Tuesday, September 24, 2019

Do we Believe In Redemption?

There is a lot of talk on the right wing internet about "sexual market value" and "marriage market value". These terms are mostly applied to women. I've read stories about women being "depreciating assets" while every man is evidently an "appreciating asset". Also, there are whole categories of women who apparently should be shut out of the "marriage market" completely, like "sluts", unwed mothers, older divorced women, women who "hit the wall" (anyone after 30), women with tattoos, debt etc etc.

Imo, there are a couple of problems with this approach. Problem number one is that not every man is an "appreciating asset", whatever pretty lies they may choose to tell to themselves. I constantly hear how women have "an expiration date" (apparently we all become infertile somewhere about 25-26) and that women "age like milk" while men "age like wine". The truth is that many older men are hardly a catch themselves. A middle aged overweight  alcoholic without a stable income isn't going to attract "a young nubile virgin" however hard he tries.

Women are often accused of only running after highly desirable men and not wishing to settle, but vice versa can be also true. There are lots of men with unrealistic dating standards. They will gather on the internet and spend hours *itching complaining about how all women around are fat, have illegitimate kids etc yet they never ask themselves why can't they attract a better sort of women, may be, because they aren't anything special, either?

If we look at the marriage purely from the "market" point of view, then we see that the higher quality women will look for the best of men, and high quality men do the same. Like attracts like. Take tattoos, for instance. Let's be honest, tattoos are a class marker. Outside of hipster bohemian circles, as a rule "a lady" won't have one. But, not every man is a gentleman, either, and not every gentleman wishes to marry a lady. So a nice middle-class church going guy may be repulsed by them, but some biker or an alternative type will hardly ever care.

Considering older women there are lots of older single/divorced/widowed men, probably with kids of their own who don't want any more children but would like to have a stable home and a partner in life etc etc. There is a "market niche" for everyone.  So, to sum it up, my point here is that "losers" come in both sexes, and there is always someone for everyone, if only both men and women can get rid of unrealistic expectations.

And here comes my second point: should we as Christians reduce all the interpersonal relationships purely to the market exchange? Is that what the right-wing thought has finally come to? That we view our fellow men and women as consumer goods?  It also doesn't work, because human beings aren't computers and aren't motivated only by the ideas of profit (and for those who are, please, seek help). We also have emotions and feelings, and though we shouldn't be ruled by them, they aren't to be completely disregarded, either.

As  Christians, we ought to believe in redemption. Yes, both "sluts" and "bums" can be redeemed, can change their ways, clean their life and find happiness in marriage. Marriage isn't only for the upper class, it's for everyone, yeah, even for those who made mistakes. "Merchant right", those who reduce everything to the economics and "market value" can be conservative, but traditionalists, they aren't.

P.S. I don't mean that people shouldn't have standards as to whom date and marry. For instance, if we take divorced people, some churches, like the Catholics don't technically allow divorce and it could be against convictions for many Christians to marry a divorced person. If someone considers marriage, it's not wrong to exclude certain groups of people as potential marriage partners. However, these standards should be realistic and when dealing with people, even online it's always good to be more charitable, so to say.  


  1. Very lonely men and women will often overlook debt or tattoos when they find a compatible mate. The potential mate might be sincerely repentant and have given up their worldly ways.

  2. Exactly! People don't always change, but sometimes they do. And there still exists something like a soul mate. I think especially for older people, they often will remarry after the death of their spouse just to have a companion, someone to talk to. It's not all about worldly goods and "what do I get out of it?"

  3. I firmly believe in 'redemption'; why else did Jesus Christ come to earth and live and die for us, if not to redeem us and help us change? Everyone deserves a chance and a second chance.

    As for a woman's fertility--I didn't even marry until I was 30, and had five healthy children between ages 30 and 40. My grandmother had her 15th healthy child at age 46 (and never had another period after that), so I don't believe in the myth that women are not fertile after mid twenties. I think too many women decrease their own fertility by taking hormonal contraceptives and by the foods and drinks they consume. I will say that having babies is a "young people's sport" because as we age we don't have the same stamina as we did in our 20's. On the flip side, I was lots more patient and experienced with our fifth than our first.

    If I'm ever asked about what to look for in a mate, I advise that character is most important. Looks fade and money can be lost, but character is enduring. My husband isn't so great looking, but he is endlessly kind and patient, hardworking and generous. Figure out what is most important then become that kind of person which will attract that same kind to you.

  4. Rozy, amazing, internet told me that by the age of 30 a woman's uterus falls out:)

    Women living like men, with all the stress of climbing a career ladder, partying till late at night, drinking, smoking and especially having multiple sex partners and corresponding problems tends to decrease fertility. But many modern men have diminished fertility, too, also probably due to lifestyle. It's by no means only a female problem.

    Our society is broken in many respects and it's the way the elites appear to like it to be. And many children miss their parents' guidance. Also, youth is often superficial. When I was younger, things like status were more important to me than they are now because as you get older, you start valuing other things, like, indeed, character.

    As for looks, they aren't entirely under our control, and getting older isn't something which you can escape. However, I do think that we should take a good care of our health and appearance, out of self-respect.

  5. Thank you for addressing the depravity associated with reducing another human being to a marketable commodity that can be categorized and shelved according to what amounts to a PUA rating scale.

    That people who are ostensibly conservative, traditional, and often proclaiming religious faith embrace the practice is disconcerting.

    In the real world, real men (including men of faith) often buck the debt-free, tattoo-free, virgin ideal and not because they're desperate or unattractive, but because emotions are unpredictable, and at the end of the day people want someone who feels like home to them. When they find that, arbitrary rules often fly out of the window. This bit gave me a chuckle:

    The truth is that many older men are hardly a catch themselves. A middle aged overweight alcoholic without a stable income isn't going to attract "a young nubile virgin" however hard he tries.

    Great post, Sanne.

  6. You are welcome, Elspeth!

    Yes, some men do like rating women but somehow get upset when women do the same:) Apparently, it's wrong for the women to run after "top 20% of the men" but it's OK for a guy to only settle for a "9 or 10". Well, it works both ways. As someone said online, "female fertility isn't a charity, either".

    Unfortunately, a lot what passes for "conservatism" nowadays, is just right-wing liberalism.

  7. Here in Finland it was typical (beofre contraception) that woman got one more child at her 40's, right before she hit menopause. Usually there was rather big age gap between the last one and the one before him. It is like woman's body had decided "ok, enough babies" and then "No, wait a minute, let's have one more, this is our final chance".

    Those kids were called "Evening Stars". I think it was rather sweet. And the older siblings pampered and spoiled that Evening Star.

    I must say that even if everybody deserves second change, I propably would not marry someone who needs one. If people make so bad mistakes they need second change, it means they lack common sense. And people cannot learn that, you must be born with it.

  8. The word used here is more along the lines of "the one who came last" which isn't at all poetic:) I think I'd prefer "Evening Star"!

    Imo, people with problems should settle for other people with similar problems, in this way they can better understand each other. But it's also what mostly happens in life. That's why the complaints of certain guys are so ridiculous: if all they can attract is "low quality" women, then they aren't "high quality" themselves.

    Also, there is normally a difference between what one thinks and what one says in polite company. It's hardly charitable for Christians to constantly rant against "sluts" (who are any woman who isn't a virgin apparently) or women with tattoos or whatever. Does a tattoo disqualify otherwise normal woman from getting married? I don't think so.