Lori Alexander - Still Not Learning A Thing, Part 4

[usmcmom]

*banging head against computer screen*

Having a period is much different than bleeding for weeks on end.  Even if a couple chooses to engage in some sort of sexual activity during her period, that is much much different than accommodating a weeks-long bleeding issue. The latter condition brings with it stress, worry, embarrassment and frustration over a LONG-TERM necessary adjustment in a couple's intimate life. 

This poor woman is seeking empathy. Of course Lori says she'll pray for her but then has to get to the real point of all of her posts - to chastise her.  "WELL *I* NEVER REFUSED SEXUAL RELEASE TO MY HUSBAND DURING MY PERIOD." 

I just wish these poor women who read her blog would recognize that they will not get compassion, empathy or any sort of kindness from Lori.  She's so mean-spirited, I can't even comprehend how she considers herself a mentor. 

*disclaimer - of course I know all of you know this...I guess I'm writing this to Ken so he can go back and educate his wife. Or maybe they need to start referring their readers to Cabinet Man. He does, after all, know more about women's hormones than any woman on earth. 

These people...I can't even.

[Loveday]

I really wish Ken would come back here and face the music on this one. I want to see him try to defend Lori against the likes of Koala or usmcmom. I also want to see him defend Michael Pearl's ugly comment, not in Lori's comment section, but here, where he can't control the responses or have the last word.

 

[molecule]

I don't disagree with Lori about sex as much as I do with about everything else she writes. I am involved in marriage ministry myself, and I have seen the lack of sexual connection cause great pain in many marriages. I am one who thinks there should be more Christians writing about sex in plain terms. 

That said, I have major issues with how Lori writes about it.

• She doesn't acknowledge that she is generalizing about men and women. (She should at least acknowledge that she is generalizing and that individual marriages might have different high drive/low drive issues.)
• She never says anything about a woman's sexual needs--not even to say that a woman can enjoy the emotional closeness if she doesn't enjoy the physical sensations. Sex is viewed only as meeting the man's needs. If her readers could see that sex is for them, too, they might not need to be reminded to have sex in the first place.
• She doesn't help women figure out how to get comfortable with sex. She's saying just do it, and that's okay to a point--but the reality is that if it were really that simple, it wouldn't need to be said. If she can be saying "ten minutes and lube" and "take care of him in other ways," she can be saying "take a bubble bath to help your mind make the move from mommy to lover" and "ask your husband for a nice long backrub as part of foreplay."
• She completely ignores the fact that sex happens within the context of a relationship and that if there are relationship problems, the couple should be working on those, too.
• She goes on and on about being a woman teaching women, but then she quotes a man at length, include a very crude turn of phrase. (Seriously, "pump him dry"? There is no need for locker room talk.) Although I think it is okay for a man to talk to women about the theology of sex and, in general ways, the role of sex in marriage, I think it is completely inappropriate (on a blog that claims to be a Christian woman teaching women) for a man to give any how-to advice--especially without being thoughtful about the audience and the language used.

I do think Christians should become comfortable talking and writing about sex, but the way Lori does it makes things worse, not better.

/rant

 

 

[usmcmom]

5 minutes ago, molecule said:

I don't disagree with Lori about sex as much as I do with about everything else she writes. I am involved in marriage ministry myself, and I have seen the lack of sexual connection cause great pain in many marriages. I am one who thinks there should be more Christians writing about sex in plain terms. 

That said, I have major issues with how Lori writes about it.

• She doesn't acknowledge that she is generalizing about men and women. (She should at least acknowledge that she is generalizing and that individual marriages might have different high drive/low drive issues.)
• She never says anything about a woman's sexual needs--not even to say that a woman can enjoy the emotional closeness if she doesn't enjoy the physical sensations. Sex is viewed only as meeting the man's needs. If her readers could see that sex is for them, too, they might not need to be reminded to have sex in the first place.
• She doesn't help women figure out how to get comfortable with sex. She's saying just do it, and that's okay to a point--but the reality is that if it were really that simple, it wouldn't need to be said. If she can be saying "ten minutes and lube" and "take care of him in other ways," she can be saying "take a bubble bath to help your mind make the move from mommy to lover" and "ask your husband for a nice long backrub as part of foreplay."
• The completely ignores the fact that sex happens within the context of a relationship and that if there are relationship problems, the couple should be working on those, too.
• She goes on and on about being a woman teaching women, but then she quotes a man at length, include a very crude turn of phrase. (Seriously, "pump him dry"? There is no need for locker room talk.) Although I think it is okay for a man to talk to women about the theology of sex and, in general ways, the role of sex in marriage, I think it is completely inappropriate (on a blog that claims to be a Christian woman teaching women) for a man to give any how-to advice--especially without being thoughtful about the audience and the language used.

I do think Christians should become comfortable talking and writing about sex, but the way Lori does it makes things worse, not better.

/rant

 

 

Very well said.  There are many Christian authors, bloggers and speakers who address sex as a very important part of marriage - something that is to be mutually pleasurable for both partners.  Lori does not do this. 

[Mrsaztx]

@molecule I think her biggest issue can be summed up by her not understanding that your partner isn't just a hole to stick it in. If there was somewhere in the bible that said you could rape a goat or pleasure yourself with bread dough it would all be the exact same to her. She seems to toss out the afterthought of "I guess women can enjoy it too, or whatever" probably simply because she has gotten a lot of back lash. Her writing about how you have to let your husband rape you, even if you are sick or feeling unwell, basically just as soon as you are feeling well enough not to vomit on him from the jostling, just blew my mind. How can a person honestly say they have any positive feelings for a woman that he treats like that? And how can a woman have any affection or a man who treats her like that? It's just so twisted and disturbing. 

ETA: almost always in any sort of relationship column/blog/article/whatever where men are asked what is the one thing they like most at least one of them will mention a woman who is really enjoying herself, and who is getting her needs met (and I really feel, Lori, everyone knows exactly what that means without having to be vulgar). I wonder how many of these fundie guys have ever really experienced that? These women are probably fairly terrified on their wedding night, if the Pearl's stories are any indication they are then used roughly with no consideration of what the woman might want or need, then she's pregnant and all the changes that go with that, pain and recovery from child birth, exhaustion from a kid, and right back to marital rape. And it seems all these women bloggers agree that "no, you're not going to want to do it or enjoy it, but you have to". I can't even imagine the men would be all that excited to do it either under those terms

[usmcmom]

23 minutes ago, Loveday said:

I really wish Ken would come back here and face the music on this one. I want to see him try to defend Lori against the likes of Koala or usmcmom. I also want to see him defend Michael Pearl's ugly comment, not in Lori's comment section, but here, where he can't control the responses or have the last word.

Aw shucks!   Thanks. 

If he comes back, it will go like this:

Ken: I simply don't have time to answer.....*16 paragraphs later*.....But, like I said, I don't have time to answer you.

FJ member:  Ken, I disagree because....

Ken: Well now, you're being unreasonable! What about my freedom of speech?!?

Still, I'd love it if he would return and try to reasonably address some of our questions and opinions.  Ken did not like it here.  It did not feel good to him to realize a bunch of women are smarter than he.  He certainly did not like the fact that many FJ members have incredible knowledge of the Bible and could match him verse for verse.

[Mrsaztx]

5 minutes ago, usmcmom said:

Aw shucks!   Thanks. 

If he comes back, it will go like this:

Ken: I simply don't have time to answer.....*16 paragraphs later*.....But, like I said, I don't have time to answer you.

FJ member:  Ken, I disagree because....

Ken: Well now, you're being unreasonable! What about my freedom of speech?!?

Still, I'd love it if he would return and try to reasonably address some of our questions and opinions.  Ken did not like it here.  It did not feel good to him to realize a bunch of women are smarter than he.  He certainly did not like the fact that many FJ members have incredible knowledge of the Bible and could match him verse for verse.

Well, when you've got Satan on your side, women who hold jobs, how is he supposed to be able to win?

[polecat]

Sex shouldn't be a drudgery. If it always is, there's something wrong. Telling her to shut up and put out is not going to fix the problem. If I were forced to have frequent sex that was painful, unpleasant, or whatever else but still plaster a huge smile on my face the whole time, I'd start to resent my husband and probably within days. Wouldn't it be better advice to work with the woman to find out what's really going on -- physical, emotional or something related to the relationship? Once that's figured out, the sex will often follow. And if there's just a major mismatch in sex drives, I'd think the couple would do best by negotiating something that at least tries to balance both their needs.

I feel so sorry for these women who seemingly have never gotten pleasure from sex. If they're not asexual, then that's really sad to me. Sex is such a great pleasure and joy to share with someone. It's not something you do TO someone but something you do with someone. As such, it should be fairly equally enjoyable to both parties when possible. 

 

And I actually sit on the side of the bench that says it's okay to have sex sometimes even when you're not in the mood because you're doing it out of love for your partner. 

[Mrsaztx]

21 minutes ago, polecat said:

Sex shouldn't be a drudgery. If it always is, there's something wrong. Telling her to shut up and put out is not going to fix the problem. If I were forced to have frequent sex that was painful, unpleasant, or whatever else but still plaster a huge smile on my face the whole time, I'd start to resent my husband and probably within days. Wouldn't it be better advice to work with the woman to find out what's really going on -- physical, emotional or something related to the relationship? Once that's figured out, the sex will often follow. And if there's just a major mismatch in sex drives, I'd think the couple would do best by negotiating something that at least tries to balance both their needs.

I feel so sorry for these women who seemingly have never gotten pleasure from sex. If they're not asexual, then that's really sad to me. Sex is such a great pleasure and joy to share with someone. It's not something you do TO someone but something you do with someone. As such, it should be fairly equally enjoyable to both parties when possible. 

 

And I actually sit on the side of the bench that says it's okay to have sex sometimes even when you're not in the mood because you're doing it out of love for your partner. 

That's the thing with her advice, it doesn't all start out as objectively horrible. Sure, sometimes you have sex when you're not really feeling it because your husband wants to but that shouldn't be your normal , that should be sometimes. Yes, your relationship will be better if you are respectful to your husband and he should be respectful to you because don't marry someone you don't respect. Sure, send kids to bed early sometimes so you can have some alone time don't beat them with sticks if they get out of bed before morning. But I guess that's typical of cult thinking, be relatable for a minute on the front side before you dive head first into crazy town 

[salex]

3 hours ago, Hisey said:

Why would any woman ever marry, under this definition of marriage? It sounds so awful. You're always at fault, you have to obey everything your husband says, you have to have sex whether or not you want it. Marriage sounds like a crappy choice under these conditions, even with a husband who is a decent person.

Which may be why we have the aging Stay at Home Daughters and the "must marry who dad picks for you" betrothals/courtships..... if dad says marry, you do. 

 

[AmazonGrace]

Honestly I found Satan's tool to be far more offensive than pump him dry.

[Koala]

I shouldn't be surprised that Ken Alexander is all over the comments.

Quote

 Love making and sex IS what men think of when it comes to closeness and intimacy.

He speaks with such authority.  Wonder when the men all banded together to appoint Ken Spokensman for Mankind?

Quote

Why do you think men will go sacrifice their lives for a wife? The immense bonding that takes place in the sex act is the culmination of intimacy. 

I wouldn't know.  I don't know any men who've had to "sacrifice their lives" for their wives (at least not in the way that Ken is alluding to). 

I will say this though- As brave and dashing as Ken likes to make "sacrificing your life for the women folk" sound, and as often as he brings it up, he couldn't even be bothered to sacrifice basketball for Lori when she was (according to him) extremely ill.  If I recall correctly, he referred to it as "sacred".

Then men who I know who have "given up their lives" for their wives, have done so in ways that Ken could probably never imagine.  

Before my grandparents passed away, my grandfather regularly scrubbed my grandmother's fecal matter and vomit off their carpeted floor.  He waited on her hand and foot.  He declined invitations to go out when she didn't feel like going.  In those ways he sacrificed his life for her, and I can tell you that he would have been disgusted if Ken had applied the above reasoning to him.  He did it because he loved her.  

My grandfather never complained either.  He didn't complain when the soup spilled (or my grandmother spilled it) like Ken, he didn't expect my grandmother to wait on herself when she wasn't really able to, and he didn't outlive her either.  He cared for her right up until the day he was hospitalized...and never came back home.  She made it 3 years without him, and really wasn't ever right once he was gone.  She was a hard woman, and he was really the only person on earth she loved...but she loved him and he loved her.  And they'd have both been appalled by Lori and Ken.

But that's not the kind of sacrifice Ken's talking about.  He's talking about the kind that pretty much no one ever has to make...so it's easy.  The wife is called to sacrifice daily, with the promise that should the need ever arise, the husband will come rushing in and "sacrifice his life for her"...because sex.  How cheap.

 

Quote

 For that matter, surprise him and tell him that you want to try new and exciting things in your love making. 

For that matter, it is extremely inappropriate for Ken to be making such suggestions to a married woman.  What goes on in their bedroom is absolutely none of his business.  He is so far over the line it's not even funny, but then maybe that's the real purpose of these sex posts Lori likes to make.  It gives Ken an opportunity to pour over whatever details Lori can pry out of her readers...a chance to talk to them about things he shouldn't.  

Disgusting. Absolutely disgusting.

[polecat]

Quote

One spouse wants sex more often and the other spouse fulfills their martial responsibilities without letting the other spouse know it is an burden, because they understand their marital contractual obligations. 

Ah, sex, nothing more than a contractual obligation ... 

I think my husband would die of shame if he thought I was only having sex with him as a "contractual obligation." Ken, you're gross.

[AmazonGrace]

If it's a contractual obligation, you're doing it wrong.

[Mrsaztx]

See, Lorken, "Contractual obligation" should only be used in regards to sex if you're doing "sexy secretary" role play. But that would require your wife take part to a greater extent than "lie back and think of Jesus" so I guess you would be unfamiliar.

[Koala]

Ken Alexander:

Quote

It takes often less than ten minutes to please your man

I can't even imagine why they continue to advertise this.

Quote

A spouse's role is to be available to the other spouse to please them. Not to teach them abstinence or self control in sex within the marriage bed.

That's not true to hear Storage Sociopath tell it.

 

Quote

I love what you said here: "Completion of the sexual act is the complete image of the Trinity, as Jesus held nothing back in His love for us and in His love for the Father, so too are we to hold nothing back from our spouse." 

 Well that takes "Close your eyes and think of Jesus" to a whole new level.

 

Quote

 Lori and I are all for "as many babies as the Lord will give you," 

*Snort* That's why Lori had to put a hole in her contraceptive device to conceive baby #2.  It's also why they have 4 children instead of 24.  They are ALL about having as many babies as possible.....for other people.

[Hisey]

I can't imagine how their children are cringing as their mom and dad write this stuff for the world to see.

It's not like Lori's keeping the blog a secret. Her whole family knows about it. They log on and see she's written  "ten minutes and lube" or "other ways to please him" or "sleeping with him while I have my period." My goodness, little Emma and Kenny will log on in ten years and read this stuff about grandma and grandpa. How gross!

What happens when Cassi or Ryan or Alyssa run into their cousins?

Cousin: So, your mom is still running her blog, huh? [snicker]

Alyssa: Um, yeah. I don't really read it. . . 

Cousin: I saw last week she wrote about sex during menstruation. It was interesting. I guess she doesn't let having her period stop her from. . .

Alyssa: Oh, gross. Did she really? God, I wish she'd stop that. . . 

Cousin: Yeah, here, I'll find it for you. Here it is. . .

[desertvixen]

It's one thing to occasionally have sex when you're not 100 percent in the mood, but your partner is... or to let your partner work you into feeling more "in the mood". 

It's another for that to happen all the time, or to suggest that you have sex when you're in active pain/bleeding.

I'm also pretty sure that if Ken treated Lori like Michael Pearl suggests (and as he apparently treated Debi on their wedding night) that she would be most unhappy.

[Heathen525]

As an atheist living in sin, I'm often shocked by how prurient deeply religious people can be!

I was at a Catholic wedding where the bride and groom were virgins and the priest mentioned "marital congress" several times. Just not something I want to be mentioned in my ceremony or around my grandparents!

[Mrsaztx]

15 minutes ago, Heathen525 said:

As an atheist living in sin, I'm often shocked by how prurient deeply religious people can be!

I was at a Catholic wedding where the bride and groom were virgins and the priest mentioned "marital congress" several times. Just not something I want to be mentioned in my ceremony or around my grandparents!

I've heard various allusions to sex in nearly every religious wedding I've been to. It's terribly awkward. My husband, who doesn't get out much, didn't believe me until he went to the wedding of one of his "married as a virgin" friend. He also was horrified to find out I wasn't kidding when they put a hard emphasis on that whole "obey" thing for women. We aren't about that life so we walked down the aisle to the music of Dewey Cox

[Hisey]

Looks like someone is giving the OK to masturbation. . .  Thanks, Ken.

Quote

If God had wanted us to make a big deal about Onan and masturbation he would have had more than one story about it. The unwillingness to use his seed to honor his Levarite responsibilities and his prideful display of such rebellion is why he was struck him dead. God teaches us clearly in the NT all of the things we need for life and godliness. We do not have to go to some strange history story in the OT to discover His will. 

So, this part of the Old Testament is a "strange history story." But the part condemning homosexuality is something we need to take really, really seriously.

[crawfishgirl]

It's amazing how much they just pick and choose what they want to believe from the Bible, try to rationalize it, and then judge people who don't believe like they do.

[Koala]

Ken Alexander:

Quote

If God had wanted us to make a big deal about Onan and masturbation he would have had more than one story about it. 

How does Ken know what God would have done?  Does he just ask Lori?  After all, she does speak for The God of the Universe. 

Seriously though, what is the Biblical precedence for this method of evaluating scripture?

Of note: The woman who posted asking for prayer and understanding regarding her medical issue has deleted her post.  She is a regular poster too.  I guess Lori's nasty little response didn't offer her much comfort.  Lori's response is still there for now.

Today's post has been dedicated to airing the business of the women who post in her "private" chat room.  Lori gave such great advice (in her own opinion), that it needed to be posted for the world to see....along with the struggles that the poor women who look up to her are suffering through.

It's one thing for Lori and Ken to air the details of their own marriage for the world to see, but the way Lori showcases others is absolutely exploitive.  

She's discussed the cleanliness (or lack thereof) of her neighbor's house, her parent's marriage, letters women have written to their dying spouses...so many things.  And you know, the Bible has a thing or two to say about gossips, and people who carry tales from house to house.  It probably has a thing or two to say about being discrete too.

[Mrsaztx]

The New Testament gives us all we need and let's ignore the Old Testament? Interesting sentiment from someone who hits the Adam/eve thing so freakin' hard. Last I checked, the New Testament is an awful lot of "hey, it's all good. Everyone can go to heaven, just be nice to each other and help out" which is kind of the opposite of all their fire and brimstone nonsense. 

[older than allosaurs]

On 1/8/2016 at 7:20 AM, Koala said:

Someone has already called her on Michael's vulgar terminology:

Lori replies, assuring her that it's okay because:

1) Most men talk like that (I don't know any...truly I don't.  The men I know would be embarrassed to have a woman hear them talk that way.  My husband wouldn't say anything like that in a million years)..

Has Doug Wilson heard about this piece of heresy? Women can't pump anyone dry because that's way too egalitarian: Remember his famous "A man penetrates, conquers, colonizes, plants. A woman receives, surrenders, accepts."

Being a vulgar old hussy myself, sometimes, I've thought about how this could be turned around: A woman surrounds, envelops, extracts. A man is drawn in, submerged, wrung (or pumped) dry.

It's all about the verb choice.

Heading to the prayer closet now.