Kissing Is Not SEX

[Toothfairy]

Four Duggar girls–teens from the homeschooling reality show family 19 Kids and Counting–have just released their first book. Garnering the most press attention is the little tidbit that they will save not just sex, but also their first kiss, for their marriage.

I have several friends who have saved the smooching for the ceremony, and they’re very glad they did. I certainly don’t think there’s anything wrong with it, though the thought of hundreds of people watching me kiss for the first time is more intimidating than romantic. But I still find the whole Christian purity culture a little perplexing.

My mother grew up in a very conservative rural Manitoba community. They kept the Sabbath sacred; they didn’t wear makeup; they certainly didn’t dance. But kissing, at least when you were engaged, was fine. Today, though, large swaths of Christianity are more conservative than our parents’ and grandparents’ generations were.

What’s going on?

I think it all started with Joshua Harris’ I Kissed Dating Good-Bye. That book spread like wildfire through the church, and all of a sudden dating, which had been one of the main attractions of youth groups for decades, became an anathema.

Yet while I agree there’s little benefit to high school relationships (an opinion I am so glad my teenage daughters shared), Boy Meets Girl, Harris’ follow-up book about courtship, still left me a little uneasy. He and his now-wife didn’t kiss until they were married. They really only did that famous “Christian side hug†that every evangelical teen has perfected. And Harris has a list of strict guidelines they followed so as to not feed lust.

Are Christian teenage girls growing up ashamed of their sexuality?

Lust is a real battle, yet this movement to grab lust by the throat and throttle it until it’s dead seems a little like overkill. We have purity ceremonies where we ask girls to stand with their dads and pledge not to have sex until marriage. We give endless talks on modesty, discussing hemlines and cleavage and how high T-shirts should be (two finger widths below the clavicle, apparently). I do believe in modesty; the world would be a much better place if everyone agreed that leggings are not pants. But in our eagerness combat the sexual revolution are we doing more harm than good?

That’s the question Amanda Barbee asked recently in her viral article “Naked and Ashamed.†She says that the evangelical church has made teenage girls ashamed of their sexuality, and this causes much sexual dysfunction later.

I certainly see where she’s coming from. We spend so much time telling girls, “Don’t do it! Don’t even think about it!†And then they get married and suddenly some switch is supposed to go off that lets them see sex as a positive thing.

What makes it especially problematic, though, is the way we frame the whole issue. “Boys are walking hormones who will lust all over anyone in a tight sweater. It’s your job to keep him from lusting!†Girls’ sex drives are barely mentioned, while boys are presented as testosterone-induced drones, rendered helpless by cleavage. Girls become responsible not just for their own purity, but for boys’ purity, too, and sex becomes something boys want but girls have to fight against. No wonder so many girls grow up ambivalent about sex!

Unfortunately, Barbee didn’t offer an alternate approach. Yes, we’re shaming girls too much, but purity is important, and sex before marriage damages you both spiritually and emotionally. We do need to teach our kids to wait. But if we really want kids to make good choices, maybe we should stop teaching them to do the right thing and start introducing them to Jesus.

I was recently talking with a 19-year-old young woman who didn’t date in high school, but is now in quite a serious relationship at university. When she and her boyfriend were first discussing boundaries, they decided not to define “how far they should go†because as soon as you draw a line, you immediately rush to that line and start flirting with it. Instead, they decided that they would start every time that they’re together by focusing on Jesus. Make Jesus the centre, and the rest will follow.

We have become so scared that teens will have sex that we have created a purity culture that is centred around rules and shame rather than centred around Jesus. Yes, we should be modest, and yes, we should be pure. But we’ll achieve that much faster by having a relationship with Christ than by memorizing a bunch of rules.

I’m convinced that Christian kids often rebel because we put too much energy into teaching rules and not enough into showing them how to love Jesus. Rules don’t win people to God; Jesus does. And He’s the only one who can help us create a purity culture anyway.

What happens when we take young women from this sex-obsessed approach to purity (because that is exactly what this is), and we brush them up against a guy and nothing happens? When holding his hand does not lead to petting or when having coffee does not lead to a slumber party? If a girl has grown up believing these are boundaries and that all roads lead to sex, the temptation is going to be to throw all of her ‘boundaries’ out the window.

Nothing happened when she held his hand, so why should anything happen when they snuggle? Nothing happened when they were alone for coffee, so what’s the big deal if she rides in his car? She starts thinking, “What’s the big deal?†and that is the last thing you want her thinking! What we need to be doing, instead, is encouraging young women to establish their boundaries and to come up with guidelines that help them.

This is a good blog post [link=]http://beggarsdaughter.com/2014/05/kissing-sex//link]

[Ave Maria]

If no kissing until marriage works for them, fine, but I don't think it needs to be a hard and fast rule. I think it could leave a girl quite scared, really, to go from no kissing to "all the way" in one night. Wedding nights are intimidating enough, even when you have been kissed before. :P

[RosyDaisy]

I'm a firm believer in "you have to kiss a few toads". I certainly didn't have sex with all of them. There is this thing called self control.

[scc12]

The whole no kissing thing is just for show anyway,imo.

It's so they and their parents can show the world they haven't had sex yet...after all,they haven't even kissed!

The joke would be on them should a couple have sex and not kiss bf the wedding.Perfectly possible.LOL.

[debrand]

I think that the problem with the purity culture is that it isn't biblical. Both the Old and New Testament place more emphasis on helping the poor and vulnerable than not thinking dirty thoughts. If parents were really following the bible, they would have their kids promise to give to charities or be nice to one another.

If the biblical Jesus is true who do you think would please him more? The person who ignores their fellow man but doesn't think any dirty thoughts or the highly promiscuous person who tries to help others? The Jesus described in the New Testament didn't show any evidence that he gave a damn about the state of women's hymens.

The purity culture has less to do about actually following Jesus and more to do with controlling people's sexuality. The idea that people might decide to have sex or not have sex based purely on their own needs seems to frighten some people.

People are different and it makes sense that we all react to sex differently. Some people are much more happy waiting for their first kiss and sexual experience until they are in a committed relationship. Other people are like me. I don't regret being promiscuous and have a lot of fond memories of past relationships but I know that what is right for me wouldn't be right for everyone.

[scc12]

I think they want to control who their dna,I mean offspring,procreate with as well.as in,it had better be from an acceptable family of the right beliefs and right ethnicity.that, in their minds, is the best way to insure their twisted beleifs get passed on.

[Scribber]

I think that the problem with the purity culture is that it isn't biblical. Both the Old and New Testament place more emphasis on helping the poor and vulnerable than not thinking dirty thoughts. If parents were really following the bible, they would have their kids promise to give to charities or be nice to one another.

If the biblical Jesus is true who do you think would please him more? The person who ignores their fellow man but doesn't think any dirty thoughts or the highly promiscuous person who tries to help others? The Jesus described in the New Testament didn't show any evidence that he gave a damn about the state of women's hymens.

The purity culture has less to do about actually following Jesus and more to do with controlling people's sexuality. The idea that people might decide to have sex or not have sex based purely on their own needs seems to frighten some people.

People are different and it makes sense that we all react to sex differently. Some people are much more happy waiting for their first kiss and sexual experience until they are in a committed relationship. Other people are like me. I don't regret being promiscuous and have a lot of fond memories of past relationships but I know that what is right for me wouldn't be right for everyone.

It has ALWAYS bothered me how obsessed Fundies are with sex. They spend a ridiculous amount of time thinking and talking about it. My neighbors growing up were Fundie Lite, and I've always had to laugh a bit at how their "luck" turned out. All 4 of their daughters ended up pregnant before marriage - two of them in high school. Because of their suppressing their wants and desires at home. In fact, we are going to the wedding of the 4th daughter this weekend, she's the oldest to get married at 19 - and due in December. (And this is a family of leghumpers - they are huge Duggar fans and gush about how much the want to be like them - Idolize much? Isn't that against the ten commandments? Oh wait, they don't care about those - it's just the women's purity.)

[scc12]

I wonder if your nbors threw the Duggar girls in their daughter's faces.My mom was always throwing my oh so virtuous cousin in my face,and it backfired on her.

[scc12]

If these ppl could clone themselves,I think they would.Can you imagine the ultra stuck up ones,like Jim Bob and Steve Maxwell doing it? I think it would be an easy choice for them.

[smittykins]

Although my late husband and I chose to wait for sex until we married, the whole ideal of going from "0 to 100"(not even kissing to full-blown sex)within the space of a few hours seriously freaks me out. :mouse-shock:

[singsingsing]

They've made kissing into something so bizarrely sexual. Josh and Anna's hand sex was way worse than a simple, chaste kiss on the lips. What do they think happens when your lips touch someone else's? I mean these parents admit that they kissed before marriage but waited to have sex, so they know first hand that kissing didn't turn them into sex crazed lunatics with no self control. They're allowed to hug, hold hands, and tell each other "I love you" and have really emotionally intense conversations before marriage, but God forbid their lips touch...? It's idiotic. They've deprived their kids of something normal and fun and not at all dangerous for absolutely no good reason. Shameful.

[Rebelwife]

They've made kissing into something so bizarrely sexual. Josh and Anna's hand sex was way worse than a simple, chaste kiss on the lips. What do they think happens when your lips touch someone else's? I mean these parents admit that they kissed before marriage but waited to have sex, so they know first hand that kissing didn't turn them into sex crazed lunatics with no self control. They're allowed to hug, hold hands, and tell each other "I love you" and have really emotionally intense conversations before marriage, but God forbid their lips touch...? It's idiotic. They've deprived their kids of something normal and fun and not at all dangerous for absolutely no good reason. Shameful.

But it's something concrete they can point to that makes them different and speshul. Us heathens walk around touching lips all the time so we'll never be a holy as they are. Just keeping your own standards, whatever they may be, is much harder to brag about.

[Letgo]

It's what the kissing could lead to the couple doing, not the kissing itself. At least that was how it was explained to me. Kissing stirs up sexual feelings that are not allowed to be fulfilled until marriage, therefore it should not occur. It also could lead to thinking about sex prior to marriage. This is not okay. I guess they think as long as there is NO kissing activity at all, no one will think of sex or have sexual feelings. So the no kissing means EVERYTHING is saved for marriage and the one person intended for you. No baggage such as JB has discussed.

That hand sex Josh and Anna had did not stir up any feelings AT ALL.

[Jana814]

I'm a firm believer in "you have to kiss a few toads". I certainly didn't have sex with all of them. There is this thing called self control.

Soo true!!

[ndmomma]

I had a prof at my conservative Christian college who told us that tongue was bad because it was penetration. Ew. My husband is now a theology professor, and he has nice Catholic kids come out to him all the time.

[Toothfairy]

I'm a firm believer in "you have to kiss a few toads". I certainly didn't have sex with all of them. There is this thing called self control.

Do people actually teach their children self control? You can think but not act. You can look but not touch. You can kiss but not go all the way.

[FloraKitty35]

I'm a firm believer in "you have to kiss a few toads". I certainly didn't have sex with all of them. There is this thing called self control.

I've kissed more men and women than I ever done the deed with. Damn self control and missed chances. :doh:

[JaChelle Sugar]

Do people actually teach their children self control? You can think but not act. You can look but not touch. You can kiss but not go all the way.

because to them its not just the doing that's bad, just thinking about it is sin.

[FearLyss]

To the Duggars, I would be a harlot. I have slept with four men in my life. I knew all very well as friends, but not as partners, because I am not ready for relationship (and yes, I was ready for sex). The progression from friendship to bed buddy felt natural and I was able to take the steps I wanted on my own timeline.

The idea of marrying a man and kissing him for the first time, and then transitioning to sex would terrify me. It is asking for so much more from women who have been taught to feel shame over any sexual thoughts. I would never be able to move so quickly in one night, and I imagine most fundie women either wait a while after marriage for sex (if their husbands allow that) or go from 0 to 100 in just a matter of a few hours, and I can't imagine it is healthy for them.

I know a few men and women who have chosen to remain virgins until they are/ were married. This is not something that bothers me, but waiting until marriage to kiss does. I have known after a kiss that I did not feel the spark I wanted with a guy, and I was able to stop it there. I am not looking for a husband or wife at this time, but I know if I were, physical contact (not necessarily sex) seems like a vital factor.

[Full enough quiver]

I've never understood why sex is a moral issue. I think with all their hang ups, it would be difficult to enjoy sex, once they get married. Especially since sex=babies in their culture. They can't njust enjoy their sexuality, and use it as a way to connect with their spouse on a deeper, more intimate level. Isn't that part of God's gift to us?

I teach my kids that it is a perfectly normal, natural thing to want to do, and that as long as both parties consent, go for it. There's nothing to be ashamed of. Their worth as a human being has nothing to do with what they have or have not done with their genitalia. Whether they are virgins, or have been promiscuous, it doesn't make them less worthwhile as human beings. Whether they like men, women, both, or neither, its no one's business but their own, and in no way makes them a bad person. They know that sex can be a very powerful way to connect with another person, and they should be sure that they are honest with themselves about why they want to do it with a particular person. They know that it's important to e honest with their partner about how they feel (or don't feel) about them. This way, they avoid hurting any feelings. They know that it's important that they should treat others the way they want to be treated. They know that sex can have consequences, like stds or pregnancy, so they need to be very careful, use a condom every act, every time.

Fundies want to save sex for marriage, whatever. They can save kissing, hand holding, hell, save your first meeting for the wedding. Have an arranged marriage for all I care. You do you. Just don't think it makes you any better than anyone else, because it doesn't.

[defraudingjezebel]

I totally agree that fundies and some evangelicals are downright repressive when it comes to unmarried people expressing (and understanding) their sexuality. However, part of me wants to see some hard numbers on exactly how many ultra-conservative Christians actually follow the whole "no kissing before marriage" rule. Anecdotally-speaking, I'm from a very religious part of the country and I only encountered one girl who wanted to court instead of date. And even then, I know she wasn't hell-bent on not kissing before marriage. Sometimes I wonder if all of my exposure to this brand of fundies on the Internet has skewed my perception of their numbers. Hopefully there's not as many fundie girls out who actually follow these backwards restrictions as I think.

[Miggy]

But it's something concrete they can point to that makes them different and speshul. Us heathens walk around touching lips all the time so we'll never be a holy as they are. Just keeping your own standards, whatever they may be, is much harder to brag about.

^ This. Plenty of people save sex for marriage. You can't claim to be precious and special and better than everyone else unless you go further. They need something physical to show they are better and both kissing and no-touch courtship fits this need. After all, they wouldn't want to be mistaken for regular, everyday Christians or even worse, heathens who just choose not to have sex before marriage!

[smittykins]

I'm surprised that no couple(as far as we know)has gone "all the way"(so to speak)and not even met before marriage. You can't get more pure than that!

[uber frau]

Ssshhh. Don't give them ideas.

[Miggy]

I'm surprised that no couple(as far as we know)has gone "all the way"(so to speak)and not even met before marriage. You can't get more pure than that!

Well ... my cousin-in-law skyped with a girl for six months and proposed online. He flew to America, went on a six week tour of the country while she organised the wedding. He arrived at her home two weeks before the wedding, when they actually met for the first time. That's getting pretty close to not meeting before marriage!

The funny part was that it didn't occur to them to look into visas so after the wedding and honeymoon, he came back here and she went back to the US until they sorted out a tourist visa for her to come out here. Took them months to sort out correct visa because, naturally, the Department of Immigration thought it was just a marriage of convenience.