Not.
Part of a comment to my post Five Things Women Don’t Know About Men was this, from a (very nice) woman with the screen name of “Wee Sandy”:
And John, I truly hope men aren’t really watching a constant mental porn show. I agree with [commenter] Feather that it is addictive and destructive to both men and women, not to mention children. I hope that was a tongue-in-cheek post! But if men really ARE that focused on lust, shouldn’t we be trying to do something to help change that? Like helping our sons to understand that it is unacceptable, and that the only way to stop focusing on one thing is to fill your mind and life with something better? Or to work yourself until you’re too exhausted to be filled with temptation? Stuff like that?
The ancient, persistent, pervasive idea that being a good Christian man means being a eunuch is something that I think we need to reconsider. Men are men. Men lust. They lust constantly. They can’t help it. And I get real uncomfortable whenever I hear anyone say we should want them to help it.
Do we really want men who don’t find women—lots of women, all the time—sexually attractive? Are we sure that’s what we want? Because wanting that necessarily means wanting our men to have less of a sex drive than they do. And are we sure that’s a good thing? Because if you reduce a man’s sex drive, you automatically reduce a whole lot of stuff about him that you definitely want to think twice about losing.
You want an ambitious man? Then you want a man with a strong sex drive. You want a man who will always protect his wife and children? Then you want a man with a strong sex drive. You want a man who will lay down his life for his country? Who will explore new territory? Who will take control of a bad situation? Who will champion the cause of the weak and oppressed? Who will clear trees, kill animals, build a home, and make sure that when the dust all settles, he and his are standing? Who, when things get tough, will roll up his sleeves and work? Then you want a man with a real sex drive. And a man with a real sex drive could no sooner not lust after women than he could unhook his gonads and leave them at home in his sock drawer when he goes off to work every day.
No man should disrespect women, of course. And certainly no man should lose control of his behavior. But being a man means that in the privacy of your imagination, you are going to do to think a great many lustful thoughts. That’s just a fact about being a man. That won’t change. It can’t change. It shouldn‘t change. The whole idea that somehow Christian men aren’t really supposed to be men is ridiculous, and harmful.
Healthy sex isn’t just a good thing; it is the necessary thing. It’s how our race survives. It’s what makes the whole world go round.
If God didn’t want men to be men—to do their part to help that world go around—he wouldn’t have filled them with all that testosterone. But he did. And part of the effect of that does mean that men are bound, by their very nature, to, in the sacred privacy of their imaginations, lust for women.
I know what Matthew 5:27-28 says. Here’s how it’s translated in “The Message”:
“You know the next commandment pretty well, too: ‘Don’t go to bed with another’s spouse.’ But don’t think you’ve preserved your virtue simply by staying out of bed. Your heart can be corrupted by lust even quicker than your body. Those leering looks you think nobody notices—they also corrupt.”
I have got not problem with that. One’s heart certainly can be corrupted by lust, just like it can be by anything that’s unhealthily fixated upon. And certainly no man should ever look at a woman “leeringly,” because that’s obnoxious, invasive, and extremely disrespectful.
But the bottom line is this: Show me a man who says he doesn’t look lustfully at women—by which I mean who doesn’t constantly imagine himself in sexual situations with all kinds of women—and I’ll show you a man who’s either lying, or gay.
![John Shore on The Huffington Post](http://johnshore.files.wordpress.com/2010/03/huffpost.jpg?w=120 "John Shore on The Huffington Post\")
{ 129 comments… read them below or add one }
« 1 2 3
Hm, I disagree with you on this. I think reducing men’s sex drives would actually benefit men and men’s rights hugely – since you’ve just pointed out a million ways in which women and society are able to EXPLOIT men because men have a high sex drive. For example, men are apparently expendable in wars (defending their nation) purely because of high testosterone levels – isn’t that just a little sexist? And isn’t it horrible too? Would you really want to inform your son he life is worthless, compared to a woman’s life, and he must die or exhaust himself in a ruthless competition for a mate (i.e. fertile female partner). Is it okay that men take physical risks, abuse their own bodies, or become workaholics (ambitious) in order to impress a potential mate. It seems to me that men would be far happier if men had lower sex drives. Of course, women and society would be miserable, since women and society would no longer have the means to exploit men and take advantage of all their free labour/sacrifices.
There is so much bitterness in that last sentence – through this entire graph – that I have a difficult time even knowing how to start. The confusion we have about men and women is so nuts right now.
No one ever remotely suggested that men are “expendable” because their testosterone levels drive them to action and risk (women have testosterone as well, by the way, just lesser levels generally speaking). That we were designed with certain levels of hormones is genetically tied to our role in propagating and protecting our species. The abuse comes from sin but even without sin, men as they are designed today would want to show their strength and dominance.
You’re confusing the distinction -
It’s okay for men to be sexually driven, but NOT okay for channeling it into lust and most importantly, thinking that it’s totally fine, that lust was meant to be.
Trying God’s patience indeed. And this is coming from a liberal.
It’s impossible to “channel” one’s sexual drive in such a way that it never becomes sexual lust. If you think it is, then … then good luck with that.
To John Shore:
Amen! It really needed to be said.
Most importantly, we as Christians cannot do this of our own because it is the nature of the flesh to disobey the Lord. We need the Holy Spirit and we need to know the truth concerning His word to set us free from bondage. Shalom.
I have not had the chance to read through all the comments but i did read the main topic and this what i have to say. First of all i believe in my Lord Jesus Christ. Secondly regarding the issue of lust, i believe that God created men to have a sex drive and it is good and healthy. I also believe that God created women to be physically endowed and so we can say that men and women are different both physiologically and psychologically. I also now believe that a woman’s physical anatomy (whether clothed or naked) was not created to be a stumbling block or to be a source of temptation to any man or vice versa (This is where the Church is indeed guilty because many are blindly ignorant). The human body is the most wonderful entity the Lord created because He made it with His hands, everything else He spoke into existence. We have been socially trained to believe through the Church and the media that a woman’s body (breast, buttocks e.t.c) will surely cause men to lust after them and so we believe that the best way to deal with it is to limit such opportunities or look away. The real problem is that we have held a false perception of the human body as a source of temptation instead of as a temple of God He created!!! So i personally believe that it is a CHOICE to either admire how beautiful any woman is; respecting her as a person and giving Glory to God or to selfishly indulge her in your mind and abusing her. The fact that a man finds a woman he sees beautiful is normal and right and as long as he respects her in his heart, he is not sinning. Even if the person happens to flaunt her body through suggestive clothing does not in any way give us the right to disrespect and take pleasure in her wrong doing. The real issue is always the HEART OF BOTH THE OBSERVER AND THE SUBJECT OF OBSERVATION. There is a sight that will throw more light into this: http://mychainsaregone.org/MCAG-welcome.htm. Have a blessed day.
Christian men don’t hold themselves accountable to God’s instruction manuel. They love you, but her and her and her too, they re with your body but another women mentally. Lust for them and controling itis no different than a non christian.
There’s a difference between appreciating a beautiful person, and what you’re describing as “constantly imagine himself in sexual situations with all kinds of women”. I completely diagree with you on this. As christians we are supposed to control our thoughts. It is wrong to imagine yourself committing adultery just the same as it is wrong to imagine yourself committing a murder. There’s a huge difference between giving it a passing thought and actually marinating and indulging in either of those ideas. I think your last statement is pretty offensive to a good number of men who do have strong sex drives but actively channel that towards their partners. My husband, who you are probably just going to say is lying, always says that whenever he sees a beautiful woman or a naked woman in a movie it just makes him of me, because I’m HIS woman and that is where HIS sex is. He sees boobs, he thinks about HIS boobs (my boobs). He’s not saying that he doesn’t find other women beautiful, but when it gets to the “imagining sexual situations” he imagines me. On purpose. It’s a choice. My husband is not a christian, but he is very faithful and honorable has a VERY strong sex drive. Oh, and he’s not a liar either. He has proven over and over that he would rather be honest and fight with me than lie and tell me what I want to hear or spare my feelings, it causes some (read lots of) fights, but it is one of the things that I truly love and respect about him. So I believe him and am offended that you called him a liar. Also, who are you to speak for all men?
On the whole I agree with you that the church takes it too far most of the time (as they have a tendancy to do) with the demasculization of men. There is an amazing book called “Wild at Heart” by John Eldredge that comprehensively addresses the subject and I highly recommend it to anyone who is at all interested. There is also a companion book about women called “Captivating” by John and his wife Stasi. Both wonderful books.
“makes hime *think of me”
Yeah…your husband’s a liar. Doesn’t mean he doesn’t love you completely, in fact, it’s probably proof that he does.
It’s sickening how churches try to tell kids they are capable of avoiding lust if they just try hard enough.
I’ve seen responsible compliant teenage guys try so hard not to lust they won’t even look at attractive girls in the eye or talk to them. They cannot even treat them as people, because they are so worried about lusting. I know one guy who dates a girl only because she isn’t a turn-on for him. I know another guy who abandoned Christianity after high school due to the shame and guilt of having lusted several times. What kind of sick teaching in youth groups does this?
I’ve had to pull these guys aside and have a talk. Hard to believe a nice fuddy-duddy Christian woman like me is saying: “It’s okay to have the right kind of lust. How else could we marry and reproduce?”
You know what I’m saying.
I think there is a big difference between “lust” and checking out if a woman is stacked better than a Las Vegas poker deck (or, to be fair to the gay contingent, has a but you could bounce a silver dollar off of).
Sexual desire in both men and women is healthy and normal. But lust is more about possession, a kind of unlawful taking of another human being by reducing them to an object to be used. Lust reduces the object of its gaze to something less than human. Lust isn’t even about sex or sexual desire alone, per se, it’s about ownership, utility, use.
Unfortunately when it comes to sex, I think a lot of people are not honest with themselves about the many many forms of physical desire, its roots within the psyche, and how to find its proper healthy God-given expression.
I think you have a good point.
So…I had to ask my husband if he had sexual thoughts about other women…and he said “of course not honey!” And then he smiled and said “But I do admire God’s handiwork on occasion.”
You had me with you right up to the gratuitous gay reference at the end. I understand your point, and understand the way that you were trying to make it.
But the way you did it manages to be either dismissive of or insulting to gay men. Going on and on about the good qualities of men and why they are linked to high sex drives works, and as long as the whole thing is about straight people, no problem – we’re used to being excluded in this sort of conversation.
By adding the reference to gay men only at the end, you leave the implication that no gay man can be ambitious, protect his spouse and children, lay down his life for his country, explore new territory, or any of the other great things you mention. No, men are either highly sexed heterosexuals, or weak and flawed – liars or gay.
Please either leave gay men completely out of the discussion, or start off by making it clear that you are only talking about straight men. Please don’t leave orientation out until it’s time to make it clear you are talking about the undesirable.
I had come to expect better of you. God made us, too.
Calm down. Read the final line again.
John, I am calm. Did you make any attempt to consider my comment?
All the positive things about being a man are specifically linked to being heterosexual? Or just the positive things about being a Christian man?
I truly appreciate your voice in your other writings about not discriminating against us and about not oppressing us.
But here, you’ve clearly made no effort to include us. We’re still clearly “other” to you when it comes time to talk about the positive aspects of being a Christian man.
Huh? Gay men aren’t sexually attracted to women. That was the point.
No. It wasn’t, unless you take the last line completely out of context of the rest of the piece. Read it again.
Want a man who is ambitious? Then find a man who lusts after women.
Want a man who will protect his family? Then find a man who lusts after women.
Want a patriot? Then find a man who lusts after women.
Want an explorer, a champion, a builder? Then find a man who lusts after women.
“If God didn’t want men to be men—to do their part to help that world go around—he wouldn’t have filled them with all that testosterone. But he did. And part of the effect of that does mean that men are bound, by their very nature, to, in the sacred privacy of their imaginations, lust for women.”
Men are bound by their very nature to lust for women. Not straight men. Men. You know, the real men. The important ones. The ones God likes.
That’s not what it said. It said with “strong sex drive” it made no reference to sexuality in that part of the article. This applies to gay men and their sex drives too. The only point of this article is that christians, in particular christian women, try to mentally neuter their men. This is primarily due to gender differences and women not understanding how mens minds work. I imagine that this is a much less complicated issue in gay relationships because of the lack of gender differences. John was not saying that gay men are less manly. Comprehensive reading people, c’mon!
we know that he didn’t mean it that way because he’s into gay rights but it does kind of SOUND that way. i also think this article could be read as dismissive of Asexual guys and guys with a low libido (there are some, right?) and intersex people some of whom (or who sometimes) might identify as guys.
the end bit could have been a little better explained, how that doesn’t make other kinds of guys less… useful? as males of the species than their extremely hetero peers.
hate to be a jerk, but if someone doesn’t have a strong sex drive there probably is something wrong with the. Sex drive is a huge indicator of health.
them* geez! hit the buttons Katie!
Uh, asexual here.
And there’s nothing wrong with me.
I’m sorry if I offended you. I don’t really know a lot about asexuality, but I looked it up. I just used to work in a doctors office and lack of sex drive is definitely a symptom to be concerned about. however, that was an ignorant way to state that. I apologize.
Another asexual here (hi!).
Thank-you for taking the time to look up asexuality and apologize, Katie.
I would just like you to keep in mind that it’s a sudden lack or decrease in sex drive that is a symptom that someone should be concerned about. On the other hand, if someone has had little to no sex drive for the entirety of their life, there is most likely nothing to worry about.
i thought i was asexual for a while but in my case it was just a combination of a lot of inhibitions due to religion and neurological stuff, plus low libido. the OBGYN even says low libido is a natural variation and not something to be worried about. as the latest comments attest (Hi!), there are plenty of people who are really born asexual or identify as asexual and that is just as much a natural variation as all the other gender variations.
Agreed. The fourth paragraph gives a strong impression that only men with strong sex drives are able to be ambitious, protective, powerful, etc. Not to mention it seems a little absurd to say that sex drive has such a strong impact on non-sex-related abilities and skills. If you want to ascribe these abilities to testosterone and then connect that to sex drive, that’s fine, but if you skip that step in between it starts to sound incongruous and absurd.
Ahh. Thank you, Katie.
Perfect, John! One of the very things I love about my man is, well, he’s a man’s man! And I wouldn’t have him any other way. He’s not afraid to point out an attractive woman to me nor would I want him to be. I think it’s healthy to be able to look and to appreciate what you see. I think there is a definite line between liking what you see and actually leering at someone. Bottom line, no matter what he sees, my husband is coming home with ME! (I consider my husband to be a deeply Christian man, btw.)
thank you, john. as a female, i have been trying to find meaning with this very thing for the past couple of months and i found this piece very helpful. thank you for the perspective.
Ann, I really found two books helpful on this subject … “Wild at Heart” by John Eldredge is AMAZING! I literally went out and bought copies for all my girlfriends. It should be required reading in church groups. The second is “For Women Only :Inside the minds of men” by shaunti feldhahn, it’s all those things that you “know” about men, like “men are visual” and “men need respect” clarified. because “knowing” something is different then understanding it, and this book translates what those statements actually mean to and for your man. They are SO good!!
Another aspect of this issue (i.e., mental adultery) is whether Christ meant sexual thots in general or sexual thots about a particular person one had to right to have sex with. I.e., it sounds pretty clear that thinking about sex with Joe’s wife is mental adultery, but what about thinking about sex with Joe’s unmarried but available sister, or for that matter, with an idealized fantasy female?
In fact, is it mental adultery to wonder what it would be like to have sex with another person’s spouse if one recognizes one is not entitled to have sex with that person?
In Matthew 19:9-12 Christ famously refers to anyone who divorces his wife (presumably spouse in today’s unerstanding) without reason (KJV cites fornication, others adultery, Young’s Literal Trans. sez whoredom, which suggests something more mercenary & calculating than a simple romp in the hay) is committing adultery & causing anyone who marries the divorced spouse to commit adultery as well. His disciples respond that if that is indeed the case, it’s better not to marry. Christ then says, “All men cannot receive this saying, save they to whom it is given. For there are some eunuchs, which were so born from their mother’s womb: and there are some eunuchs, which were made eunuchs of men: and there be eunuchs, which have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven’s sake. He that is able to receive it, let him receive it.” (KJV)
So, yeah, there are people (again presuming all are equal in the eyes of God) who are asexual or have a very low sex drive, others who are not interested because of physical reasons, and a few who are so dedicated to God that sex runs a poor second place.
They are the exceptions, not the rule.
I think it is clear Christ is not talking about the occasional stray thot or temptation (because being tempted itself is not a sin, otherwise Christ would be a sinner), but a deliberate pattern of desire for a person one is not morally/ethically entitled to have intimate physical relations with. The problem is not w/the physical act in question, but in the attitude it fosters in one’s heart & mind.
Amen! This sounds right in line with truth about human behavior and the power that our thoughts and motivations have on our behavior. It also is in line with scripture about God looking at the heart in connection with the behavior. Some people have the right motivations but the wrong behavior. Some people have the right behavior but the wrong motivations. And still some have no clue about what they are doing or why they are doing it and need help in understanding what all of this means in terms of their own personal experiences and reality and how rethinking our behaviors, thoughts and ideas can help us to have healthier expectations and empower us to think before we act and stop thinking about things that are motivating us to act in ways that hurt us and others.
I agree with the comment that there is a sexual sickness in the body of Christ as we experience it. If I interpret the comment of Jesus as a reminder of the commandment: “Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor’s wife”, It helps me. I find there is a difference between coveting and noticing how hot my neighbor’s wife is.
I think it really means “thou shalt not fuck the neighbour’s wife” and/or plan to. It would be interesting to have inconvenient sexual drives removed, but that is not, alas, how the Lord made us.
I also don’t agree with your statement that EVERY man “CONSTANTLY
imagines himself in SEXUAL situations with all kinds of women.” I do
agree that it’s normal for a man to occasionally entertain such thoughts
just as it is for women to do so about other men. How often
will depend on different factors in regards to the sex drive and
whether the person has learned to discipline their thoughts in this
regard, so that those thoughts do not control them nor dictate their behavior.
Men think about sex approximately every seven seconds in one way or another.
I don’t think there is proof of that statement. I think some men think about sex that often, but how many men that is I don’t think anyone knows. I think clarifying what that “one way or another” is in regards to thinking about sex is also important to the conversation. I’m sure it is also different from one man to another.
The statement “Men think about sex approximately every seven seconds in one way or another,” is both axiomatic and wrong. It doesn’t stem from a scientific study, and no one has ever been able to come up with a controlled test to determine whether it’s true or not. But the lie is so pervasive that Snopes has an article on it, here: http://www.snopes.com/science/stats/thinksex.asp
I found this article both insulting and emasculating. Not all men do have a strong sex drive, and this paints those men as poor protectors, providers, fathers, and says in the closing line that they’re probably gay.
Guess what? That’s not the first time someone has called me gay for being wired a little less potently. It makes me just as angry to see it in print. There are at least a dozen factors that figure into a man’s drive, and I the first four that come to mind have nothing to do with the quality of his manhood.
I’m a guy. I have a partner in life who I love and adore, without whom I fear life would be… less than worth living. And a dozen years later we still have, ahem, a lot of drive. Yet unless I’m concentrating on something (a stinkin’ steamy pile of bad spaghetti code, what the other cars on the road are doing, where my gate is, how not to fall off a ladder, whatever) I don’t even think I can even make it 7 seconds without, you know, thinking, however briefly, about… it. And if somebody hot of either gender steps into view when I’m not otherwise focused or engaged, yeah, I totally look.
I’m sure there is a lot of variety among folks. Some guys and gals have less interest in that sort of thing, some, more. But frankly, only once every 7 second s sounds positively generous. For men I’d have pegged it as every other second.
(Sometimes I almost look forward to old age on the theory that, maybe, certain parts will even calm down. LOL. But till the day, I say there’s a big difference between thinking and doing, or lusting and… just admiring God’s handiwork.)
And I meant to add that it seems likely that in order to reign over our own impulses and desires that may be inappropriate and have unwanted consequences and hurt not only the people we love but also ourselves, we often have to start with having reign over our thoughts and basically learning to control such thoughts when they come into our head so they don’t end up controlling us.
I do like the gist of what you write in this article – that it is s harmful to expect that people don’t have human tendencies that come from unmet needs or desires and that some of these tendencies, such as lust, can be useful when that energy is redirected. And that shame is not a useful device in helping people redirect this energy. But don’t you think there are impulsive people who don’t know how to control such urges or people who are addicted to sex? Those latter two can have a tendency to manifest lustful thoughts into unhealthy actions with unwanted consequences.I think that is what Jesus was speaking to. The power that our thoughts actually have in conjunction with our beliefs about our reality to influence and possibly control our actions if we don’t get reign on our impulses and desires.
Tera: Yeah, as I said, “And certainly no man should lose control of his behavior.”
Yes, I saw that. But you didn’t emphasize it much…and I think it’s useful to understand this scripture hat lusting is different than feeling an attraction. Don’t you think? I responded to another comment on here just below that explains more about what my mind defines lust as versus healthy attraction and the fantasies that sometimes can come to mind from that attraction.
“Attraction” is what prissy fundies say when they mean “lust.” It’s the same thing, in a different dress.
well, if you think it’s the same thing, you don’t understand words very well and their different connotations. It’s not the same thing to lust and entertain thoughts as it is to simply feel an attraction and be reminded that you are a human being with normal desires yet not entertain those feelings long enough to have them take hold or form any type of longing. And there is no need to call names. I’m not a fundie anyway – maybe I am a bit prissy sometimes, though
Is what you’re describing “lust” or “emotional/spiritual immaturity”? I’m puzzled as to why you are drawing an extreme conclusion (i.e. not being able to control one’s urges or abuse as a result of lust) = the normative experience of “lust”.
Likewise:
The ancient, persistent, pervasive idea that being a good Christian woman means being a freeze dried prune is something that I think we need to reconsider. Women are women. Women lust. They lust regularly and coincidentally around the time of ovulation. They can’t help it. And I get real uncomfortable whenever I hear anyone say we should want them to help it or that they don’t have desires or that they are somehow different.
No woman should disrespect men, of course. And certainly no woman should lose control of her behavior. But being a woman means that in the privacy of your imagination, you are going to think a great many lustful thoughts. That’s just a fact about being a woman. That won’t change. It can’t change. It shouldn‘t change. The whole idea that somehow Christian women aren’t really supposed to think about sex is ridiculous, and harmful.
good point. all sex (etc.) involving women would have died out with the arrival of feminism or maybe before, if there weren’t something in it for us, too.
(ehhhh… i mean, a lot of us. not all of us.)
Man, I loved this post. In my observational experience, it’s when men STOP lusting that many Christian women start to wonder if it’s A) that they’re not attractive, or B) whether the men are closeted gays.
PREACH!!
I’ll be honest here. I think the church has oppressed men and made them feel wrong or bad about anything sex related. I’m not sure exactly where all this tyranny originates from but it saddens me. Monogamy, fidelity and marriage are present to protect a union, perhaps a sort of ‘line drawn in the sand’ so someone knows your committed elsewhere. But when we’re getting down to the mind aspect, the private mind of a I’ve rarely seen men so tortured by a subject. I was married to a Christian man who was tortured by the shame that the church puts on ‘sexuality’. I’m not sure what the answer is but I will say this; I know many non Christian men who have healthy monogamous relationships and are free in their minds from shame because it has not been put upon them as an evil. I feel that this is a disease in the body of Christ. My heart goes out to those men living with this pain and feeling like they are bad or broken because of a natural biological state they are born in to. I belive in monogamy and protecting our relationships but somewhere down the line that turned in to Christian men feeling like a pervert for noticing a woman’s breasts. God help you that your not a robot. Because king of shame only pushes people into fear and repression. Like I said before, I don’t know the answer but I do think it’s important to acknowledge when we’ve taken a wrong turn as the body and just like we’ve made gay people feel shame we do the same thing to heterosexuals.
I agree with you. There is no shame in having normal attractions, but lusting is another thing. Lusting implies more than being attracted (at least in my mind it does) – it means an active pursuit and thought of action. Thoughts are powerful. If we can mange to keep them only as thoughts, then more power to us. But some people cannot and not just men but women, too. Also, if we are constantly having these types of thoughts that might be saying something to us. Maybe our sexual needs aren’t being satisfied at home? I think John shore and other Christians who speak out about rethinking how to communicate and translate what Jesus said and what he meant by what he said is very appropriate. We seem to be caught in some outdated thinking and understanding that is causing harm by shaming people into doing and behaving in a certain way. That is far from an empowering way to live and not at all what Jesus would have us be doing or thinking is right.
i’ve also heard about guys whose church really made them flip out about masturbation, too. and not just ancient catholic where they had it as one of the 10 commandments but regular mainline presbyterians or some kind of very populous protestant church.
« 1 2 3