PART TWO

WHY DOES GOD LEAVE OUR SEX SWITCHES ON?

CHAPTER FIVE

DOES SEX GUARANTEE INTIMACY?

Because they lack a positive reason for their single sexuality, many singles feel only frustration, temptation, and confusion. Single sexuality is seen as an unmanageable subject, an unprofitable problem. The only solution is to avoid anything to do with sexuality. Such singles end up looking like the "see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil" monkeys. Of course, a life of avoidance is very difficult for singles: they are to see no sex, hear no sex, speak no sex, and touch no sex. That's an impossibility; there's no way to become a non-sexual person.

An overweight woman complained one day, "Its easier to be an alcoholic than an overeater. At least the alcoholics can live without booze, and they can avoid their problem completely. But we can't live without food. We have to face our problem every day, to taste and be tempted, and yet not give in. Can you imagine an alcoholic staying sober if he was forced to drink some wine with every meal?" In the same way, singles try to keep away from sexual reminders, but in our sexually hyper-charged culture they are constantly bombarded with the very thing they are trying to avoid.

Laura, for instance, was an intelligent, conservative Christian, and a virgin. She was sexually pure and innocent, trying to save herself for her future husband. She felt the virgin lifestyle was difficult in her late teens, as she was quite popular and dated frequently. But she kept to her standards. Her romantic life took a few unexpected turns, and she graduated from college unmarried. She was again successful and popular in the working world, but few of the men she met were Christians. She dated some of her co-workers, staunchly retaining her moral ideals. Though they made many sexual advances, she withstood them all.

When Laura reached her twenty-fifth birthday, though, she began to become depressed about her marital potential. All of her friends had already married, as had all of the quality Christian men she knew. She was a virgin, indeed, and despaired of ever being married.

"Why do all of my friends get to be sexual and I do not?" She asked. "If God wants me to remain single, then why did He create me as a woman with the desires I have? I want to experience physical intimacy with a man too! I feel as if God made a mistake or just forgot about me. Sometimes I even think he is just playing with me, getting some morbid satisfaction out of my pain. It's not the way I used to view God--and not the way I want to view him--but sometimes I can't help it."

It was all just too confusing to her. Why did God leave all of her sexual apparatus in full functioning order and yet hang a sign on it that said, "Do not use"? Why did she have all of this equipment and no freedom to use it? Why was she barred from the experiences of closeness and physical intimacy?

She asked these questions of many Christian leaders and friends. They gave their answers, many of them simplistic and trite. They all seemed merely to say, "because God said no." None was able to sufficiently explain to her why He said no.

Finally Laura made up her own mind. She decided to become sexually active. Her decision process went something like this: God is loving and smart. He doesn't make mistakes, and He is not malicious. He created me as a sexual woman. I am going to experience all that He created me to be.

This new type of sexual freedom was exhilarating for Laura, but it also brought with it a truckload of new problems. Even though she was being more physical with men, she felt even further from them. Somehow the sexual behavior was preventing the development of closeness. The men stopped treating her with consideration; they were less interested in expensive evenings out on the town. In addition, her self-esteem began to plummet, as she realized men wanted her for sex--not for her many fine character qualities. Finally, her relationship with God diminished considerably, as did her involvement in church and with Christian friends.

Laura was not happy or content. Even more terrible was the realization that she was not any closer to becoming what she was created to be. She was at last sexually active, but she lost her self-esteem.

ARE MANY CHRISTIAN SINGLES SEXUALLY ACTIVE?

Laura is not the only single Christian who has decided to become sexually active. If the studies and surveys are correct, Laura is part of the majority, not the minority. In order to understand how many Christian singles are sexually active, it is important to first look at the larger context of sexual activity of all singles. Many studies have been done along these lines, all of them drawing the same conclusions: most singles are sexually active and are confused about moral issues. Reay Tannahill, in her encyclopedic work Sex in History, refers to a study done by Time magazine that illustrates this well:

A swift result of the 1970s" sexual revolution was moral confusion. When Time magazine conducted a survey toward the end of 1977, it found that 61 percent of the people interviewed were finding it "harder and harder to know what's right and what's wrong these days." In the 35 to 49 age group, 72 percent thought it was "morally wrong" for teenagers to have sexual relations; among the over-fifties the figure rose to 80 percent. Forty-two percent of those questioned believed women should be virgins at marriage, and 34 percent that men should be, too. (There was an apparent conflict here between theory and practice, since a survey, a year earlier, had indicated that at least 55 percent of unmarried women and 85 percent of men had had intercourse by the age of 19.) Forty-seven percent still considered homosexuality "morally wrong," 43 percent did not, and 10 percent were unsure. Yet although 74 percent wanted the government to crack down on pornography in movies, book, and nightclubs, 70 percent subscribed to the statement that "there should be no laws, federal or state, regulating sexual practice." Men on the whole tended to be more liberal than women, Catholics more permissive than Protestants.

The trend to sexual permissiveness has now reached the general teenage population. A nationwide survey conducted in 1992 by the Centers for Disease Control in Atlanta polled 11,631 students in grades nine to twelve and found these results: 40 percent of ninth graders claim to have had sex, 58 percent of tenth graders, 57 percent of eleventh graders, and a whopping 72 percent by time they are seniors.

Things have changed rapidly over the past forty years. In 1948 the Kinsey Report stated that 80 percent of all American men under the age of 25 admitted to some premarital, sexual experience. In 1953, Kinsey reported that 33 percent of women under age 25 were in some way sexually active (either there were some busy women or some men and women who lied!) But by 1975, Redbook magazine asked its female readers a similar question. It reported that 90 percent of the women under age 25 admitted to being sexually active. The sexual revolution had obviously made an impact on the behavior of young women.

The Redbook survey, however, also asked a significant religious question of its readers. It asked them to classify the strength of their religious commitment. Of the women under age 25 who claimed to be strongly religious, 75 percent still admitted to sexual experience before marriage.

A 1987 Bama survey conducted for Josh McDowell Ministry found a majority of Christian teenagers to be sexually active. Polling more than 1,400 youth who attend church, Bama found that by age eighteen 65 percent had had sexual contact, ranging from fondling to intercourse, and 43 percent had engaged in sexual intercourse. Interestingly, 73 percent of the youth who said they had experienced sexual intercourse said they were born-again Christians.

Why are so many strongly religious singles sexually active? Maybe one of the reasons lies in the instructions on sexual morals that their churches are giving. In order to determine the theological and moral beliefs of church leaders in America, researchers William Mcminney and Daniel Olson in 1988 and 1989 distributed 3,000 questionnaires to national leaders of several denominations, ranging from the United Church of Christ to the Assemblies of God. Of almost 1,500 denominational leaders who responded, only 40 percent felt it was wrong for a man and a woman to have sexual relations before marriage. Of course, the specific denominational percentages varied widely: of the United Church of Christ, only 14 percent of its leadership believed premarital relations to be wrong, contrasting with 95 percent of the Assembly of God leaders who felt such activity was wrong. The percentages of leaders in other denominations that felt premarital sexual activity was wrong were: United Methodist Church, 36 percent; American Baptist Churches, 45 percent; Baptist General Conference, 95 percent; Evangelical Free Church, 94 percent; and the governing board members and national staff of the National Council of Churches, 19 percent.

Obviously, opinions among Protestant church leadership vary widely as to whether sexual activity before marriage is wrong. No wonder so many Christian single adults become sexually involved; the messages they hear from church leaders are mixed and confusing, to say the least. Even in the most conservative denominations, there are leaders who do not believe premarital sexual activity to be wrong. In the more liberal churches, there are leaders who openly model unmarried, sexually active lifestyles.

Clearly Laura is not alone; many single adults, even Christian single adults, are sexually active today. All are missing the hidden opportunities God has for single adults in temporary celibacy. Typically, they have ignored the option of celibacy, associating it only with traditional morality, not even considering its emotional and spiritual benefits. Contrary to the common sense adage "Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater," our culture has jettisoned not only traditional morality, but also the practical benefits of temporary celibacy.

TRYING TO SAIL WITHOUT A RUDDER

We are a culture adrift without any guidelines for sexual behavior or morals. "We've thrown out the old values that inhibited sexuality and we can't agree on the new ones," says Richard J. Cross, professor emeritus at the Rutgers University School of Medicine. "The task is now to try and agree on what constitutes mutual responsibility in a relationship. Cross, an academic, affirms what the Bible has been saying all along, that standards are needed for our sexual behavior.

However, the professionals can't agree, Cross says. How confusing, then, it must be for the average person. As Richard Keeling, chairman of the American College Health Task Force on AIDS, says, "There's a great sense of chaos now when young people consider sexual activity. Students frequently tell you in confidential interviews that the risks they perceive far outweigh the pleasures of sex." However, "There's still a problem of one-night stands and numerous partners," according to June Reinisch, director of the Kinsey Institute for Sex Research. In fact, research shows that 90 percent of young women today have had intercourse before marriage, compared with only 50 percent forty years ago.

Recently, a TV station in southern California broadcast the tragic news of a local high school baseball player who shot himself in the head during the bus ride home after a game. He and some fellow athletes were playing Russian roulette with a loaded pistol, and he lost. Noting that his accidental suicide was a needless loss of life and the result of a senseless risk, the evening news anchors cautioned other teens against Playing that stupid game.

Yet TV news anchors fail to warn young people against playing another form of Russian roulette played by millions of the nation's teens and adults. Sexual Russian roulette is just as devastating, for it can lead to contact with the deadly Human Immunodeficency Virus (HIV). How wonderful it would be to hear some of the TV anchors say, "Premarital sexual activity is a dangerous game in which there are no winners, only the potential of a needless loss of life because of a stupid game." But of course, they don't say this, because they think abstinence is impossibly hard for young singles. That's nonsense.

After basketball star Magic Johnson admitted to the world that he had been tested as HIV positive, it became clear that such extramarital and premarital sexual behavior, in light of the current AIDS epidemic, was very risky. He had played a sexual form of Russian roulette. Though he thought himself invincible, he too succumbed to the disease. Originally Johnson told teens to practice "safe sex" to avoid getting HIV. Now he recognizes that the only safe sex is no sex at all, and Johnson teaches abstinence to avoid getting AIDS.

Yet the modern media mainly teach the simple (and potentially deadly) slogan "Practice Safe Sex." That's like saying to teens, "It's OK to play Russian roulette as long as you wear a helmet. What dumb advice. What if the helmet has a crack or weak spot? If we truly believe kids can say no to drugs, what prevents us from believing that kids can successfully say no to sex before marriage? We assume they can't, though, and offer them condoms and warnings to encourage them on their way.

In fact, drug education in the classroom is a useful analogy that illustrates how mixed up the ethics of sex education are today. Can anyone imagine a science teacher's giving a lecture like this:

"OK, class, today we will learn about drug abuse. Now of course you shouldn't take drugs unless prescribed by a physician. But we educators know that that is an old fashioned belief and that most of you will take drugs anyway. So today we want to show you the healthy way to do cocaine, heroin, and many other drugs. Let's start with heroin. First, it's really important that you use a clean needle. After class, I will be giving out free needles to anyone who wants one. Next, you roll up your sleeve, make a fist, and..."

This, of course, is easily seen as a counterproductive way to teach drug prevention. Unfortunately, the very same method in the area of sexuality is seen as "enlightened" and "modern."

A PROBLEM FOR THOSE PREVIOUSLY MARRIED TOO

The problem of a strong sex drive and the temptation for sex before marriage does not confront only young singles. In fact, the problem may be even more difficult for those singles who have been previously married. It is extremely difficult for some singles to be sexually active for several years and then to become completely inactive. It's like asking a marathon runner never to jog again, an artist never to paint, a chef never to eat. If sexual activity has become a vital part of a person's life and identity, it is confusing and painful to quench that behavior.

Alan was a happily married man of forty-five with three children and a loving wife. Driving home one night from a meeting, his wife lost control of her car and drove into a tree. She was killed on impact. Alan's world, of course, turned instantly upside down. He was now both father and mother, breadwinner and homemaker. Friends and family helped out in many ways, and he and his children slowly rebuilt their lives.

But no one helped Alan with his sexual problem. He had been sexually active with his wife for years. After his wife's death, he was expected instantly to change and become celibate. As he said, "Do you have any idea how hard it is to be sexually active one day, and then the next day to be celibate? Lots of things about June's death were difficult but at least others could help. No one helped me sexually--no one even mentioned a word! And I couldn't talk to anyone about it. I was embarrassed. It's still a tough problem for me!"

Divorced singles often feel the same way. As Tracy, a single woman divorced at thirty-one, put it: "Alex and I were a terrible match in every way but sexually. It may sound sick, but sex basically kept our marriage together for as long as it lasted. In bed we were great; out of bed, we were rotten.

"We finally realized that most of life is lived out of bed! We knew the best thing for both of us was the divorce, and I don't regret it. But I was surprised to find out how hard it was to be celibate. After eleven years of great sex, I was going crazy after eleven days. Of course, I couldn't talk about it with my married Christian friends--they already looked down on me for getting the divorce. This is the first time I've ever admitted to anyone how hard it was to not be sexually active."

Tracy met a man and married him three months after her divorce was final. You probably can guess one of the reasons that drove her to marry again so quickly. Unfortunately, the second marriage also did not work out. Tracy is now trying to take things slowly and not jump into a new relationship right away, but she admits that it still is difficult. "I feel such a desire to share intimacy with a man that I give in sometimes. Is that so wrong?"

"PLEASE GOD, TURN OFF MY SWITCH!"

Of course, not all singles are sexually active. There are still many who are virgins, trying hard to remain pure. These singles are not sexually active, yet many of them feel as Laura and Tracy do: they too are frustrated and confused. Why does God make them sexual and then prohibit sexual activity?

In desperation, many singles turn to God as the final solution. They cry to God for release from their sexual feelings. They envision God standing before a great, heavenly control panel, able to turn on and off the different impulses in their lives. So they beg God to turn off their sex switch.

"How nice it would be," they assume, "if God would just turn us off sexually while we are single. We could then be without these strong temptations for a while and be better able to lead godly lives. Of course, God could flip my switch back on once I become married. What a great idea."

I have often wondered what marriage ceremonies would be like if singles were granted this wish. As the pastor pronounced the couple married, or as the two exchanged vows, God in heaven would move their sex switches from OFF to ON. How funny that would be to watch. I can see single men and women, having had no sexual impulses for months or years, begin to quiver and shake as these impulses coursed through their veins again. (Some might even faint from systems overload.) Their eyes would become like saucers, the first kiss would be much more passionate, and the recessional would be very fast. In fact, receptions after weddings might become a thing of the past. But God, for reasons of His own, does not choose to answer this prayer as some singles have hoped. Instead, He leaves singles' sex switches fully on and functioning.

Singles who are not having sexual activity aren't sure why God has left them so turned on (literally), and because of this they aren't sure why they are still waiting. As one single woman said, "I know single Christians aren't supposed to be sexual, but I've almost had enough of this waiting. I'm about to give in anyway!"

INTIMACY AND THE SUPER SEX MYTH

The reason for the large numbers of sexually active singles is not primarily physical. Unlike those lines in the movies and in real life, men won't explode if they don't get sex. For most men and women, the physical sex drive is not so overwhelming that we will go crazy if we don't get release.

The body has its own mechanisms for releasing such sexual pressure. A man may say to a woman, "Please make love to me. If we don't, I think I'll explode." But she should be wiser than that and have more of a sense of self-respect than to make love just to be a release valve. One smart woman told me that she just said to one such man, "Sorry, but that's just another reason I shouldn't sleep with you."

No, the motivating factor towards sexual involvement for singles is not primarily physical. Instead, it is relational. The top priority for single adults is their hunger for close, personal relationships. What we really want is intimacy. We need closeness with another human being, a sense of being cherished by one special individual. Intimacy is the draw.

But what does this have to do with sexual behavior? The connection is easy, at least in twentieth-century America. It is expressed by what we might call "The Super Sex Myth" of our culture: sex will guarantee intimacy.

There is, of course, some truth to this myth, as there is in all mythic beliefs. An emotion similar to intimacy is felt when clothing is removed, and each person reveals what is kept from public view. A feeling of closeness is sometimes experienced when two people lie down side by side, touching and being touched. A sense of being cherished is approximated by the intensity with which the two cling to one another, holding each other tightly.

But the myth is ultimately false. Sex does not necessarily provide intimacy. Instead, it can prevent true intimacy from ever occurring, genuine vulnerability from happening, authentic closeness from being achieved. In the wrong context, sex can be the enemy of intimacy.

ACCEPT NO SUBSTITUTES

And yet the myth continues. Singles may substitute sexuality for intimacy out of ignorance, or they may actually settle for sexuality instead of seeking intimacy. Here are three reasons singles may be tempted to substitute sexuality for intimacy:

First, sex is easier than honesty. Sex is less risky than true vulnerability. Most of us find it very difficult to openly reveal ourselves to another person--especially if we don't know for sure who we are. So we hide behind our passion, and we hide together under the sheets.

This is one reason teenagers are notorious for kissing for hours--kissing is easier than talking. The process of forming themselves, their ideas, and their goals is just beginning. How can they talk with any depth? Even more difficult is the sharing of emotions. Emotions are still hard to identify and express. So how can they truly share verbally what they are feeling? These tasks are too demanding for teenagers; indeed, they are tough even for adults. Rather than attempt to scale their heights, the kids opt instead for a satisfying and yet easily accessible plateau: lookout point.

Frequently the same inability to share a true sense of self with another persists into adulthood. Maybe the man has a very poor sense of self, so it is better kept hidden. Maybe the woman was deeply hurt, before, so she keeps her real self hidden and protected as a way of avoiding future pain. Whatever the cause, these adults are likely to choose sex over intimacy. They take the clothes off their bodies but keep the masks on their faces. Intimacy has degenerated into a costume party, each playing a tightly scripted part. Such behavior reminds me of a masquerade ball at a nudist colony. Neither knows who the other really is.

This has happened partly because of laziness; it takes a lot of work to know and be known. But it also has occurred because of fear. Discovering the true essence of another person is a dangerous thing, as is being truly known. If I do not know the real you, then I can continue to believe that you are who I would like you to be. But if I know the real you, I'm stuck with that. My ability to idealize you is over.

In the same way, if you do not know the real me, it won't hurt so much if you reject me. After all, that really wasn't me you rejected. But if you truly know me and still reject me, the pain is complete and deep. As John Powell said in Why Am I Afraid to Tell You Who I Am? "If I tell you who I am, you may not like who I am, and that is all I have."

Second, sex can be a quick fix. In a world of microwave ovens and Minute-Rice, the ability to delay gratification is hindered, if not completely absent. Not only are our children unable to sit quietly and politely, and not only are our teenagers unable to do their chores or homework first and relax later, but we adults are also largely unable to delay gratification. Rather than waiting to save enough money to buy more clothes, our credit cards are loaded to the limit. Rather than investing in the safe, long-term account, our money is lost in high-risk, get-rich-quick investments. And rather than waiting until commitments are made and we know that the person is able and willing to keep the commitment, we jump into bed hoping that commitments will follow.

Scott Peck, author of The Road Less Traveled, says that "delaying gratification is the process of scheduling the pain and pleasure of life in such a way as to enhance the pleasure by meeting and experiencing the pain first and getting it over with." He claims, "It is the only decent way to live."' The quick-fix approach to sexuality is the opposite of decent, mature sexuality that can endure delayed gratification. Like a drug, it only masks the need and numbs the feelings. Prolonged use of this drug can lead to an addiction, an addiction to shallowness and dishonesty. It leaves one with neither a decent nor a gratified life.

Third, sex even can be used as an avoidance of intimacy. Two singles who have just met at a bar and later hop into bed may be intimate physically, but there is little potential for emotional or relational intimacy. Sometimes they don't even know each other's names. The greatest example of such avoidance can be seen in what are known today as fake orgasms. At the height of what should be an honest, vulnerable moment, there can be extreme falsehood and dishonesty. Rather than intimacy, one partner will lie to the other about the very physical act that is supposedly going on. Here there is not even physical intimacy anymore; there is only theater. Modern singles have effectively replaced the desire for intimacy with the deceit of imitation.

Deep down we know that sex does not guarantee intimacy. Women still roll over in bed and ask their men, "Do you love me?" Men answer back with an annoyed sound, "Of course, I love you. We just had sex, didn't we?" But both the woman and the man know better: sex does not guarantee intimacy, and sometimes it is used to avoid it. As any married couple knows, the marriage bed can be the loneliest place on earth.

Sex not only doesn't guarantee intimacy, but it can also destroy it. If that is the case, then why does God leave singles' sex switches on? The surprising answer will be revealed in the next two chapters.

CHAPTER SIX

THANKS FOR VISITING! GOD BLESS YOU!

[ Index | Internet | Salvation | Computer | Botany | Study | Personal ]