Issues in Human Sexuality Live Read, by me. From 1991 (90 years after Havelock Ellis published Sexual Inversion, 30 years after Robert Wood's book calling for full inclusion). Is this the most contemporary Church of England account of sexuality prior to LLF?
Reprinted in 2003.
I'm not going page by page and line by line, especially because I speak an entirely different language to the writers - one in which I do not need to finish my sentences with quite random Bible verse quotes often unrelated to the real Content. #IssuesInHumanSexuality#drappissues
"In Genesis 2 the man, as a royal figure, has authority over the woman."
As a Royal Figure? 👑 WTF?
The man has authority because he gives her a name? 🧙♂️
It will take men away from their family homes. In all cultures? I think not.
About the Leviticus rules, the document is as vague as vague can be.
Paraphrased: we don't apply them all, but we apply some, but not all, but definitely some but surely not all but surely some (and but some we mean the anti-gay verses.)
"Ask the Holy Spirit"
They have a discussion for pages about how the Bible is not clear, and then they suddenly and decisively finish with a random clear statement that is not drawn from the discussion at all.
AT ALL.
"Only by living within those boundaries (which we have randomly drawn up) are Christians to achieve holiness"
Even though they defined holiness entirely differently only one page previous.
Quite rightly, relationship (here, marriage) is something that helps each partner better serve their community (which I think applies in all kinds of sex with enthusiastic consent, even in providing one another with joy or other needs) BUT
When it comes to discussions of Lesbian, Gay or Bi relationships, things like mutual support are all but forgotten every time the same-sex relationship discussion occurs which is usually just sex sex sex.
"For all these positive reasons God's perfect will for marriage is chastity before marriage and then a life long relationship" - - what wait hours did one draw that conclusion from the previous commentary in the chapter. Once again they've just pulled a Statement out of thin air
Unless they are directly linking 'divorce' to any union and dissolution of a relationship, I don't really know where that assumption comes from that sex before marriage isn't it.
Are people not capable of making their own informed consent decisions about when it is a marriage?
That's one (1) mention of disability so far, here cited as a reason someone might be single.
Just cos y'allcan't have sex with your friends, doesn't mean that no one can.
Also IF this is the approach, put it earlier in the argument before you make your sudden Statement, not as an afterthought.
There some contradictions in here. It's important that husband and wife are friends but that friends don't have sex.
Excuse moi.
Also, who hasn't been in church where mixed gender friendships are constantly frustrated by people insisting one or the other is in 'danger'
"(Friendship) can only flourish within the framework of chastity." Says whom though?
FIRST OF ALL, they've picked an alternate translation of The Bible just to find one that said Marriage instead of Eunoch, and second, "Celibacy cannot be prescribed for anyone" if a powerful phrase. Better not see any prescribing later...
How ARROGENT do they have to be to INVENT a new word to discuss gay people in 1991????
To put it into context, the organisation featured in the movie "Pride", Lesbians and Gays Support the Miners, raised £22,500 to support the miner strikes in 1984-1985, five years before this document was published
If you read #IssuesInHumanSexuality without context, you'd think they were the first people to coin a word for any concept of LGB+ love/sex/relationship.
Lesbian and Gay was right there, and had been for YEARS.
How RUDE do you have to be to not ask and just invent a new term instead. I'm actually fuming. #homophile
*yeah, it might be used by a few other contemporary publications at the time, but its also just rude. It's not 'Homophiles Support the Miners'
I am BEGGING them to pick up a book (and by a book, I mean Sexual Inversion by Havelock Ellis)
As was already pointed out this week, here's #IssuesInHumanSexuality questioning whether future gays should be eliminated.
I see the victim blaming from the first chapter (against women) has switched to active LGBT+ people fighting to survive as causing others who 'were sympathetic to be hostile'.
Of course.
That said, this section suggests that there is no place for homophobia on the church and that's not been realised thirty years later.
Huh?
Here natural means whatever serves their cause. Homosexual love is compared to lying.
But in the next paragraph, Natural means something else entirely (and ignores the existence of those who cannot have children for any reason).
Um.............
ERMMMM.......
I screamed. Not the penis in the vulva/vagina being sacramental.
Only one chapter ago you said that using sex as idol worship and black magic is not okay.
Mother, I am SCREAMING. You plucked this out of thin air!!!!!!!
Actually having straight sex doesn't make you better qualified to be a parent.
This paragraph doesn't even make sense. Where are the linking sentences?
Yes to this paragraph, some gay Christians will decide, through conscience, to be in sexual relationships and should be welcomed in church with the understanding that this does not reduce their spirituality, religious choice or presence. I agree.
WHAT THE FUCK???????? Their three possible issues with Homophiles include Bisexuality, Polyamory and PEDOPHILIA. with a tiny comment that this also includes straight people - BUT THEY DIDN'T PUT IT IN THE STRAIGHT SECTION DID YA.
This paragraph says that clergy both can't be good examples to people who are different from them (if clergy gay and congregants straight) AND that clergy can be good examples to people who are different from them (if clergy straight and congregants gay) in ONE PARAGRAPH.
🚮 🚮 🚮
In conclusion the document examines and discusses, but then throws it the discussion and reflection when it comes to concluding statements, every time, and the concluding statements literally spring up from nowhere.
They also treat clergy and those seeking ordination awfully.
Question 3 of the Public Consultation on #ConversionTherapy is also very important, especially for anyone approaching legislation from an abolitionist view point. There are proposals that target organisations above people, which are the ones I would personally support more than
- Criminalisation of individuals, especially knowing that Criminalisation and imprisonment etc disproportionately affects minority groups.
In the event of the legislation pulling a bait and switch it is important that we choose the right things to support and not support.
Removing profits, preventing CT folk from holding office in charities and protection for people being sent overseas for #conversiontherapy are - to me - far more important in tackling the lasting presence of Conversion Therapy in the UK, than Criminalisation of individuals.
If is important to realise that the legislation around #ConversionTherapy includes references in every place it talks about protecting people from being converted 'from being transgender' also 'to bring transgender'.
Now, no one is forcing people to be transgender, but its -
- very important that this legislation does not get twisted.
There are VAST differences between talking about what it means to be transgender and exploring personal gender, to what is defined as Conversion Therapy, but this is one to watch.
Vitally, the legislation discusses what Consent is, and certainly people talking about what it is to be transgender are doing so in consenting contexts (as discussed above), but it could be jumped upon by bad faith actors.
Honestly Have, for all his faults, is an engaging writer and drops take downs into his writing with greatest of ease.
He discusses how when the 'sexual instinct' first appears in youth it is often not specifically directed, and mentions that women are often forced on young -
One day I'm gunna do a deep dive of Accelerated Christian Education. It's nearly 3am and I'm scrolling through pages and pages of their material online and it's messed up and it's not good for my soul. But one day. I'm gunna do it.
TW. Home schooling
.
.
.
Since I have them saved from last night, I'm gunna dump a bunch of pics of the workbooks, cartoons, etc here and maybe you'll can work out what's wrong with them. #exposechristianeducation#aceducation#homeschooling
This is the book (and speaker) recommended by the church I was looking at joining after the Pandam.
Hands up if you think it's going to be a well thought out, helpful, harm-reduction focused education.
Hands up if you think it'll be sex jokes and Purity Culture 🖐️
If the Evangelical Alliance recommended my book I would need to flush myself down the toilet.
The author says he felt guilty about looking at boobs AGED FIVE.
I'm sorry but growing up in a shame-filled Purity Culture world like that from such an early age probably DIDN'T help create a balanced world view on sex at all. I feel sorry for that five year old.