I agree that EITHER party is allowed to change their mind, but it must be at the moment. Timing, clear communication and honoring one’s choice is important.
There have been cases where a women will claim that they were assaulted days after because they regret what happened when they consented at the time.
It then turns into a he said/she said which does a dis-service to those that are victims of assault.
Jim, you don’t know what happened. Do you have any idea of trauma? Many women think they consented because they were aroused, and only later realized they hadn’t. When you are raped, it’s very, very confusing and horrifying. Many women can’t put words to it for days afterwards. To assume that this means they merely regretted it is wrong.
Sheila,
You don’t know what happened either. You are showing your bias to ‘believe all women’ even though there are document cases of women crying assault when they regret an interaction.
I understand and agree that if you are assaulted that it is confusing, traumatic, and difficult to process. But that is why these accusations must be treated with the utmost care.
The important thing is that if there are going to be charges made that will have serious consequences for the accused, there must be evidence to show their guilt. If they are proven guilty, lock them up and throw away the key.
However, at least here in America, you are supposed to be considered and treated as innocent until proved guilty.
But Jim, how do you prove guilt when it’s a he said/she said? Do you know how hard that is to do, when people (as you have shown here) are quick to disbelieve women? When a man can just say, “she consented but changed her mind”? The fact is that it’s extremely hard to prove rape, which is why less than 1% of rapists end up in jail.
That’s why it’s so vitally important to stop teaching the tropes that lead to rape. It’s so hard to prosecute; so we simply must stop spreading messages that make rape more common. That’s what I’m trying to do. You may want to go back and look at your comments and see how you have shared several rape myths right now–like you can give a blanket statement for consent beforehand, or that it’s so common for women to take back consent retroactively.
Do you know how few people report rape because they know what it will do to them? False accusations are actually very rare. Not saying they don’t happen. But women rarely willingly put themselves through this agony for no reason, when they’ll be disbelieved and mocked so easily.
Sheila,
Are you accusing me of being a rape apologist? That is absolutely disgusting! If that happened to my wife, sister, daughter, or any women that I care about, I would want the perpetrator to be punished to the fullest extent of the law, if anything I think that sentencing for rape is overly lenient, especially with repeat offenders.
But your response to me and others, mostly men shows why those that don’t agree with you 100% should not be involved and are not welcome on this platform. This is honestly no better than what you accuse FotF of being.
When you don’t have an argument you go to name calling and DARVO. It is ironic considering that you talked about it last week.
1. Deny – You appear to deny that false allegations happen and that asking for evidence should not be needed to prove guilt. An accusation is all that is needed.
2. Attack – You attack me for saying that I do not understand trauma. My follow up statement shows that I do.
3. Reverse Victim and Offender – You accuse me and anyone else that call for a balance of the rights of the accuser and the accused that we are rape apologists. I thought that we all wanted men and women to be treated fairly and equally?
I won’t be surprised if this comment is moderated since I starting being moderated as soon as I started commenting.
You do not appear to want to have various voices and opinions here.
You are under moderation because you are pushing rape myths here and on other posts you posted incel talking points.
People who do that generally get on moderation.
Jim. I am not a woman – ok obvious fact. Do you know what happened to me? I was coerced into touching another older (5years older)boys penis when I was 7 years old. You might argue I did it willingly if you knew the story. The truth is I did it so he wouldn’t get beat up by his older brother so he said would happen. Do you know when I actually told someone about that? Not until I was 30 years old. So you know the effect that had on me? I have had a lot of hell in my life for that choice Jim. Am I lying because I regret what happened? So why do they not report it for days and years and very long time? BECAUSE IT HURTS. IT IS SHAMEFUL. Why? Because the very thinking you are displaying here. While there may be the documented case that some women lie for regret or attention do you really think thats the majority? That is going to be the basis of your argument? A few people lie so we assume they all do? NO Jim. This thinking is the very discussion that we are having here today. Guy in podcast was essentially pushing back that because the world is a dangerous place for a woman and he has witnessed men lust all men lust and that we need to set up the world for the woman to keep that from happening to her by making it her fault and telling her to not dress a certain way. I was in my pajamas. I was 7. Is it ok if I change my mind?
Phil, I’m so sorry. Thank you for being so vulnerable, and for shedding light on how many male victims of child sexual abuse there are. I love your conclusions here exactly (and your passion!)
Yes, Jim, the things you are saying are rape apologies. And you are engaging in DARVO. And. “Innocent until proven guilty” applies to a court of law. You are not a court of law. You don’t have to have evidence or “beyond a reasonable doubt” to believe a victim.
You probably really believe that you think rape is disgusting and reprehensible. But the things you are saying indicate you don’t believe victims. If your wife, daughter, etc told you they were raped would you say these things to them? Would you ask for evidence? What if she were too traumatized to say anything for days, months, or years and the evidence was gone? Would you refuse to believe them without evidence that would stand up in court? Do you see the problem now?
Jim,
Trauma is messy and complicated. Sheila spoke to that a bit, and Phil below gives a heart-breaking example of the difficulties that it can bring and the time it takes to process. The reality is that only about 1-3% of accusations are false, but to hear people talk, you would think it was the majority of accusations.
Let me ask you something: if a woman has a sexual encounter that she consents to, and later regrets it, what is it that make her regret it? Regret is coupled with shame. If she ashamed, why would she say anything at all. She can just quietly move on. If she wants to claim that she it was rape, when she really consented, what does she gain? She gains mockery, speculation, and a spotlight into her life. She gains disbelief and dismissal. Why would someone willingly put themselves through that for a lie? Some people might, but again, I would guess that the percentages of that is extremely low, kinda like the percentages of false accusations.
This is a part of a larger conversation around how some people can appear to consent, but it’s to avoid other consequences or actions, they don’t feel like they can so no, and there is a lot of coercion. And when a man says that he is too turned on to stop, well that is coercive. What’s the name for that again?
Gah. I’m fired up. Lots of typos, but I think my point is clear.
Phil, I am so sorry that you went through that. I hope that you have been able to work through the trauma.
A – thanks for the note. I have been working through it for the last 43 years. By the grace of God I have Grace (that’s my wife). Through the hard work I have done and with the grace of Grace we have gotten through to the other side. Today we have peace and I am so proud of the family that we have built even through some tough times. We are on the upper side of the kid life 18,15,12. So there is some work left to be done. Here is where We are at: We have a relationship with God with a focus on Jesus, My wife and I have a rockin marriage and we have a family that loves each other. Why am I here? Well I came to get above and that worked out lol so along the path I got above I learned about the bad messages that are out there in the church and how they harm women and quite frankly I participated in that bad message in many ways…so because I owe an amends to women and because it is my duty to God. I stand here 4 Jesus and Women. 😁
And lets not forget how men are taught that clothing gives consent. Or that any friendly interaction on her part should be interpreted as a proposition.
Look, if he guesses that she wants it, and then later she says it wasn’t consent, does that mean she changed her mind? Or did he guess wrong?
Comment was meant as a reply to the poster named “A”
Bernadette: “clothing gives consent”
As in, the way she was dressed, she was asking for it?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JO-HI1hGcpM
Sometimes I really like the BBC
Phil: I’m so glad that you have Grace and have experienced grace. I am so glad that you are here! It is honestly refreshing and healing for a man to engage in these conversations in a positive way and to see the damage that has been done. These messages don’t just harm women, they harm men too.
Bernadette: Yes to the clothing. Also, being friendly can be consent. Or going on a date, or any number of things. It’s an entitlement mentality which is about power and control at its core.
Here’s an article that compiles multiple studies on the prevalence of false accusations from the National Sexual Violence Resource Center.https://www.nsvrc.org/sites/default/files/Publications_NSVRC_Overview_False-Reporting.pdf
Ack, posted in the wrong place! The above was in response to Jim.
What I would say to Preston Sprinkle if I had access: Ok, let me concede your point for a moment, that men have higher sex drives than women and men are stronger than women. (Not wholly accurate, but I’ll concede it for a moment.) So what? What does that mean? That it’s ok for some men to rape some of the time? Think this through, Preston. Follow it to its logical conclusion. You’re saying that sometimes men can’t help ignoring a woman’s “no”, her wishes about what happens to her own body. Preston, regardless of sex drive levels, all men are capable of respecting other people’s autonomy and wishes. If he refuses, and pushes a woman past her desired boundaries, it’s not because of his sex drive. It’s because he feels entitled to put his penis in a vagina. And the church is complicit in making men believe this, as your input in this exchange exhibits.
My daughter recently told me that one thing she loves about her current relationship, is that if he proposes sex, and she says no thanks, his reply is simply “OK”. No pressuring, no whining, no pouting, no forcing. Just OK. And I have to say, that sounds positively lovely. (fwiw, my daughter and her boyfriend are not believers, despite their mothers’ best efforts.)
His argument is also a marital r*pe apologetic. Conceding all his points, what changes after the wedding? Do the vows make him suddenly honor her consent? (Too often they do the opposite) Does the ring lower his sex drive? (Of course not)
As much as he wants to think telling his girls that men are dogs & you should be scared to get in a car w/one keeps them safe. If he would think past preserving her for the wedding night, he would see that it doesn’t protect her at all for the rest of her life! The most it could hope to do is keep her a virgin for her husband & it fails miserably at that!
I am incensed at how harmful these teachings are proving to be. Proven by Bare Marriage’s research and still the patriarchy won’t yield!
Agreed. My ex husband married me because he thought being able to have sex “legally” would help him stop using porn. Even though I wasn’t “his type”, and my mom didn’t age beautifully. (You know the trope about how you can tell what your girlfriend will look like as she ages by looking at her mom.) Imagine his surprise when I didn’t want sex every single time he did. And when I had thoughts, feelings, beliefs, desires, wishes, etc that differed from his. This thinking might keep people virgins til the wedding night (sometimes), but it doesn’t make for good marriages.
I can personally attest to how refreshing it is to have a “no” be met with a simple “ok” (especially after that was not the case in a past relationship).
Bare Marriage team: “If our goal is to raise girls who are safe… one of the best ways to get there is to help them have a voice… They need to know that God made them in His image in as much as He made the boys in His image… They need to be able to feel their worth because when they feel their worth, they will be safer! Because the biggest thing that leads to girls not being safe is that girls make poor decisions because they don’t think they’re worth more and so we need to help our girls know they’re worth more and that means we need to give them a voice.”
Had I felt I had worth, I do think I would have made much better decisions and wouldn’t have gone through the misery and struggles I have for decades now. Your message is what I needed badly growing up. I have bought She Deserves Better. Once I read it, I imagine I will be gifting it to many friends with girls! Thank you for helping bring healing to my inner child (as someone else described it in comments a while back!) Here’s hoping the next generation has less to heal from and can focus on God all the more instead of that time spent on damage control!
I think Preston is fearful for his daughters so he is trying to control what he “can” to feel less out of control. Keep his daughters far/safe from a man’s sex drive and they won’t get raped in his mind’s eye. If rape isn’t about sex drive, then it’s an unknown to him and he feels powerless to stop it so he feels more empowered by adherence to it being about sex drive.
Nessie: ” If rape isn’t about sex drive, then it’s an unknown to him and he feels powerless to stop it so he feels more empowered by adherence to it being about sex drive.”
I think that you have hit on something quite huge here.
Good men don’t get rape. Just like good men don’t get abuse.
When talking about abuse, many a good man has made the mistake of saying/believing that it’s never right to hurt a woman. But they understand what it would take to make them what to hit a woman and decide that any woman that gets hit probably ‘did the thing’ that they shouldn’t have done that got them hit. They don’t understand the abuser mindset.
So also, talking about rape. She must have ‘done the thing’ in order to be raped. Was it what she wore? Or was she just being such a tease, cruelly leading him on? Living in a rape culture as a man with daughters has got to be scary.
It’s taking a long time to expose rape culture in the Church.
It is taking a long time indeed!
Your last paragraph doesn’t make sense to me. Two different things are going on maybe: Preston wants his girls safe from r*pists AND he feels more empowered by r*pe being about sex drive.
How does it being linked to high drive & not a changeable mindset (entitlement) keep his daughters more safe? Does that make sense to you? Can you explain if you are seeing it in a different way than me? Thanks!
Taryn-
Hey, I’ll try. My brain is sometimes like a pinball machine, haha.
My thought was if Preston believes a higher sex drive may lead to rape, then he can theoretically control that situation (prevent it) by making his daughters appear unattractive which would reduce a man’s sex drive being aimed at his daughters (thus prevent their rapes). The point being no, it doesn’t make sense. But if he can subconciously trick himself into thinking it is that, he won’t be as scared all the time over his daughters potentially being raped.
(My theory of) his reasoning:
-Rape happens because of sex drive (which is increased by attractively dressed female).
-Neutralize/prevent this by making daughters dress unattractively (men’s sex drive will be decreased regarding them).
-Daughters won’t be raped.
-I’ve controlled the situation by safeguarding my daughters, hence I have regained power of this situation (fearing my daughters will be raped.)
He may feel that sex drive is an easier beast to manage and get under control on the whole (because he feels it falls on women to lessen men’s sex drive via clothing), versus male entitlement which is about how a species thinks and feels vs. “simply” controlling what girls wear. Hence feeling more empowered if it is sex drive driven vs. male entitlement driven.
If that doesn’t actually help, then that’s totally on me and maybe someone else can help explain my thoughts better worded? 🙂
Okay, thanks! I do get it better now. I don’t think that’s great reasoning, but I think I understand now.
Oh golly, I don’t think it’s great reasoning either (I think it’s absolute rubbish!), but considering he didn’t really want to accept that rape isn’t about sex drive, this theory was my best guess.
I don’t understand why the concepts and conclusions Sheila and team have shared are so elusive or unbelievable to some people! I just ponder theories and ideas because if I (or someone else) hit on one that rings true somehow for someone, maybe it changes the conversation in such a way that others will finally “get” it.
That’s a good summary of how many men feel I think!
I also very much appreciated the conversation you had with Preston.
As a man with three daughters, he had a vested interest in the conversation. As a man deeply entrenched in the “traditions of men” teaching on keeping our daughters safe, he did struggle, very much, with the paradigm shift presented by “She Deserves Better” and your conversation with him.
It felt as though he wanted there to be a better message for his daughters, but he truly struggled with believing that there was a better message that could actually work in our culture and with the way men think/act/are.
Maybe if they think the messages that are less harmful to girls in all the ways Bare Marriage points to won’t work in this culture w/the way men act, they could try changing the culture & the way men act?!? But, no, couldn’t do that.
Men just have high testosterone and will never change, best not to try. Also, our culture is perfect, or it would be if everyone would just join us in God’s own Christian patriarchy where abuse never happens & marital rape isn’t a thing (b/c we ignore it!).
I’m getting sarcastic b/c I’m so mad, but I really do think their patriarchal beliefs are limiting the kinds of ideas they can even conceive might work. Like you said, “traditions of men.” Until they can believe women are actually equal to men & shouldn’t bear consequences of those w/more social power, they will keep trying to control girls instead of teaching boys.
One other thought struck me. Preston mentioned that he had done some research on LGBT relationships. As a man, does he feel a need to avoid doing anything that might tempt another man and to have boys taught this message? Or on the flip side, if some men believe that someone with a high drive “can’t” stop, does this contribute to homophobia and violence against gay men – because straight men fear being treated as they have been taught that women will be treated?
I really liked Laura’s threads! They were so much of what I was thinking about the podcast. I put a long rant on the FB post for this essay about how angry I am that the teachers of these messages just don’t care about women. Aunt Matilda was right, to these people, marriage is just legalized r*pe!
But here, I wanted to bring up something else from the Twitter thread where Laura was talking about Preston making so much room for the high testosterone potential r*pist. While I think he was doing that & his intent doesn’t matter as far as the harm he is causing, I don’t think that is what *Preston* thinks he is doing. And I’m pretty darn sure he would not agree that he is making any of his arguments for the PURPOSE of helping men get away w/r*pe.
I think he is naturalizing the high sex drive makes it harder for men to stop idea to give the men who do stop more credit. Laura talked about it being a sympathy play. Keeping the bar all the way on the floor makes the men who can clear it look better in comparison. He still wants the men who don’t clear it to have consequences & for everyone to see them as bad guys, but “can’t you women see how hard the guys barely stepping over it w/out tripping had to fight against our hormones?” “Give us cookies if we only harass you, but don’t rape you.”
So even though he is still being misogynistic and perpetuating r*pe culture, that half-step removal in his mind is enough for him to see himself as a good guy who doesn’t condone r*pe. But to me it highlights how all men benefit from misogyny as long as they aren’t siding completely w/women & girls to say r*pe culture is wrong. Harassment is unacceptable! Men should be expected to treat everyone w/respect & honor boundaries no matter what!
Anyway, I’m not sure what the point of me trying to nuance this is except that I think it pretty well encapsulates what a lot of these guys go thru in their heads to say such nasty, harmful stuff & still think they are decent people. I don’t think we’ll get them to cop to being straight up r*pe apologists, but maybe by understanding their mental gymnastics we can get them to admit the lesser evil & work from there to show how it’s still harmful & needs to change? Maybe? Can we hope? Otherwise, I’m pretty okay w/just burning it all down & letting these teachers/authors do their own work rebuilding from the rubble.
I hear you, Taryn! I think that’s an interesting idea–that they benefit because anything short of rape is seen as something to be grateful for. That’s super scary!
So, under that logic, I should be given kudos for not robbing the local bank, even though we have financial needs. “Good job for not robbing the bank,” said no one, ever. You don’t get brownie points for doing the basic human expectations.
It’s pretty similar to the Dennis Prager commentary on “thanking your husband just because he didn’t go out and cheat on you today.”
Basic human decency isn’t even considered.
Here is what I came up with from listening to the podcast. Preston understands there is a problem. We all know the problem just as he explains. There are men who cant control themselves. What I heard in his line of questioning is that he wants to blame someone. So it has to be the woman or the man. That is the ROOT message we are taught. Blame someone. So if you are a man who cant control yourself who are you going to blame? Thats the message we all know. And the woman is the fall out. HOWEVER! Its not the man or woman we are to blame. IT’S THE FREAKING MESSAGE(s) we have been taught. The correction to the message is to rebalance the equation. Due to the large imbalance of the equation, the first correction is that women are not at fault for this wrong message. The second message is that we need to teach both men and women the correct message. AND for a time until the equation is balanced (if ever) the first message has to be conveyed LOUDLY so the second correct message can be delivered.
I’m starting to think that part of the challenge in these discussions is due to differing definitions of rape.
Maybe too many ___ (Evangelicals/Christian men/pastors—insert relevant group here) have a knife-blade narrow definition of rape—violent, back-alley, strangers.
So, they overlay that definition on scenarios that are presented to them, and it doesn’t compute. The teen girl in the back of the car with her teen boyfriend of several months—and she changes her mind—that doesn’t fit the definition. But neither does it fit the idea of a joyous union between a married couple. So, it’s not rape (by their definition). But they also don’t have another word for it—because a perfectly accurate one already exists in the English language: rape.
This likely also attributes to the lack of understanding when saying anything about rape culture. Of course no decent person is for rape. But what about all the coercive but not violent, power dynamics at work, or unloving demands between spouses? These exist—in some minds—between enthusiastic consent and rape.
Maybe we need to start with a solid working definition of rape and progress from there.
Great thoughts! I completely agree. When there’s no consent, it’s rape. And if she can’t freely say no, then she can’t consent either.
Amazing how you managed to handle this Steve Arterburn/Gary Thomas concoction with such poise. I had to pause it for a while at 50:40 when Rebecca said she was a curvier teenager than others her age and he responded with “Pervier?” and then laughed. I watched it on YouTube, so seeing his face made it worse than if I was just listening. Even if he did genuinely mishear “curvy” as “pervy” (which in itself says a lot!), the polite response would have been to ask the speaker to repeat herself, not to repeat the word and laugh. You were both amazing in just ignoring it and moving along.
The Starbucks story is made up or it was his particular group of friends ogling the woman in yoga pants. We’ve all been to Starbucks, they’re all full of yoga pants, no one has ever seen the entire coffee shop collectively ogle any yoga pants.
His disdain for peer-reviewed research is particularly disturbing. He literally said that he rolls his eyes at it. This is prefaced, at 1:08:28, with “I’m just trying to acknowledge the biological realities of some difference in male and female sexuality.” No one is denying the difference, buddy! We can orgasm successively and you go flaccid after just one, that is a HUGE difference. And somehow the lack of refractory period does not turn us into the kind of perverts that you portray men to be. Ugh, and the way he casually mentions his “research” as if anything he’s done can compare to Sheila’s actual research or will ever be acknowledged by any actual universities or medical bodies. Oh the confidence of a mediocre white man. And on the topic of actual research, I wish you’d countered his “lesbian deathbed,” which is a total myth based on one single study from the 1980s, with the fact that lesbians have no orgasm gap.
Finally, testosterone. The newest book published about it by Harvard professor (of science, not finance – yes, that’s a Shaunti Feldhahn joke) Carol Hooven says that above a certain average level scientists cannot predict how violent or sexual a man will be. That’s all socialization and she points out how levels of violence differ drastically between cultures, not hormone levels. Take, for example, Denmark and Iran – do Danish men have lower levels of testosterone because they beat their wives and children less (both illegal in Denmark) and don’t have the death penalty? That would be ridiculous to say, even more so considering that we’re talking about descendants of Vikings. Testosterone is associated with violence only in animal species. Preston seems to want to remain at that level.
Reading Laura’s descriptions of her husband’s reactions was healing. She mentioned that he didn’t grow up in the church, which made me think of Connor and Rebecca saying something about how those guys are safer.
I’m going to have to look up Hooven’s research! That sounds fascinating.
And great summary, too!
I also highly recommend developmental psychologist Andrew Smiler’s book Challenging Casanova: Beyond the Stereotype of the Sexually Promiscuous Young Male. In anonymous surveys with high school and college boys, he found that only 15% responded with a “yes” when asked if they’d like to sleep with three women in the next month. If he asked a group out loud, of course they’d all yell “yes” or “why only 3?!” because social pressure requires them to do so, but when they get to answer the question anonymously, this does not appeal to 85% of them! So, why are these secular biologists and social scientists showing us through credible research that most men are not uncontrollable horndogs and our Christian leaders keep insisting that they are? Seriously, WHY? The science here is mirroring the real life scenarios. Women are reporting that boys raised outside of the church are safer and the research done out in the world also yields results that are safer for women, but Christian leaders and the young men they disciple insist on keeping us in danger.
Ack! there’s no Kindle version. I’d actually love to rad this.
Just google his name or book title and you can find interviews where he summarizes his findings!
I was sexually harassed in high school. By two male teachers. In their 50’s. Wanna know what I was wearing? Baggy clothes. To cover (read “hide”) my very flat body. I didn’t get curves until my late 20’s. The problem was definitely not the clothes, and definitely not the non-existent curves. Purity Culture offered no protection for my real life scenarios. All it did was teach me shame and fear, which stole my voice when I really needed it.
I’m so sorry, Taylor. That was so wrong, and so common, and it just makes me so angry.
“Purity Culture offered no protection for my real life scenarios. All it did was teach me shame and fear, which stole my voice when I really needed it.”
Brilliant and merchworthy.
There was another poster a while back who talked about how at church camp, she dressed very baggy and covered up and so on, but the abusive ones went after her INSTEAD of the girls who wore more revealing clothes. And I’m sure there are more such stories.
Well, if “modest is hottest,” why wouldn’t the boys go after the most modestly dressed girls?
In other words, the message is just moving the problem around to another place, not solving it.
Yep, women’s clothing, behavior, whatever is always the problem, not the misbehavior of the men and boys misbehaving.
Most of what has been said about “after the fact regret” (which is mostly the result of rape) is true, and it’s also a fact that very, very few rape accusations are false.
One thing, though, about Sheila’s response.
“Many women think they consented because they were aroused, and only later realized they hadn’t.”
While this is true in many cases, this leave a huge hanging question.
How is the man, in this case, supposed to tell the difference? How is he supposed to determine whether the woman is giving REAL consent, or just thinks that she is? Right away, I would assume that anybody under the influence of drugs or alcohol can’t give genuine consent, but that won’t cover all situations.
Hey Nathan,
I appreciate you asking this question. There might be better responses to it, but here’s my two cents:
My husband and I were talking about this post yesterday. His high school was fairly liberal, but he said he appreciated the straightforward definition of consent they taught: “sober, unreserved, enthusiastic YES.”
Anything less than that is at least persuasion (not always bad, but can be bad depending on relationship), then bargaining (incl. sense of obligation/duty, usually bad), then coercion (incl. power difference, threat of bad stuff happening if you don’t, etc. definitely definitely bad), then physical rape. Technically the consent line is crossed at coercion. He said he views each of these four as different since there are significant differences in the woman’s psyche that result afterwards.
For example, persuasion among a teenage dating couple might still be bad. Like a creeping push of, “just try this,” or, “hey do you want to try something fun?”
But in a long-term committed relationship might be okay. Like “hey love, I know you’re tired. Can we cuddle for 10 minutes and see if we feel like we want sex afterwards?” The context really matters for persuasion.
Next, feeling used is a common after-feeling if a woman was bargained into sex by her husband. Suppose he says, “I’ll do the dishes if you give me sex,” and she thinks, “well, he did the dishes, so now I owe him.”
BUT feeling shame, confusion, dirty, cheap, etc are more after-feelings for coercion.
Turn that up to an 11 and add a sense of lost identity or misplaced belonging for rape, and you get a different psychological response.
Yes, of course the zones can get blurry around the edges. But I would say try to stick to the “sober, unreserved, enthusiastic YES” if at all possible.
Sober—obviously not under the influence of drugs or alcohol, also not asleep (!).
Unreserved—the classic “if you can’t say no, then you can’t say yes” thing.
Enthusiastic—sex should be good for the woman (!). If she doesn’t enjoy it, find out why.
Enthusiastic also means that “I guess,” “fine,” or “maybe” DO NOT COUNT as consent.
Sheila and team put up a great post a little while back on consent: https://baremarriage.com/2022/11/christians-need-a-better-understanding-of-consent/
They emphasized the difference between actively wanting to not have sex (clearly not consenting), and not particularly wanting sex at this very moment (maybe lower sex drive, responsive libido, maybe you just had sex yesterday, etc) but might be open to it (see persuasion).
I don’t mean to come off as offensive here but I am having trouble with this conversation. I think if we have to analyze it this hard the answer is NO. Pretty much of its not a YES then its a NO. There should be no raging questions Am I allowed to say you should just know? And if you dont! NO!
> > Am I allowed to say you should just know?
This is a bit tough sometimes. I would say that any time drugs or alcohol are involved the “yes” isn’t a real yes. Same goes for being in a social situation with a lot of pressure, like a frat party. Same for bargaining and coercion.
As for other situations, maybe the best path is to assume “NO” unless you’re absolutely sure beyond the shadow of a doubt.
I agree. If you have to persuade the person, then it’s now all about your pleasure and you dont’ know if the person is just saying yes to please you.
Hey Nathan, it’s a good question, and actually a fairly simple answer: “Listen to what I say, instead of trying to guess if my body is consenting.”
Nonconcordance really does happen. If my words are saying no, that should be all that’s needed.
Regarding telling girls and women what they should do to “avoid getting raped”, I read somewhere that when you say “just dress more modestly” or “just don’t walk alone at night”, you’re actually saying “make sure the rapist goes for the other girl”. That’s chilling.
Here’s a thought experiment for Preston and those who think like him: what would happen if every girl and woman dressed equally modestly and behaved the same towards men? Would the men who want to commit rape simply not go through with it? Well, we already know the answer from the Muslim countries where every woman is covered up in the same way. Women still get raped. It’s not about how we dress.
Exactly! This is really “choose the other girl.” We’re not actually preventing rape; we’re just trying to make sure our own daughter is safe. And it doesn’t work like that, since most rapes are more of a date rape/acquaintance situation and not stranger rape anyway.
“Boys just find it hard to stop at a certain point” is a self-fulfilling prophecy. When you assert something as truth, people tend to believe it is true. Boys who are told “women deserve respect” and it is modeled to them tend to respect women. And probably not rape them.
Exactly!
I just wanted to share this video – as I didn’t see it in any of the comments here.
Created in the UK and used by police departments for clarifying consent and rape.
You have probably seen it before … but in the climate you’re working in, I don’t think reposting it can be done too often! 🙄
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=pZwvrxVavnQ
Thank you again for all you are doing!
I saw a Tik Tok video about consent by a gay man advocating for women. He was saying that straight men don’t get consent unless a gay man is hitting on them when they don’t want it. Then all of a sudden they see things differently. If they think a gay man shouldn’t do it to them, then they shouldn’t do it to a woman. If they don’t want a gay man sexually fantasizing about them and they think the gay man should be able to stop doing that, they can do the same thing for women. I like the raccoon analogy but the reality is that if ANYONE walked into their space, they could stop immediately. Self-control is a choice. I often told my ex-husband that he wasn’t a puppet. No one had their hand up his butt controlling him and making him do abusive things to me. If they can stop if someone walks into the room then they can stop without someone walking into the room. Self-control is a fruit of the spirit that it seems more lost people have than straight Christian men.
I truly believe that Preston is working really hard to learn and grow his worldview on important topics like this. I went to his recent Exiles In Babylon conference, and it was fantastic. He’s doing great work, and I think his heart is good. But he’s just not quite finished deprogramming some of the more insidious messages that he’s internalized, and this is unfortunately very harmful. My hope, though, is that this podcast, as well as more discussions with his daughters and other advocates in this sphere, will help him and people like him get to a healthier place.