Is there marital rape or not

Note: Read the conclusion

I’d thought I’d weigh in on Elspeth’s Divided Loyalties and Cane’s Red Wedding on the topic of “marital rape” and whether it exists as a thing or not.

Step back for a second.

God’s law is above the law of the land, so first an issue must be considered according to God’s law. Though if something is not directly in God’s law then we are to obey the law of the land. This is the basis of Structures of Authority that God has instituted on this earth.

In first consideration, the legal ramifications of the law of the land are irrelevant. The fact that there was no such thing as marital rape 50 years ago is irrelevant. The fact that marital rape is such a thing now is irrelevant. Our goal is not to be on the side of men but on the side of God.

Let’s discuss this from the Biblical perspective.

First, is there established authority in marriage? The answer is undoubtedly yes.

Ephesians 5:23 For the husband is the head of the wife, as Christ also is the head of the church, He Himself being the Savior of the body. 24 But as the church is subject to Christ, so also the wives ought to be to their husbands in everything.

1 Corinthians 11:3 But I want you to understand that [a]Christ is the head of every man, and the man is the head of a woman, and God is the head of [b]Christ. […] 8 For man [i]does not originate from woman, but woman from man; 9 for indeed man was not created for the woman’s sake, but woman for the man’s sake. 10 Therefore the woman ought to have a symbol of authority on her head, because of the angels. 11 However, in the Lord, neither is woman [j]independent of man, nor is man [k]independent of woman. 12 For as the woman [l]originates from the man, so also the man has his birth through the woman; and all things [m]originate from God.

No one would doubt that Jesus has authority (or is head) over the Church. The same is true of husbands to wives. Jesus would never submit to the Church, yet loves it because it is His.

Second, are there exceptions to authority in marriage? The answer is undoubtedly yes. There are exactly two.

1 Corinthians 7:3 The husband must [a]fulfill his duty to his wife, and likewise also the wife to her husband. 4 The wife does not have authority (exousiazō) over her own body, but the husband does; and likewise also the husband does not have authority (exousiazō) over his own body, but the wife does. 5 Stop depriving one another, except by agreement for a time, so that you may devote yourselves to prayer, and [b]come together again so that Satan will not tempt you because of your lack of self-control.

G1850 — ἐξουσιάζω — exousiazō — ex-oo-see-ad’-zo
From G1849; to control: – exercise authority upon, bring under the (have) power of.

Ephesians 5:21 [o]and be subject to one another in the [p]fear of Christ.

The Ephesians 5:21 verse is often warped by modern Christians to say that the husband should submit to the wife. However, it is but the exception and only in the case of sin if you do a contextual analysis of Ephesians 5:1-21. In any other instance aside from sin, the wife is to submit to the authority of the husband. The fallibility of humans is the reason there is this exception between the parallel of Jesus’ authority over the Church and husbands to wives.

Likewise, in the context of sex in marriage the husband and wife are not have control over their own bodies but submit to each other’s desires. This is to affirm the joined together and one flesh of marriage.

Third, The exception to the authority in the matters of sex is that each spouse does not have control over their own bodies. They should not be depriving each other.

Therefore, it is sinful to deprive one another of sex in marriage.

On the other hand, is it sinful [to utilize force] to have sex with your spouse in marriage?

The correct answer is no. It is not sinful. As you can see from the above passage,

1 Corinthians 7:4 The wife does not have authority (exousiazō) over her own body, but the husband does; and likewise also the husband does not have authority (exousiazō) over his own body, but the wife does.

It says quite clearly that the husband has authority over the wife’s body, and the wife has authority over the husband’s body.

However, we must make a note that this is but the letter of the law and not the spirit of the law. Let’s examine that in the next section.

Fourth, there are two passages from Corinthians that apply well to this situation.

1 Corinthians 6:12 All things are lawful for me, but not all things are profitable. All things are lawful for me, but I will not be mastered by anything. 13 Food is for the [g]stomach and the [h]stomach is for food, but God will do away with both [i]of them. Yet the body is not for immorality, but for the Lord, and the Lord is for the body. 14 Now God has not only raised the Lord, but will also raise us up through His power. 15 Do you not know that your bodies are members of Christ? Shall I then take away the members of Christ and make them members of a prostitute? May it never be! 16 Or do you not know that the one who joins himself to a prostitute is one body with her? For He says, “The two shall become one flesh.” 17 But the one who joins himself to the Lord is one spirit with Him. 18 Flee immorality. Every other sin that a man commits is outside the body, but the [j]immoral man sins against his own body. 19 Or do you not know that your body is a [k]temple of the Holy Spirit who is in you, whom you have from [l]God, and that you are not your own? 20 For you have been bought with a price: therefore glorify God in your body.

Paul talks of uniting with a prostitute which is both sinful and unlawful here. However, we know that having sex with your wife is both good and lawful.

The point being that if a spouse forces themselves on another, even though it is not sinful and lawful, it is very close if not at the point at which the spouse is mastered by their lusts and not love.

1 Corinthians 10:23 All things are lawful, but not all things are profitable. All things are lawful, but not all things edify. 24 Let no one seek his own good, but that of his [i]neighbor. 25 Eat anything that is sold in the meat market without asking questions for conscience’ sake; 26 for the earth is the Lord’s, and [j]all it contains. 27 If one of the unbelievers invites you and you want to go, eat anything that is set before you without asking questions for conscience’ sake. 28 But if anyone says to you, “This is meat sacrificed to idols,” do not eat it, for the sake of the one who informed you, and for conscience’ sake; 29 I mean not your own conscience, but the other man’s; for why is my freedom judged by another’s conscience? 30 If I partake with thankfulness, why am I slandered concerning that for which I give thanks? 31 Whether, then, you eat or drink or whatever you do, do all to the glory of God. 32 Give no offense either to Jews or to Greeks or to the church of God; 33 just as I also please all men in all things, not seeking my own profit but the profit of the many, so that they may be saved.

Likewise, Paul exhorts the Corinthians to understand that it is not about them. The Spirit of Christianity is about relationships and not about yourself.

Conclusions

  • Is there such thing as marital rape under the law of God? No.
  • Is utilizing force in marriage to have sex with your spouse sinful? No.

That is what the letter of the law says. However, the spirit of the law is different.

Even if you seek what is good for both parties — sex in marriage — if one of the spouses adamantly refuses by the Spirit of Christianity, then it is not bad but it is also not good to force them to even when you have the authority.

The reason for this goes back to God’s creation. We were all created with free will. When you force someone into doing something they don’t want to do that negates their free will. The good news of the grace of God is for those who want to accept it. It cannot be forced upon anyone.

In summary, regarding the possibility of “forced” sex in a Christian marriage:

  • One spouse is in sin (the one refusing) and one is not (the one doing the forcing),
  • but both are not walking according to the Spirit of Christianity and one flesh.

In reality, what usually happens is:

  • One spouse refuses sex (and is in sin), and the other spouse becomes indignant and responds not out of love (while lawful, not with the fruits of the Spirit) but doesn’t force sex.
  • One spouse is in open rebellion against Christ and their eternal soul is in danger (the one refusing sex), and the other is a Pharisee who holds the law over love even when they have the authority to do that what they want (the one who wants sex but responds not out of love).

What should happen is:

  • The refusing spouse should know the Scriptures or be enlightened to the Scriptures and repent.
  • The initiating spouse should respond out of love by correcting with the Scriptures, and explaining/teaching them if they are unaware. If they continue in rebellion then potentially meting out consequences as necessary.

This issue is complicated because it accurately highlights three different categories:

  • Rebellion against God (the one refusing to have sex in marriage).
  • The letter of the law of God (the non-sinful and lawful potential to force a spouse to have sex).
  • The Spirit of God and Christianity (the desire to have both spouses choose to have sex willingly and enthusiastically of their own free will).

In reality, we are prone to thinking of life in context of only two categories: good and bad. However, often we want to do good, but we follow the letter of the law instead of the Spirit of God. This means it comes off as legalistic or mean-spirited even if it is the Truth.

1 Corinthians 8:Now concerning things sacrificed to idols, we know that we all have knowledge. Knowledge [a]makes arrogant, but love edifies. 2 If anyone supposes that he knows anything, he has not yet known as he ought to know; 3 but if anyone loves God, he is known by Him.

4 Therefore concerning the eating of things sacrificed to idols, we know that [b]there is no such thing as an idol in the world, and that there is no God but one. 5 For even if there are so-called gods whether in heaven or on earth, as indeed there are many gods and many lords, 6 yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom are all things and we exist for Him; and one Lord, Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we exist through Him.

7 However not all men have this knowledge; but some, being accustomed to the idol until now, eat food as if it were sacrificed to an idol; and their conscience being weak is defiled. 8 But food will not [c]commend us to God; we are neither [d]the worse if we do not eat, nor [e]the better if we do eat. 9 But take care that this [f]liberty of yours does not somehow become a stumbling block to the weak. 10 For if someone sees you, who have knowledge, dining in an idol’s temple, will not his conscience, if he is weak, be strengthened to eat things sacrificed to idols? 11 For through your knowledge he who is weak is ruined, the brother for whose sake Christ died. 12 And so, by sinning against the brethren and wounding their conscience when it is weak, you sin against Christ. 13 Therefore, if food causes my brother to stumble, I will never eat meat again, so that I will not cause my brother to stumble.

It is of first importance, even if we know the Truth, to minister to people where they are. Not impress upon them the Truth that they may not know or not be able to handle at that point in time.

Is it important to know that there is no such thing as marital rape? Sure. But it is more important that people don’t divorce.

Note: If you couldn’t understand what this post is advocating then here is the final conclusion:

If a Christian husband or wife wants to force themselves on their spouse then they are more like a Pharisee (obey the letter of the law) than Jesus (He who embodies the Spirit of the law). As Christians, even though we know it is lawful, we want to be like Jesus. 

That’s the reason why forcing sex on the spouse is a sin. It’s a sin of hypocrisy.

I personally cannot think of any instance that I’ve heard of where Christians who are walking the walk have forced themselves on their spouses.

The end.

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Godly mindset & lifestyle and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

79 Responses to Is there marital rape or not

  1. What is not complicated is that do unpack a tit for tat – ish scenario in today’s Christian context is unacceptable. In the case of a refusing wife, then a hold-her-down husband, after the hold-her-down event, the refusal would be off limits to discuss especially among most Christian woman and male Christian lift chasers because they seem logically unable to evaluate things that fit the template :Woman sin’s, man responds sinfully: rationally. To charge the woman with her sin is, to them, to exculpate the man. This presumed exculpatory intent blocks a great many of women’s marital sins from ever seeing the light of church discussion.

  2. @ empathologism

    Yep, it’s predicated on Christians that are actually willing to discuss the truth as rare as that is.

    There are some out there because we are some of those people.

  3. My take on the marital rape paradigm is that it is a legal fiction invented by feminism as a way to try and keep men under their command. Historically amongst other things it is my view that when a woman agrees to marry that she is agreeing to spread her legs for the rest of her life whenever her husband wants her to.

    Any woman not prepared to consider going down this path might make a good sex partner but would be useless as wife material.

  4. fringe says:

    sorry to be off topic: does anybody know what happened to joseph of jackson’s blog?

  5. @ Father Marker

    We can take that thought further. The core of it is the enemy’s attempt to classify that which is good in marriage as bad.

    Sex is holy in marriage. Only those who are opposed to Biblical marriage would classify any kind of sex as unholy (or rape) in this instance.

    Unfortunately, many believe in the lies of the enemy.

  6. @ fringe

    I’m sure he’ll reappear in the manosphere again if he wants us to know. He has left his e-mail on some sites (though I don’t remember which) if you want to attempt to contact him.

  7. Missy says:

    You disgust me. You pig. Rape is sex that has not been consented too. Therefore a spouse who forces themselves on a non-consenting spouse is RAPING THEM. Whether the bible calls marital rape good or bad doesn’ t matter. It is not even “Marital Rape”. It is JUST RAPE.

    As for whether the rape is biblical:
    Rape is selfishness.
    Rape is physical and emotional violence (you think it does physically and emotionally hurt the victim?)
    Rape is an abuse of authority. Does a man cause harm to his own body?

    Rape is an act of sin.

    Try “not raping” your future wife and let me know how long your marriage lasts.

  8. Looking Glass says:

    Ah, drive-by with questionable reading comprehension & shifting/unspecific definition abuse. This is why we can’t have nice things.

    Assuming “Missy” ever pops back, you need to apologize to Deep Strength. Aside from the unwillingness to actually read the conclusion or think about the topic with any understanding, you *directly* and *intentionally* Sinned against him. Think long & hard about the fact your own foolishness lead you into another Sin. Then repent of it and go to God for understanding.

  9. @ LG

    I was amused to say the least.

    Emotional driven answer with no Scriptural support. Seems pretty typical of christo-feminists.

  10. Looking Glass says:

    @DS:

    It’s always the constantly shifting definitions that get me. I guess I should just assume that a word has no fixed definition to people. Not that we have different definitions, but that they’ll use very different takes of the same “word” between sentences. I wonder how they ever manage to use the word “set” properly, it of 40+ definitions.

  11. Gabriella says:

    Oh gosh deep strength, really???????? Are you aware of the ungodly chauvinism brooding here? I’m a bit confused, are you saying a man can without sinning force himself on his wife?

    “On the other hand, is it sinful [to utilize force] to have sex with your spouse in marriage?

    The correct answer is no. It is not sinful. As you can see from the above passage,

    1 Corinthians 7:4 The wife does not have authority (exousiazō) over her own body, but the husband does; and likewise also the husband does not have authority (exousiazō) over his own body, but the wife does.

    It says quite clearly that the husband has authority over the wife’s body, and the wife has authority over the husband’s body.”

    Well, considering that fact, a wife can exercise authority over her husbands body as the scripture clearly says she can and command him to move his body off of hers. See how that works? You fail to look at it from both angles it seems… So then the answer is forced sex regardless of the others consent is in fact sinful. Furthermore it is clearly not an act of love and therefore against God, an ungodly work of the devil. For love does not seek it’s own, it bears all things, hopes all things and believes all things; therefore, a man who follows God doesn’t take matters into it’s own hand when things don’t go his way, but submits them unto the care of God in prayer like a real priest of a home would 😉 And Glass, leave Missy alone, maybe she’s a victim of abuse, stop being so religious and childish… Hey guys, also, check this out, it talk about God’s original design for male female relationships… http://www.youtube.com/attribution_link?a=FTBnbbVW15Q&u=%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DKpQQ_ORtFRo%26feature%3Dshare

  12. @ Gabriella

    Well, considering that fact, a wife can exercise authority over her husbands body as the scripture clearly says she can and command him to move his body off of hers. See how that works?

    You fail to look at it from both angles it seems… So then the answer is forced sex regardless of the others consent is in fact sinful.

    Incorrect. Sex is an act of unity in marriage. It is holy. In the aspect of unity (forcing sex) versus disunity (stopping sex), God honors unity. Likewise, the 1 Cor 7 passage is explaining that husbands and wives do not have authority over their own body because of denying sex not for stopping sex.

    However, as I said in the conclusion, husbands should not force themselves on their wives and wives should not force themselves on their husbands. Although it is permissible by the letter of the law it is not in the Spirit of the law.

    A husband or wife that forces themselves on their spouse is more like a Pharisee than like Jesus. Obviously, we should not be like Pharisees but more like Jesus. Thus, I do not recommend/condone husbands or wives forcing themselves on their spouses because we are supposed to worship God in Spirit and in Truth.

    Also, consent is given at the wedding. In a godly marriage there should be no more “giving consent” as the two are one once they finish the wedding and consummate. It has only been recently in feminist times that “marital rape” has become a thing. That’s why there is no such thing as marital rape because consent is already given.

  13. Gabriella says:

    DS, Jesus said the pharisees were sons of the devil, so it’s like it’s either Jesus or it’s not… He also said the letter kills, but the Spirit brings life. Also, what about the woman having exouziaso over her husbands body? Why can she not then exercise that authority over his body to stop??
    Let’s say a woman is grieving the loss of her parent and doesn’t desire it, is it right or in anyway or justified to force sex? Or if her husband looks at porn or lustfully at other women (which is adultery in the heart) and she is hurt and is thus separated from him spiritually/soulically? Sex is the unity of the body. We are first and more than anything a spirit and soul, those must be united first for a willing and enthusiastic partner, even though I have yet to have personal experience on the matter I’m sure it will also yield the best and most blessed sex ever known to man. And forced sex will actually break unity as it is not an act of love but selfishness and we are to be united in the spirit, mind and bonds of peace. A wife may be just being neglectful or mean which is wrong but it would only make things worse to respond with the same lack of consideration… It must be solved through godly love… and maybe there’s a reason for her attitude

  14. @ Gabriella

    I don’t know why you’re arguing with me here. We agree. Adhering to the letter can kill that’s why you don’t want to do it.

    The argument is if it’s lawful (or justified) or not.

    The answer is yes, it’s lawful. But that which is lawful is not always good — everything is permissible (lawful) but not everything is beneficial/profitable/edifies.

    Is it an actual good thing to do? No, of course not.

    If you read through my whole post instead of doing a knee jerk reaction to the beginning you would realize this. 😛

  15. Gabriella says:

    lol, that’s a cute smiley… I did read the whole thing, that’s why I got confused. I do confess though, there was knee jerking that happened on my first read, but then i was like, okay, calm down, keep a clear head, don’t say anything, read this again from start to finish to really see what is going on…. and that’s when I found myself confused… I think one is approved by God and one isn’t…. cut and dry, because in this instance, the husband is sinning against his wife and doing her injustice… sins cause bad consequences, they hurt people and the one sinning, that’s why God doesn’t want us to sin and that’s why He made laws, for our own good and protection, not just to tell us what not to do and how to act, there was reasons for them all… so… how is something that causes one to sin (in their heart) justified in the sight of God? Like as you know, that’s exactly where the pharisees went wrong, by thinking they could just use God’s word as a do or don’t list rather than finding God’s heart about the matter and learning to express His heart through the law (or their actions).. Geez, may I say it is so easy to have misunderstandings via writing.. it’s a much more difficult form of communication sometimes… I hope we don’t go in circles missing what the other is saying… sorry to be so tedious DS, you’ll get a break from me soon for this extended week end =D hope we’re trackin together…

  16. @ Gabriella

    You’re losing sight of the reason why God created us unlike the animals in the first place: free will.

    Pharisees say it’s wrong to heal on the Sabbath because that is work and God say to to do no work on the Sabbath. This is what the letter of the law says. Likewise, the letter of the law says that spouses can force sex on each other.

    In this case, enforcing compliance to the law limits free will:

    1. There should be free will to do good (e.g. heal) on the Sabbath because doing what is good is righteous and honors God.

    2. There should be free will for the other spouse to want to have sex rather than having it forced upon them because this is also good, righteous, and honors God.

    When the law interferes with choices — eliminates free will — that allow others to do good, enforcing it is the letter of the law rather than the Spirit.

    As Christians we are to avoid even the appearance of evil, which in this instance means that we are to avoid that which is lawful but limits free will such as the above examples.

    Enforcing the Sabbath and forcing sex is not a sin because they’re lawful, BUT we are judged according to the standard we judge. Thus, the sin is not of enforcing the Sabbath or of forcing sex but instead of hypocrisy — I can exercise my free will but you can’t. Hence, why Jesus calls the Pharisees hypocrites many a time.

    Does that make sense?

  17. Gabriella says:

    I think I see your angle now, however,
    Matthew 22:36 “Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?”
    37 Jesus replied: “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’[a] 38 This is the first and greatest commandment. 39 And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’[b] 40 All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.”
    So you’re saying it doesn’t break the law to force oneself on their spouse, but rather that it is not good or preferable as it imposes on the other spouses free will, but the above scripture shows that the greatest commandments which sums up all of them, says in the 2nd, to love others as you love yourself, so asserting one’s free will over another is breaking that law, thus cannot be the fulfilling of any of the commandments as that command along with the first sums up all of them. So I think the Lord is saying if you Love God you will love others and if you do that, you got every other commandment in the bag.
    Ok, g2g now DS, Have an great independence day weekend!! =) I’ll follow up with y’all next week
    PeACe, grace and Love

  18. @ Gabriella

    You’re close.

    “Love your neighbor as yourself” is a commandment which is the opposite side of the coin of judge how you want to be judged.

    If you treat others different than yourself you’re judging them on a different scale as yourself — usually as less important. It’s the sin of hypocrisy (and of pride): “I’m more important and valuable than you, and can enforce my will on top of yours.”

    The law is not broken by enforcing sabbath or forcing sex in those acts, but there is law breaking sin in other areas. That’s why legalism fails.

  19. quietdove says:

    @ Father Marker: No. That’s not even close to being true. Just because a woman marries a man doesn’t mean that it’s okay for the man to demand sex from the woman (or even worse, force her to have sex with him against his will) whenever he wants. The fact that you think that’s true says a lot about how little you actually care about women. Tell me, whatever happened to Matthew 22:39 “You must love your neighbor as yourself”? Us women are your neighbors, too, you know. So why do you refuse to follow Christ’s command to love us?

  20. @ quietdove

    That’s a non-Biblical way of looking at it.

    If the husband comes to the wife or the wife comes to the husband in need of sex, 1 Corinthians 7 says to acquiesce to their need instead of withhold.

    Obviously, demanding sex of either spouse is mostly likely not going to make them want to give you sex, but that shouldn’t stop them from doing the right thing which is to have sex.

    Two wrongs don’t make a right.

  21. quietdove says:

    @ Deep Strength:

    Following the words of Christ is “a non-Biblical way of looking at it”? Seems to me like you just don’t want to have to follow Matthew 22:39. Tell me, why do you think that ignoring certain Bible verses is okay? As for 1 Corinthians 7, that’s one of the many examples of misogyny in the Bible. A woman should absolutely have control over her own body and her husband should never be able to treat her like his personal sex slave. Why do you think it’s so wrong for a woman to refuse sex? Shouldn’t a woman have the right to do that, even when she’s married?

  22. @ quietdove

    The Scriptures specifically state “equality” on this matter:

    1 Corinthians 7:2 But because of immoralities, each man is to have his own wife, and each woman is to have her own husband. 3 The husband must [a]fulfill his duty to his wife, and likewise also the wife to her husband. 4 The wife does not have authority over her own body, but the husband does; and likewise also the husband does not have authority over his own body, but the wife does. 5 Stop depriving one another, except by agreement for a time, so that you may devote yourselves to prayer, and [b]come together again so that Satan will not tempt you because of your lack of self-control.

    The husband is not to deny the wife sex, and the wife is not to deny the wife sex. It’s wrong and a sin for either the husband and the wife to refuse each other sex. Both “have the right” to give sex to the other when they have a need and never to deny it from each other unless mutually agreed for a time for prayer.

    I believe the Scriptures are the inspired Word of God. All of it and not just the parts I like. If we can’t agree on that then there’s no point in discussing this further.

  23. quietdove says:

    @ Deep Strength: So if your wife demanded that you have sex with her, and you were too tired, or feeling sick, or otherwise not in the mood, would it be okay for her to force you to have sex with her? I sure hope your answer is no, and that you realize how cruel and barbaric it is to force someone to have sex with you, even if that person is your spouse.

  24. @ quietdove

    So if your wife demanded that you have sex with her, and you were too tired, or feeling sick, or otherwise not in the mood, would it be okay for her to force you to have sex with her?

    Yes, because I love her.

    Jesus states in John 15:13 Greater love has no one than this, that one lay down his life for his friends.

    If I can’t have sex with my wife even when I’m feeling horrible, tired, or sick which has in it its own reward — a pleasurable, intimate, and uniting act — then how am I ever going to show love for others?

    Romans 5:8 But God demonstrates His own love toward us, in that while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.

    It’s not about what another person is doing even my spouse. It’s about how can I love and serve the other people. That’s how God shows His love to us, and that’s how I can show my love to others.

    I sure hope your answer is no, and that you realize how cruel and barbaric it is to force someone to have sex with you, even if that person is your spouse.

    This is an attitude that is not cultivated toward loving other people.

    1 John 4:19 We love, because He first loved us. 20 If someone says, “I love God,” and hates his brother, he is a liar; for the one who does not love his brother whom he has seen, cannot love God whom he has not seen. 21 And this commandment we have from Him, that the one who loves God should love his brother also.

  25. quietdove says:

    @ Deep Strength: Obviously, you don’t understand how humiliating, traumatizing, and physically painful it can be for someone to force you to have sex with them. I mean, do you really think that forcing someone to have sex with you is no big deal at all? If so, then you’re dismissing the very real pain that actual rape victims have gone through. Face it, forcing someone to have sex with you is never okay, whether or not you’re married to that person. Rape is rape, even in a marriage. Why is it so hard for you to own up to that?

  26. @ quietdove

    That’s a poor leap of logic to rape.

    I said that if my wife demanded that I have sex when I was sick, tired, or otherwise not feeling it I would do it because I love her. There is no need for her to force me. Likewise, so should a wife to her husband.

    I’ve rehashed already in the OP and the comments why employing the use for force — making clear a want or need is not a demand which is also not force — is a hypocritical and unloving attitude and thus sin. Likewise, no one should demand it because it’s unkind.

    If a spouse comes to you in obvious need or want of sex they shouldn’t deny each other.

  27. quietdove says:

    @ Deep Strength: Just because you love someone doesn’t mean that you’re always sexually aroused when you’re around them. And forcing someone to have sex when they’re not sexually aroused is rape. So why do you keep trying to justify rape?

  28. @ quietdove

    Just because you love someone doesn’t mean that you’re always sexually aroused when you’re around them. And forcing someone to have sex when they’re not sexually aroused is rape. So why do you keep trying to justify rape?

    I think the better quetion is:

    Why do you keep trying to frame the loving actions of a spouse who wants to please their significant other as rape?

    Even if I’m not aroused and not feeling it I want to love my spouse. It may take time to get me aroused, but I would be willing because I recognize their wants and needs.

  29. quietdove says:

    @ Deep Strength: No one should have to force themselves to have sex with someone else in order to please them. To say that they should is to belittle the very real trauma of people who actually have been raped. I mean, who are you to say that people who have been raped shouldn’t have just gone along with the rape in order to please the person who was raping them? Seriously, there is no difference at all between marital rape and actual rape beyond the fact that people who are victims of marital rape are married to their rapist. In both cases, people are being forced to have sex against their will. So by justifying marital rape, you’re pretty much trying to justify all rape.

  30. quietdove says:

    @ Deep Strength: Also, great job at refusing to even try to understand what rape is. Rape is forcing someone who isn’t aroused to have sex. It’s not pleasant at all, and it’s humiliating and degrading. Why not try going to a rape victims’ support group and ask them what it was like to be raped? Something tells me you wouldn’t be willing to do that, since you don’t want to actually understand what that’s like. No, you want to pretend that there’s nothing wrong at all about forcing someone to have sex with you.

  31. quietdove says:

    @ Deep Strength: You know, I feel like your fundamental problem is that you blindly believe in everything the Bible says, without even trying to think it through to make sure your beliefs are actually compassionate. You know, the Bible isn’t perfect, and as such, it contains many examples of hatred. Yet you don’t care about that. No, all you care about is that you’re following the Bible literally. Whether or not your beliefs are compassionate simply doesn’t matter to you. And that’s the real danger of religious fundamentalism. Tell me, how are you any different than a fundamentalist Muslim who refuses to think through how hateful their beliefs are, and who condones atrocities like jihad and stoning women to death as a result? You are no different than that Muslim, and it’s time you wake up and realize that.

  32. @ quietdove

    I feel like your fundamental problem is that you blindly believe in everything the Bible says, without even trying to think it through to make sure your beliefs are actually compassionate. You know, the Bible isn’t perfect, and as such, it contains many examples of hatred. Yet you don’t care about that. No, all you care about is that you’re following the Bible literally. Whether or not your beliefs are compassionate simply doesn’t matter to you. And that’s the real danger of religious fundamentalism.

    I want to love my wife and have sex with her even if I’m tired, sick, and not aroused because I recognize she has a need.

    Last time I checked, compassion is Jesus serving others when they have a need:

    https://deepstrength.wordpress.com/2014/01/28/the-compassion-of-christ/

    Thus, I’m “[not] any different than a fundamentalist Muslim who refuses to think through how hateful their beliefs are, and who condones atrocities like jihad and stoning women to death as a result?”

    Interesting. I didn’t realize serving and loving others had that much in common with jihad and stoning women to death.

    I think this discussion is at an end. I pray that Jesus shows you the truth about learning how to love others even when you don’t feel like it.

  33. quietdove says:

    @ Deep Strength: Since you completely ignored these comments of mine, here they are again:

    No one should have to force themselves to have sex with someone else in order to please them. To say that they should is to belittle the very real trauma of people who actually have been raped. I mean, who are you to say that people who have been raped shouldn’t have just gone along with the rape in order to please the person who was raping them? Seriously, there is no difference at all between marital rape and actual rape beyond the fact that people who are victims of marital rape are married to their rapist. In both cases, people are being forced to have sex against their will. So by justifying marital rape, you’re pretty much trying to justify all rape.

    Also, great job at refusing to even try to understand what rape is. Rape is forcing someone who isn’t aroused to have sex. It’s not pleasant at all, and it’s humiliating and degrading. Why not try going to a rape victims’ support group and ask them what it was like to be raped? Something tells me you wouldn’t be willing to do that, since you don’t want to actually understand what that’s like. No, you want to pretend that there’s nothing wrong at all about forcing someone to have sex with you.

  34. @ quietdove

    No one should have to force themselves to have sex with someone else in order to please them.

    Ephesians 2:8 For by grace you have been saved through faith; and [h]that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; 9 not as a result of works, so that no one may boast. 10 For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand so that we would walk in them.

    The reason why we do good — and God created sex in marriage as good — is because we want to please Jesus.

    You’re right in one respect: no one should force someone to do what is good. They have to choose to do good of their own free will.

    Choosing to have sex when you don’t feel like it is good because you are loving and serving another’s needs, and it fulfills the goodness of what God created in Genesis 1 and 2.

    When you put your needs above your spouses you become just that: selfish. This is not Christ-like.

    Also, great job at refusing to even try to understand what rape is.

    Nope. I’ve already said that utilizing force is a sin in this thread.

  35. Robin Munn says:

    @Deep Strength –

    Allow me to quote one very important line from quietdove’s second comment (at 11:51 AM):

    As for 1 Corinthians 7, that’s one of the many examples of misogyny in the Bible.

    No wait, let me quote two lines from her* comment (back-to-back, even!):

    Tell me, why do you think that ignoring certain Bible verses is okay? As for 1 Corinthians 7, that’s one of the many examples of misogyny in the Bible.

    This was the point at which it became obvious that she was not going to argue in good faith. Calling 1 Cor. 7 “misogyny” (when it applies equally to husbands and wives and makes exactly the same demands of each) was a big clue, but her back-to-back hypocrisy, accusing you of ignoring certain Bible verses and then turning around and justifying her own ignoring of certain Bible verses, makes it obvious that she’s only here to push a point and to refuse to listen to anything the Bible might have to say that she doesn’t like. Your continuing to engage with her is showing more patience than I would have shown had she shown up like this on my blog.

    * While she hasn’t actually mentioned her gender, it’s quite obvious from the subject she’s chosen and how she’s chosen to address it.

    @quietdove –

    Since Deep Strength is continuing to allow you to comment, perhaps you can answer a question for me. You want to completely ignore 1 Corinthians 7, because you claim it’s an example of “misogyny” (though you’ve shown no evidence for that claim so far). So tell me, why do you think that ignoring certain Bible verses is okay?

  36. quietdove says:

    @ Robin Munn: Why should the Bible be taken completely literally when it’s filled with hatred, violence, and rape? Sure, there are some parts of the Bible that are wise, but there are also some parts that are abhorrent. If you’re actually interested in taking your blinders off and seeing the truth about the Bible, then here are some links you should check out:

    http://www.evilbible.com/Rape.htm
    http://www.evilbible.com/Murder.htm
    http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/cruelty/long.html
    http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/int/long.html

    If you don’t want to look at those links (and I’m doubting you will want to look at them), then why is that? Why would you rather remain ignorant about what those links have to say than even glance at them? Your blind belief is not a good thing, you know.

  37. quietdove says:

    @ Deep Strength: Your comment shows a fundamental lack of knowledge of physiology and psychology. Let’s start with physiology. When a woman isn’t feeling like having sex, it can be nearly impossible for her to get herself aroused. Us women can’t just make ourselves get turned on like you men seem to be able to do. So, if a woman isn’t feeling like having sex and she can’t get herself aroused, do you think she should have sex with her husband even though she’s not aroused? If so, then how does that differ from rape? Rapists force non-aroused people to have sex with them, so I fail to see how that’s different from a husband forcing his non-aroused wife to have sex with him.

    Now for psychology. The reason why people enjoy sex so much is because it’s an act of love and pleasure. If you take the love and pleasure away from it, they won’t want to have it, since it will seem like a chore to them. Yet you want to take the love and pleasure away from sex. If a woman were to feel as though she’s obligated to have sex with her husband whenever he wants it, she’d never actually want to have sex with him. You’re trying to make sex less appealing and less pleasureful for women, and you expect that to not backfire on you at all? This is why it seems like you have no knowledge of psychology at all.

  38. Robin Munn says:

    @quietdove –

    There is a fact that you are either unaware of, or else conveniently ignoring, that destroys the premise of your first paragraph. For the record, and trying to keep it reasonably PG-13 or below: there are other ways that a wife can give her husband sexual pleasure, if she chooses to, that don’t require her to be aroused and yet won’t be at all painful to her if she isn’t aroused. Her mouth and her hands can quite easily bring him a great deal of sexual pleasure if she loves him and is willing to do nice things for him, even if (for whatever reason) the usual sexual methods are not advisable right now. (E.g., in the weeks immediately following childbirth, sex will quite likely be painful for her, and it would be much better for her sake if she were to take care of her husband’s sexual needs via other means during those weeks.)

    As for your second paragraph: you make it sound like “obligation” and “love” are opposites. But a mother will not always feel like changing her baby’s diapers — it’s gross and messy — yet she does it anyway, because she feels obligated AND because she loves her child. A father will not always feel like heading off to work to support his family with his income, but he does it anyway, because he has a duty (an obligation) to fulfill AND because he loves his wife and his children. A wife will not always feel like fulfilling her husband’s sexual desires, but if she loves him then it won’t be too hard to tell herself “I love him, and I want to do this nice thing for him” and start engaging in foreplay with him. (And because of the realities of female physiology, and the phenomenon called “responsive desire”, she will often find that once she’s started engaging in pre-sexual behavior, her own desire will start to grow and it won’t be a chore AT ALL. And even if her desire is completely absent yet she’s doing her husband a favor out of love, well, see my earlier comments about how she can use her hands and her mouth. There’s absolutely no need for her to put herself through something that would be painful in this case: she can do very nice things for her husband without needing to experience any pain.) And likewise, a husband may not always feel like fulfilling his wife’s emotional, or even sexual, needs. (Yes, the latter does happen.) But the same thing applies to him as well: even if he’s not at all aroused and the usual sexual methods won’t work for him, there are plenty of things he can do with his mouth and his hands to bring her pleasure. It can be an obligation (he does indeed have a duty to fulfill her needs) AND it can be an act of love at the same time.

    Finally, I repeat my question that I asked regarding your dismissal of 1 Corinthians 7 as being an example of “misogyny”. Tell me, why do you think that ignoring certain Bible verses is okay?

  39. quietdove says:

    @ Robin Munn:

    First of all, I did reply to your comment about 1 Corinthians 7. My reply included a few links, however, so the blog owner has to approve it. I’m sure that will happen soon. Please be patient.

    Second of all, the first time I commented on here, I was responding to something that Father Marker said. Here’s a part of his comment that I think is relevant: “it is my view that when a woman agrees to marry that she is agreeing to spread her legs for the rest of her life whenever her husband wants her to.” So he was talking about forcing women to have sexual intercourse, not about any other type of sex act. So I don’t see how other types of sex acts are relevant to this conversation at all.

    Third of all, no, a woman doesn’t always start getting aroused when she does sexual things with a man. If that were true, then women would always get aroused when they get raped, and that’s quite obviously not the case. Face it, a woman has to feel like having sex in order for her to end up getting turned on by performing foreplay on her husband. If she doesn’t feel like having sex, or if she sees sex as an obligation or a chore, then she’s not going to get turned on. I’m honestly wondering if you actually are a woman yourself, since you seem to not understand how the female body works.

  40. Robin Munn says:

    Posted this once and got an error message; trying again. Deep Strength, if this ends up double-posting, I apologize, and please delete one of the duplicates.

    @quietdove –

    I’ll take a look at your links once the reply shows up. In the meantime, I have another question or two I want to ask you. Before I go in depth into discussion of Bible passages, I like to know the Biblical knowledge of the person I’m talking to — it saves a lot of time to know whether I can assume a certain level of common knowledge, or whether I need to go into detail about history, the culture of the time, and so on. I’ve been assuming from the tone of your comments so far that you’re a Christian, but I’d like to know rather than assuming. So:

    1) Are you a Christian? If so, how long have you been a Christian? (Someone who just came to faith in Christ last year, and someone who’s been a Christian for twenty years, will naturally have different levels of knowledge.)

    2) How many times have you read through the Bible, cover to cover? Once? Twice? A hundred times?

    3) What’s your general church background? You don’t have to tell me the specific church you attend, obviously — there are good reasons not to put personally-identifiable information on the Internet. (I’m posting with my real name, but there are plenty of people who wouldn’t, which is fine.) But what denomination do you attend? And what is your church’s teaching on the subject of men, women, headship, and so on?

    You don’t need to answer all of those if you don’t want to, although it would really help me to know how to talk to you about this subject if you did answer them. I do especially need an answer to #1, though: knowing how long you’ve been a Christian will be very important in determining the approach I take in talking to you.

    Oh, and to clarify: I’m a man. I have one of those names that could be either male or female, so your assumption that I’m a woman (based just on my name) was reasonable, but I’m a man. And a virgin, so no, I have no first-hand experience of how the female body works. But I do read a lot (and be warned: I do mean a LOT), so I’m not completely ignorant on these things either.

    And by the way, I said “often”, not “always”. VERY important distinction.

    Finally, to address your second paragraph: that may be the only sex act that Father Marker talked about, but it’s far from the only one relevant to the subject. The subject is the authority that each spouse has (equally) over the other spouse’s body, and the obligation of each spouse to meet the other’s sexual needs. To keep the focus on just one method of meeting a spouse’s sexual needs would be a mistake, because there are LOTS of ways of fulfilling a spouse’s needs if one is willing to be a little creative. There’s absolutely no need for it to be painful for either spouse, and in a healthy marriage it doesn’t need to be. And that’s what we should be encouraging: people to move towards healthy patterns of behavior towards each other in marriage, rather than unhealthy ones. So instead of focusing on the bad scenarios and saying “these scenarios are bad and wrong and ugly,” I’d much rather focus on how to turn those bad scenarios around and make them good. Focusing on what CAN be done for one’s spouse, rather than on what one CAN’T do, is one way to do so. So thankfully, you’re completely wrong to think that other types of sex acts aren’t relevant to the conversation. They are, and they’re precisely the way to fix some (not all, sadly, but some) of the broken situations that can arise when spouses allow selfishness to come between them in the marriage bed.

  41. quietdove says:

    @ Robin Munn: I apologize for the confusion about your name. However, your lack of sexual experience with females is quite apparent. Just because you “read a lot” doesn’t mean that you actually understand how the female body works. Why not trust me on this, since I’m a woman? Don’t you think that I’d know more about this than you would?

    Now to answer your questions:

    1) I’m not a Christian, I’m an atheist. However, I have read the Bible more than once, and that’s what actually convinced me to become an atheist. I realized, through plenty of deep thought and research, that the Bible is full of flaws, which means that it cannot be “the word of God” at all. And that, in turn, means that God doesn’t exist. So reading the Bible really was the onus for my disbelief.

    2) See my answer to question 1.

    3) I used to attend a non-denominational church, back before I ended up reading the entire Bible and becoming an atheist. I never really fit in there, though, since my life philosophy revolves around compassion, and it was hard for me to ignore all of the parts of the Bible that are completely lacking in compassion.

    And, seeing as Father Marker was the person I was originally replying to, I think that what he had to say is entirely relevant and should be the main focus of this conversation. Why do you keep wanting to stray from what he said? Is it because you realize that what he said was abhorrent, and you don’t want to have to admit that? And why should a woman have to feel as though it’s her duty to give her husband sexual pleasure? If a woman doesn’t feel like giving her husband sexual pleasure, she shouldn’t have to. Sex is supposed to be a way for a couple to bond, not a chore. Plus, what loving husband would demand that his wife pleasure him when she’s already told him that she’s not in the mood? It’s never loving to demand that someone perform a sex act on you.

  42. Robin Munn says:

    @quietdove –

    I apologize for the confusion about your name.

    No worries, I wasn’t offended in the least. It happens to me all the time when communicating with people who’ve never met me face-to-face. I routinely get letters from banks, etc., addressed to “Ms. Robin Munn”. There’s no need to apologize.

    However, your lack of sexual experience with females is quite apparent. Just because you “read a lot” doesn’t mean that you actually understand how the female body works. Why not trust me on this, since I’m a woman? Don’t you think that I’d know more about this than you would?

    Nice attempt at virgin-shaming there. Shame it won’t work on me at all. Oh, and your attempted Appeal to Authority (said authority being your own experience) won’t work either.

    See, I read a LOT. And I read books, and blogs, and blog comments, by both men and women, single and married and divorced. Sometimes they’re books or blogs about politics, or technology, or Christianity, and sometimes (the ones relevant to this discussion) they’re ones about romance, marriage, sex, and so on. (I do plan on being married someday, and I believe in being prepared.) So I’ve seen all sorts of information, and I’ve gotten a good sense of what’s true and what’s false. And when many, MANY happily-married women (and many happily-married men as well) have written one thing about how the female body works, and you write the opposite… well, I’m going to believe them, rather than you.

    Now, if you’re going to tell me “I’m not like that; my body works this way,” I’ll believe you. But if you’re going to make general claims about how the female body works, and those claims contradict what dozens of other women have written… well, the logical choice is obvious.

    I have to leave soon, so I’ll have to summarize rather than respond to the rest of your points. But here are a few bits I want to respond to quickly:

    1) I’m not a Christian, I’m an atheist.

    As an atheist, you won’t be persuaded by arguments from the Bible, so there’s not really much point in discussing 1 Corinthians 7 with you. Though I’ll give you credit for not trying to lie about it. If you had, I would have ended the conversation then and there.

    it was hard for me to ignore all of the parts of the Bible that are completely lacking in compassion.

    I don’t know which specific parts you’re thinking of, but most of the time when people mention this kind of thing, they’re referring to parts of the Old Testament, usually from the Pentateuch. (The punishment on Sodom and Gomorrah, for example.) Yet King David wrote a psalm of praise, Psalm 145, in which he says, “The Lord is gracious and compassionate, slow to anger and rich in love. The Lord is good to all; he has compassion on all he has made.” Do you think David didn’t know the Pentateuch, where most of the “uncompassionate” stories can be found? Or do you think maybe he saw them from a perspective you’re missing?

    And, seeing as Father Marker was the person I was originally replying to, I think that what he had to say is entirely relevant and should be the main focus of this conversation. Why do you keep wanting to stray from what he said?

    Because I know what you’re trying to do. You’re playing the Internet Arguing Checklist game, and so far you’ve hit #1 (Skim Until Offended) with Father Marker, and #2 (Disqualify That Opinion) with me, with your claim that because I’m a man I can’t know how the female body works (despite all my reading of people who have PLENTY of knowledge on the subject). I’ve also seen you pull #4 (Disregard Inconvenient Facts) once, and I was willing to grant you the benefit of the doubt on that one until, when I pointed those facts out to you, you tried to dodge them and say “Oh, but that isn’t relevant. Look! An offensive statement! Let’s talk about that instead!”

    As I said, I want to focus on the positive, not the negative. I want to talk about what can be done to encourage husbands and wives to care for each others’ sexual needs, and be unselfish with each other. And I refuse to be distracted from that by negativity. If you insist on talking about Father Marker’s comment and ignoring anything else, that’s your right, but you won’t be talking to me about it. If you want to talk to me, let’s talk about what can be done to encourage the good, and to help husbands and wives to love each other better, not talk about how to tear each other down.

  43. quietdove says:

    @ Robin Munn: The comment of mine that hasn’t been approved yet has some links to pages that have lists of all of the hateful, violent, and otherwise disturbing Bible verses. And are you really saying that you’re going to ignore all of the hatred, violence, and otherwise disturbing things in the Bible just because of what King David said in Psalm 145? Ignoring all of the horrible parts of the Bible doesn’t make them any less real, you know. So what’s the point of ignoring them, then? Stop pretending that King David had the authority to renounce all of the horrible parts of the Bible and learn to accept that he was just a human like you.

    Also, are you really trying to pretend that you know more about the female body than I do? I’m a woman, for goodness sakes! And I’ve been a woman (rather than a girl) for over a decade now. (I’m 27 years old, just FYI.) So I know about how the female body reacts sexually. So why are you so unwilling to trust me on that? And why are you being so arrogant as to presume that you know more than I do on this topic? Do you really think that arrogance is a good quality to have? (And no, I’m not appealing to authority here. I’m simply stating the facts, which are that I’m a woman and you aren’t, which means that I have first-hand experience on what it’s like to be a woman, while you have no first-hand experience on that topic.)

    And I’m not trying to play any sort of an “Internet Arguing Checklist” game. I was simply trying to reply to Father Marker, until you and Deep Strength butted in and started arguing with me. You started this argument, not me. So why are you so unwilling to take responsibility for that? And why is it so hard for you to butt out of others’ conversations? What I originally said to Father Marker had nothing to do with you, you know.

  44. happyhen11 says:

    Dove,
    As a preface, I am a woman married for 15 years. I have not always been a great wife. I consider myself a pretty decent one now in no small part from the knowledge good men and women passed onto me and the patience (akin to that of Job) my husband has shown through the years. Take that for whats it’s worth.

    ” Also, great job at refusing to even try to understand what rape is. Rape is forcing someone who isn’t aroused to have sex.”

    No. A husband forcing sex on a his wife when she isn’t aroused is unfortunate in that it will probably hurt but generally that is her own fault for having given him the run around for months on end and not holding to her part of marriage. That he would stop taking no for an answer would result in him forcing himself on her or finding greener pastures. Which do you prefer? Sex with his wife or adultery. I know which God prefers.

    Rape on the other hand is sex without consent. Being married implies consent to sex. A man can not rape his wife because she consented to being married. Marriage = sex. In fact I read a priest recently say that we should stop using the term sex all together and replace it with marriage. As in “have you had marriage with that woman?” Blunt and to the point. No confusion about expectations there. Have marriage with your husband, have it often.

    “When a woman isn’t feeling like having sex, it can be nearly impossible for her to get herself aroused. Us women can’t just make ourselves get turned on like you men seem to be able to do. So, if a woman isn’t feeling like having sex and she can’t get herself aroused, do you think she should have sex with her husband even though she’s not aroused?”

    Yes dearheart, she should. Grab the coconut oil and make it work. It is nothing close to “nearly impossible.” You make female arousal sound like men landing on the moon. She should get over herself and understand that if nothing else, she owes a debt to her husband, a debt that she agreed to on their wedding day. If all us ladies had a nickle for every time our husbands propositioned us after hellish miserable days with teething babies and loads of laundry and feeling utterly touched to death, we would all be rich. Do you really think other women haven’t found the secret to dealing with this properly? It’s called compassion, love, understanding, and being a real wife. And you know what, if you look at your man and say, “Honey, I don’t know if I can get my brain into this enough after the day I have had to enjoy it to it’s fullest BUT I know you need the love, affection, release, bonding, and/or closeness that being with me gives you so I am happy to have sex with you regardless of what my body says to me right this instant” I bet he would be just fine with that. And maybe, just maybe, you might find, you can get your mind into it. Maybe not, but it is worth a try… that is if you love your husband.

  45. quietdove says:

    @ HappyHen: Forcing someone to have sex when they’re not aroused causes more than just physical pain. It causes deep psychological pain as well. Why don’t you care about that at all? Can you honestly not see how sick it is to refuse to care about people’s emotional well-being? I’ve suffered from depression for most of my life (though, thankfully, I’ve never been raped), and I can tell you first hand that emotional pain can be debilitating, and it’s people like you who make my life worse by refusing to show me any consideration at all due to the amount of emotional pain I’m in.

    Also, there is no excuse for adultery. None at all. Just because a woman says she’s not in the mood for sex one time doesn’t mean that her husband can cheat on her as much as he wants. Plus, you’re pretty much implying that men aren’t in control of their own sex drives and are slaves to their hormones. Is that really what you want to be implying? Men should be able to control themselves enough to keep from cheating.

    And no, marriage is not consent to sex whenever a man wants it. A woman should always be able to say no to sex. To say otherwise is to imply that a woman becomes nothing but a sex slave once she marries a man. And that’s just incredibly disturbed. Also, I’m curious: do you think it’s okay for a married woman to force her husband to have sex with her? Somehow, I’m doubting you think that’s okay. And that just goes to show your double-standards on this issue and your blatant misogyny. Tell me, why do you hate women so much?

  46. Robin Munn says:

    … And now she hits #3, Attack Attack Attack. “… until you and Deep Strength butted in and started arguing with me.” Note the choice of words — “arguing” rather than “debating”. Debating is a positive word, while “arguing” is a negative.

    And she doubles down on her insistence that her own experience is more valid than that of the other women who have written down their experiences to be read. Because, well, she doesn’t say why I should trust her more than I should trust the other women who have written the opposite of what she claims. And then after claiming that I should listen to her experience rather than that of other women — in effect claiming that her experience is the ultimate source of knowledge on the subject, rather than anyone else’s — she actually believes that this isn’t an appeal to authority! The lack of logic is actually quite amusing.

    Oh wait, I missed one. Immediately after doubling down on her insistence that her own experience should trump anything I have read on the subject, she then claims that I’m being arrogant. Projection, thy name is quietdove.

    That’s going to have to be it for quite some time, as I need to leave now. But I was done talking to her anyway.

    @quietdove –

    You may have noticed the use of the third-person pronoun above. That’s because I’m talking about you, not to you. You have demonstrated to my complete satisfaction that you are not interested in a positive conversation, and are only here to attack. And so I’m done talking to you, as nothing will be gained from it. I will be reading the links you posted once they come through, but I will not be responding to you any longer. I may continue to talk about what you’ve said, if it’s worth discussing, but this is the last response you’ll get from me directly.

  47. Robin Munn says:

    Wait, one quick link-drop before I leave. I was holding this one in reserve in case quietdove tried to falsely claim that she was a Christian, which to her credit she did not. But here, take a look at how she argues on another comment thread:

    http://secularpatriarchy.wordpress.com/2014/07/13/the-natural-order-of-relations-between-men-and-women-at-the-personal-and-political-level/

    Is this the argumentation style of a person who’s wanting to have an honest debate with someone she disagrees with? Or is it the style of a person who’s just here to attack others?

  48. @ Robin

    Sent you an e-mail at the e-mail address you use.

  49. quietdove says:

    @ Robin Munn: Great passive-aggressive response there. Talking about me rather than directly to me is entirely immature. And, seeing as you just displayed your immaturity for everyone to see, tell me why I should think that you’re trying to debate with me rather than argue? Debating is something that mature people do.

    Also, what women are you talking about when you said “she doesn’t say why I should trust her more than I should trust the other women who have written the opposite of what she claims”? Something tells me there are no women out there who have written the opposite of what I claim. And you don’t want to have to admit that, which is probably part of why you decided to stop replying to me. You didn’t want to have to own up to that lie of yours.

    As for your arrogance, Merriam-Webster’s Online Dictionary defines “arrogance” as “an insulting way of thinking or behaving that comes from believing that you are better, smarter, or more important than other people.” I’ll only ask you this once: do you or do you not think that you’re smarter than me, in terms of knowing how the female body works? I’m guessing you do think you’re smarter than me, and you just didn’t want to have to own up to that, which, again, is why you decided to stop replying to me.

    And what makes you think that you’re interested in a positive conversation, when you’re not taking anything I’ve said into consideration at all? This is another reason why you can’t possibly be trying to debate: a debate requires that both people involved actually listen to each other and keep their minds open to what each other are saying. You have not done anything close to that, so why should I believe that you’re looking for a positive conversation, and that you’re not just arguing like a child?

  50. happyhen11 says:

    “Also, I’m curious: do you think it’s okay for a married woman to force her husband to have sex with her? Somehow, I’m doubting you think that’s okay. And that just goes to show your double-standards on this issue and your blatant misogyny. Tell me, why do you hate women so much?”

    Yes darlin’. Assuming he has no medical issues and “is healthy enough for sex” yes, he should fulfill his obligation. To be honest, this has never once been an issue in my marriage (my husband actually laughed when I read him your comment) but he agreed that yes indeed I should force away and force often!!

  51. quietdove says:

    @ HappyHen: Forcing someone to have sex isn’t pleasurable (otherwise, it wouldn’t cause so much physical and emotional pain), so I don’t understand why your husband wants you to force him to have sex with you. It seems to me like you’re belittling forced sex and implying that rape victims shouldn’t suffer at all, and should have enjoyed being raped. Tell me, why is it so hard for you to understand what forced sex is actually like, and why are you being so callous about this whole thing?

  52. happyhen11 says:

    “Plus, you’re pretty much implying that men aren’t in control of their own sex drives ”

    And you are implying women aren’t in control of theirs. You really aren’t in control of your sex drive, your own ability to fulfill your marital obligations? Rationing sex does not make you a paragon of virtue. Expecting sex does not make your husband a rapist. That he wants to have sex with you and only you should come as a great pleasure and joy, not a burden or worse, a crime.

  53. quietdove says:

    @ HappyHen: I’m in control of my own sex drive. That’s why I’ve never cheated on anyone at all, in any of the relationships I’ve been in. And that’s why I’m disgusted by the idea of cheating. And no, I’m not rationing sex. I’m just reserving the right to say that I don’t want to have sex. Why is that so wrong of me? And if my husband (I’m not married, but I hope to someday get married) ever wanted to force me to have sex with him, that wouldn’t make me feel joyful. That would make me want to break up with him and cut off all contact with him. I don’t take lightly to men who don’t take “no” for an answer.

    Also, like I said to Deep Strength, there is no difference at all between marital rape and actual rape beyond the fact that people who are victims of marital rape are married to their rapist. In both cases, people are being forced to have sex against their will. So by justifying marital rape, you’re pretty much trying to justify all rape. Just because someone gets married doesn’t mean that they’re forgoing their right to say “no” to sex.

  54. @ Robin

    To be quite frank I don’t see the point of having this discussion with an atheist as a Christian.

    Christians should be — and are in my case — willing to lay aside their feelings and love others by serving them and their needs. Thus, if my wife wanted to have sex, and I was sick, tired or not feeling it I would have sex with her because I love her. That’s the entire point of being a Christian — to love God and love others.

    Apparently, this act of love and service that I could give my wife for her needs is her forcing me to have sex and thus rape. This act of love also makes me guilty of misogyny, supporting rape, and comparative to fundamentalist jihadist muslims and people who stone women.

    Essentially, what it boils down to is that when my wife wants sex and I’m not feeling it I should say no to her because my feelings are more important than her needs. I shouldn’t love her.

    Feelings > Logic, Scripture, and Love

    I don’t buy it, and I never will.

  55. quietdove says:

    @ Deep Strength: Are you just ignoring me now?

  56. quietdove says:

    @ Deep Strength: Also, how is it loving to expect a woman to force herself to have sex with you when she’s not in the mood? That sounds more like servitude to me. I mean, if a woman doesn’t feel like having sex, she shouldn’t have to force herself to do so. Sex should never be seen as a chore or an obligation.

  57. Robin Munn says:

    @Deep Strength –

    Got your e-mail. Can’t reply immediately, but will reply within a day or so.

  58. Looking Glass says:

    Lol, this thread got busy yesterday.

    Just ban the concern troll. You can’t teach fools; engagement has it’s limits. “Quietdove” has chosen her sin and foolishness. She obviously unwilling to understand the concepts of “duty” and “obligation”, nor the reason that they exist within relationships. Which means she cannot understand “love” beyond the concept of physical pleasure.

    Quietdove, I pray you find God through the Son, Jesus Christ, as you are lost in the darkness of your soul. Your comments here show how lost you are, but the Grace of God is sufficient for all of us. Regardless of our foolishness & sin. Cry out to the Lord so you may know his Salvation & Peace, for you do not understand the destruction that awaits you.

  59. quietdove says:

    @ Looking Glass: So basically, you’re going to write off everything I’ve said and demean my beliefs simply because I have a different point of view than you do? “Different” doesn’t equal “wrong,” you know. Someone can have a different point of view than you and still have valid things to say. Yet you want to keep your mind firmly shut to any point of view other than your own, even though your own point of view isn’t even close to being perfect. Why is that?

  60. deti says:

    Looking Glass: You actually have the best response to dove here. There isn’t even a common frame of reference or set of facts to proceed from. Talking with people like dove is useless.

    In your case, dove, your “different” point of view IS wrong.

    Dove, you’re wasting your time. You aren’t going to convince anyone here that marital sex is rape. You aren’t going to convince anyone here that a husband expecting sex from a wife is rape. That’s a nonstarter. Claims that a husband having sex with his wife is rape are silly. It’s a sin for a man to use force; it’s equally sin for a wife to withhold because she isn’t “feeling it” or isn’t in the mood. Period. Full stop. End of discussion.

  61. deti says:

    My wife demands that I work to support her. She expects me to pay for things like food, medical care and housing.

    I don’t want her to do that. I do not consent to her using my body for her own selfish reasons.

    I didn’t agree to this when I got married. I didn’t agree that I would have to work to care for her, even on those unusual occasions when I don’t feel like it.

    I should not have to work to earn money to care for her if I don’t want to. I should be free to support my wife only when I feel like it and only if it suits my needs and only if I get something out of it.

    My wife is using my body to satisfy her.

    She is raping me.

  62. happyhen11 says:

    Well, deti, you are correct. She admitted she is an atheist and is not married (and she is probably 20 something to boot) which begs the question “Why are you here trying to teach anyone anything?” I think it was Oscar Wilde who said “I am not young enough to know everything.”

  63. deti says:

    if a man is not entitled to the one thing from his wife that actually makes a union of one man and one woman a marriage, then he does not have a marriage.

    If a man is not entitled to sex from his wife, then he’s not entitled to anything from her.

    And if that is the case, then it cannot be that the wife is entitled to anything from her husband. She cannot be entitled to his time, his money, his resources, his work, his expertise, his protection, his provision, or his sexual fidelity.

    If he cannot be reasonably assured of sexual access to his wife, then there is no reason whatsoever why she should have any assurance of his provision and protection.

  64. I’m finished here, and put comments on moderation.

  65. Looking Glass says:

    I’ll less if DS let’s this comment through, as maybe it works as a capstone to the thread.

    Quietdove, a “point of view” is utterly worthless without corresponding acceptance of Reality, the Nature of the World and the Nature of Relationships. I never argued my “point of view” is perfect, you’re just making up lies again. My point of view is grounded in the hard reality of life, something your assumption of never having to accept obligations prevents you from understanding.

    I understand what a world without accepted obligations will look like. You’ll be crushed under the weight of those that form them. Which will lead to a world where what you suppose is tyranny will be inflicted upon those not your children (as you’re unlikely to have offspring) by actual tyranny. I do not want to see that world, but you’re free to choose that result.

    I pray you do not choose destruction, as you no nothing, yet, of what awaits.

  66. Charlotte says:

    I am probably one of the only women here who agrees with the views expressed here. I’m not alone, I have read books by Christian women who struggle with their husbands wanting sex and not being “in the mood”.
    The answer is prayer, and God will give you the desire for your husband. Besides: I may not be feeling it when my husband is, initially, but intimacy in my marriage is sacred and God-sent, and I there hasn’t been a single time I haven’t enjoyed being intimate with my husband, even if at first, I wasn’t entirely enthusiastic. (He would NEVER force himself on me, I want to be clear on that point!)
    There have also been a few times the tables have been turned, and he submits to me in that way the same as I submit to him other times. God made marriage so that man and woman become one, one flesh, and if one has a desire, it should be fulfilled by their other half. It is selfish to think that you and you alone control your body; you don’t. I belong to my husband, and he belongs to me. (And we both belong to God!)
    I am not pro-rape, by the way. One of my very best friends was date-raped when she was 17 and got pregnant. She told me of her experience, she woke up in an alley, beat up, bruised, and sore, and had to go to the hospital. She then found out a few weeks later she was pregnant, and she had her baby, who was a boy. Take my word when I tell you that her son is one of the very sweetest kids you could ever hope to meet. I guess this is a tangent but you hear women saying that they should be able to get an abortion because they are raped. I can’t imagine the emotional toll that must take, but every time I hear that argument I see that little boy’s face and I think, how bereft the world would be without his being allowed to live.
    But: I digress. I take rape very seriously and it is a horrible crime.
    But your husband cannot rape you: nor can you rape your husband. It would be like saying that I could steal from myself. How can I steal something that already belongs to me?
    Mutual respect and love go a long way to making a marriage whole. My husband loves and respects me as I do him. Marriage means giving yourself to another, heart, body, and soul; all of you, nothing can be held back. Intimacy was set aside for marriage, it is a gift from God.
    If you truly love your husband, you wouldn’t deny his desires.

  67. Rory porth says:

    Prov. 9:7-8 ¶ He who corrects a mocker invites insult.
    He who reproves a wicked man invites abuse. Don’t reprove a scoffer, lest he hate you.
    Reprove a wise man, and he will love you.

  68. nikki says:

    I don’t agree. If each spouse has power over the other and the woman tells him to stop or that she doesn’t want to have sex then she has asserted her power over his body. And when he forces her that asserts power over her body. That reaps anger and bitterness and resentment.

  69. @ nikki

    If each spouse has power over the other and the woman tells him to stop or that she doesn’t want to have sex then she has asserted her power over his body

    Incorrect. Read the context of the passage: the power over the spouses body is FOR sex not against it.

    And when he forces her that asserts power over her body. That reaps anger and bitterness and resentment.

    Denying the other spouse sex “reaps anger and bitterness and resentment” too.

    Basically, spouses need to recognize that denying sex is a sin. If a spouse denies sex then it puts the other spouse in a poor position where they may be tempted to sin as well. Don’t deny sex:

    1 Corinthians 7:5 Do not deprive each other except perhaps by mutual consent and for a time, so that you may devote yourselves to prayer. Then come together again so that Satan will not tempt you because of your lack of self-control.

  70. DeepStrength,

    I would be very interested to hear your take on some posts I have written on this subject. I briefly mentioned that Biblically speaking “there is no such thing as marital rape” but at the same time I said that I would never advocate for a husband to force himself upon his wife.

    The main point of my post(“Is a husband selfish for having sex with his wife when she is not in the mood”) was not about forced sex at all, it was about a husband accepting grudgingly given sex from his wife. Basically a husband goes to initiate sex with his wife(some type of foreplay or talk) and she rebuffs him. I talk about how as Christian man he needs to discern whether his wife’s refusal is for legitmate health or other reasons(in which case he should be gracious and sacrifice himself for her needs) or is she simply acting rebellious(using a power play with her body).

    I say if she grudgingly yields after he exhorts her with the fact that God has given him her body in marriage, then he ought to take that. It is still consent, but a grudging consent.

    If she is continually acting rebellious, he needs to confront her behavior with the Scriptures and perhaps pursue some other help in getting his wife to see this behavior as being unChristian.

    You said here :
    “The initiating spouse should respond out of love by correcting with the Scriptures, and explaining/teaching them if they are unaware. If they continue in rebellion then potentially meting out consequences as necessary.”

    What I am writing a series on “How to be a godly husband”, and as part of this series I am talking about sexual refusal in marriage, and the fact that most Christian sites and books teach there is little a Christian husband can do about this – they just say things like show her the Scriptures and pray for her.

    I am taking a proactive approach, arguing that a husband has more tools he can use besides just using the Scriptures with her or just praying for her. I have currently finishing up the post in the series on what consequences a husband could bring into his wife’s life for her rebellious ways(and I am not talking about any kind of physical abuse or forcing of sex).

    I know you and I might not completely agree on this subject – but I would appreciate your take on what I wrote http://biblicalgenderroles.com/2015/05/16/is-a-husband-selfish-for-having-sex-with-his-wife-when-she-is-not-the-mood/

  71. Pedat Ebediyah says:

    It seems that what you have here are women who simply lack the devotion to Christ and to their partners to where surrendering themselves make any sense at all.

  72. @ biblicalgenderroles

    Pretty good.

    I think the biggest thing to remember in marriage and with Christians is Jesus’ prayer in John 17:

    John 17:20 “My prayer is not for them alone. I pray also for those who will believe in me through their message, 21 that all of them may be one, Father, just as you are in me and I am in you. May they also be in us so that the world may believe that you have sent me. 22 I have given them the glory that you gave me, that they may be one as we are one— 23 I in them and you in me—so that they may be brought to complete unity. Then the world will know that you sent me and have loved them even as you have loved me.

    Ultimately, the goal of all of the commands in NT Scripture is about unity. Likewise, this is the same as marriage which is representative of Jesus and the Church as one.

    So too sex is about complete unity.

    Christians should be willing to disregard their feelings of “disunity” — “I’m not in the mood” or “when I feel like it” — in favor of the uniting act of sex.

    If you understand that then you will completely understand why Paul gives authority to each spouse over the other’s body for sex. One of the only exceptions of headship-submission relationship. Unity is more important than even authority.

    This is also the true meaning of the misused Ephesians 5:21 Submit to one another out of reverence for Christ.

  73. Nil says:

    Men like you should remain single.

  74. schweineloeffel says:

    Interesting discussion but I agree with quietdove on almost (but not quite) everything she says because I understand the point she’s been trying to make. Of course in marriage there’s an expectation of sex, however, that gives neither partner the right to “demand” or “coerce” the other to have sex. Period. End of story. End of discussion.

  75. @ schweineloeffel

    Interesting discussion but I agree with quietdove on almost (but not quite) everything she says because I understand the point she’s been trying to make. Of course in marriage there’s an expectation of sex, however, that gives neither partner the right to “demand” or “coerce” the other to have sex. Period. End of story. End of discussion.

    False. There is a reason “to have and to hold” is present in wedding vows.

    Now, a couple made up their own wedding vows without that sure. However, if they didn’t then going back on their vows to freely give sex in marriage is reneging on their commitment.

    I don’t even have to bring up Christian marriage — which is the assumption here in the first place — as it is a sin to withhold sex via 1 Corinthians 7.

    On the other hand, it is a sin to coerce sex. Coercing sex is a sin because it violates free will. However, demanding sex is well within the limits of the marriage contract given both sides committed to it in their vows. Yet demanding generally doesn’t come off well. Thus, I don’t recommend demanding even if it’s justified in the confines of the commitment.

    Indeed, since sex is implicit in marriage a husband is better off flirting with his wife and then make sexual advances later. Bothering to ask, much less demand, tends to fail as asking is a turn off.

  76. Olayinka says:

    I understand what this is trying to say but I think it comes across as insensitive. If a husband has to force himself on his wife, that’s rape. Let’s be honest you want to enjoy sex and demanding it does not make it enjoyable. I don’t think it’s okay for spouses to deprive each other of sex. That’s clearly wrong, but at the same tome let’s not write off the fact that sometimes you don’t want to and I think that’s okay as long as it’s not a constant denial. If there is a constant denial then maybe the couple should examine their relationship to see that is causing a turn off. But if a husband or wife find themselves forcing themselves on their spouse, i.e. drugging, holding them down or hurting them when it is not consented then that is a crime. Married or not.

  77. Looking Glass says:

    @Olayinka:

    The proper response is, “tough, buttercup”.

    For as much theological discussion that comes up around this topic, it’s actually completely worthless. Because if a wife having sex with her husband is an “insensitive” command, you ain’t a Christian. Short and simple. That’s WAY down the list of the brutal things that come with being a Christian and what the commands from the Lord entail for your life.

    Granted, you write like a non-Christian, so why bother commenting? You don’t understand the issue in the first place.

  78. Olayinka says:

    Where did I ever say I wasn’t a Christian in that post. I am Christian and have been my whole life. Just because someone does not agree with you doesn’t mean I haven’t accepted Jesus as my Lord and Savior. Also, if you aren’t going to respond respectfully then you shouldn’t comment at all. I never said that a wife shouldn’t have sex with her husband, I clearly said if there is a constant denial of sex then the couple should reevaluate what might be causing the deprivation. Communicating with your spouse about issues in their relationship can help their sex life! Sex is important between a married couple, clearly, but sex is not just for the man…. sex is an equal expression of love for both women and men. Both parties have to listen to each other of what suits them sexually. All I am saying is that I understand sex is important for married couples, if there is a problem in their sex life is usually an indication that something else is wrong in their relationship. Those issues should be resolved and it might help other areas of their relationship. If things are so bad that a spouse feels the need to force their spouse to have sex with them, that is wrong. Let’s not forget that even Christian marriage is not perfect because us humans are prone to error and that is okay as long we look to God to fix it.
    We can agree to disagree respectfully. I’m not really here to argue, just stating my thoughts and my interpretation. Have a blessed day.

  79. Isabelle says:

    There is no such thing as marital rape. Before using phrases or words that the world uses , Christians should check out where the rhetoric comes from.
    The marital rape lie was made up by radical feminists to fit their demonic slogan :
    ‘My body my choice”
    This slogan is that den of sins that justified :
    – the glorification of female sexual promiscuity
    – abortion
    – sex denial in marriage (if my body is mine , I can withhold sex /if it is not I can’t ).

    Christians , please , listen to the truth. This is where the marital rape lie comes from.

    Actually , in marriage there cannot be such a thing as “coerced sex anyway” since coercing someone to have sex means that you have NO POWER over their own body and you have to ask for sex .
    It is like asking someone to lend you THEIR pen because it is THEIR pen and not yours.

    It is all a matter of possession . If the man is in control of his wife’s body as the BIBLE clealry states , he does not even ask for sex . That is where the author of the article is wrong.
    He does not have to ask , he just have to come to his wife and as the Bible always says KNOW his wife.

    Proverbs chapter 5 v 18 clearly tells the man to DRINK the waters of HIS well.
    It is HIS well ( the wife’s body) . He just has to help himself since it is HIS.

    Does the author of the article realize what possessing mean ? Do post modern Christians brainwashed by the radical feminist insanity spread all over the Western nations realize what it means to possess ?

    Does a man have to ask a permission to take money from HIS own bank account ? It is his !!!!!

    Calling a husband ‘rapist’ for having sex with his wife is like calling a man thief for taking money from HIS bank account.

    The author brings forth” the spirit and the letter” topic but I’m sorry ,in the case of marriage , it is irrelevant. Because marriage is God’s provision for avoiding sexual temptation .
    He won’t sin against the Lord if he has sex with a reluctant wife ( I should say disgraceful and rebellious) . He will sin if he has sex with his neighbour’s wife instead or a whore.

    If he has to “force himself” as you say , it is because the wife thinks she still has power over her own body . She is the one in sin . Not him.

    You do’nt have to force yourself on something that you belong ! It makes no sense at all.
    When it belongs to you , you just have to take it.
    Don’t you do that with the things you possess ? Do you ask permission for going into your car and turning the ignition key ?
    You ask for permission when it is NOT your car , right ?

    Please Christians , realize how demonic the marital rape lie is. Realize it in the light of the Scriptures.
    This lie is a radical feminist lie that directly derives from the fact that a married woman still has a right over her own body.
    It was made up in hell and enforced on earth in order to blow up the marital bad , the core of marriage.

    Sex is duty in marriage and to be sure it is done , God has deprived both spouses (realize it is not only the wife) of the previous power they had over their own body.
    The author talks about a “violation of free will” , which is totally irrelevant.

    And when a father forces his child to do something he does not want to but has to do , he violates his free will too ? What is the use for him to have authority over his child then ?
    Just to decorate ?

    God in his WISDOM and GOODNESS has already made away with “free will” by depriving both spouses of power of their own body.
    There is NO FREE WILL .

    Because there is NO free will as regards sex , sex cannot only be withheld with MUTUAL CONSENT (logical since both have authority over the other’s body) .
    Which means that the woman CANNOT do anything with her own body but have to petition her husband . If he agrees for not having sex , ok. If he does not , they WILL have sex.
    And it goes both ways since the wife has also been given authority over her husband’s body.

    What is the use of having power if you cannot exercize it , as the author of the article says ?
    Sorry but it makes no sense.
    Having power over your spouse’s body is no “letter of the law” ! It is a God-given power that you have to use !!

    Notice that the Bible says to the man ‘ DRINK ‘ (proverbs 5 v 18).
    It does not say drink IF the well agrees . NEVER.

    Notice also that it is only GOD and God only who had a right to stop a man from having sex .
    There were two reasons :
    -the menstruations . strictly forbidden
    – spiritual : men could not know their wife before some particular spiritual event ( when Moses got the commandments on Mount Sinai for example)

    But NOWHERE in the Bible you can read God say to the man ‘don’t have sex if your wife does not want to “.
    Anyway , a wife has to submit to her husband in everything , right ?
    So ? Where is the problem ?

    Do rou realize how unbiblical the marital rape lie is ? How demonic it is in fact since it enables SATAN to take over the marital bed and ruin it.
    No sex = no marriage since the very defintion of marriage is being one flesh.

    To be honest , I was far from suspecting my own Christian brothers or sisters to believe in a demonic lie like the marital rape stuff.
    I can say , and Lord knows my heart , that I am appaled . Really appaled.
    I can’t believe such misandric rhetoric can be used among Christians.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s