I have to admit that it feels a bit awkward writing a blog
about sex. It seems that the cultural definition of writings about sex, at
least the last time I checked in the grocery store check-out line, focuses upon
techniques, attitudes, and agendas which are all aimed at bettering the sexual
experience. The simple message is nothing short of, “Here is how you can have
great sex.” The headlines and taglines make it fairly apparent that by “great
sex” what is meant is the physical act of sex itself. If an alien were to pop
into my local grocery store and read the magazine covers, he might just think
that we were a people who are consumed with sex, that our lives are a virtual
sexual romp. Actually, you don’t have to be an alien to come to this
conclusion. Most people pick up this idea, this idea that life is supposed to
be all sex, all the time. It is right here that the problems start.
One of the primary complaints I routinely hear about
marriages involves differing expectations regarding sex. Usually the discussion
starts something like this, “He/She isn’t meeting my needs. . .” What follows
involves a discussion of unmet desires and expectations, desires and
expectations which usually have something to do with an “all sex, all the time
attitude.” The problem is that the spouse doesn’t feel the same and offers the
countering argument that “All he/she is concerned with is sex and I have other
needs, needs which he/she refuses to meet.” It usually devolves from there so
let’s just stop at this point. It has taken a few years, but I think I have
come to the root of the problem. The problem isn’t really about sex, its
frequency, or the needs of one spouse or the other. The problem is rooted in
our definition of sex.
Our culture has defined sex in physical terms. Sex is the
act of sexual intercourse. Therefore, “all sex, all the time” means lots and
lots of sexual intercourse. Because this is the definition, many of the
conflicts come down to disputes over the definition of “lots and lots” which is
troublesome to resolve as our preoccupation with frequency places our focus
squarely upon ourselves and the satisfaction of our own passions and desires.
Right here we ought to pause and say, “Wait a minute!” but because our cultural
notions surrounding sex are so strong we often rush right by the moment. So
let’s take the moment.
Life is not about us, not as followers of Christ that is.
For those of us who follow Christ, life is about the other person. We expect
but one thing and this of ourselves: that we will submit to others around us
(Ephesians 5.21). So if we have defined something, let’s say sex, in a way that
turns our attention to ourselves and the meeting of our own desires and
passions, then we are on pretty solid ground stating that we probably have the
wrong idea. So what is sex? Sex is relationship. Here’s what I mean. We were
created sexual beings by God, and our sexuality was meant to lead us into
relationship with one another, relationships which teach us about God’s own
life and character. Within the relationship of marriage, sex as relationship
begins with two people living in community and consummates in these two moving
from communion to union, two becoming one, which last time I checked also
teaches us something about God’s own life and character, a triune life and
character.
Does sex involve sexual intercourse? Sure. Does it involve
more? Absolutely! Because sex is relationship, it is more of a continuum than
an act. Sex begins with communication and caring, it deepens with sharing and
authenticity, it consummates with union. In this way, sex is about discovering
“us” and not satisfying “ME.” Perhaps one might say that life in this way is
meant to be “all sex, all the time” but in a way in which it is about the other
person, seeking to know and understand, to support and affirm, to encourage and
exhort in a way that leads to mutuality and unity. When we approach sex in this
way debates about frequency fall away as we seek to meet the needs of the other
in a way that models God’s own life. We become less concerned about what we get
and more concerned about what we give. When we do this we discover a richness
and depth to our relationships, particularly our marriage relationships that
make our physical encounters much more satisfying and probably a good bit more
frequent. So the next time you are tempted to say, “He/she isn’t meeting my
needs!” and begin a debate about frequency of physical encounters, you might
first ask yourself, “Am I meeting the needs of the other?” and start counting
the frequency of the conversations.
A fellow traveler,
Blake
What’s my next step?
We encourage you to
consider engaging in the following as a way of handing off faith in your
family.
Redefine sex: We live in a
highly sexualized culture, a culture that instills a preoccupation with the
experience of personal physical gratification. Consider working to provide a
more holistic understanding of sex as relationship within your own family. For
younger children this involves modeling such as taking a regular date night and
demonstrating non-intimate touch. For older children, you might consider
purchasing various magazines and reading the articles about sex together and
then discussing what the main ideas within the article are and how they are
similar or dissimilar to God’s own ideas about sex as relationship.
We encourage you to
consider engaging in the following as a way of deepening your own faith.
Go on a date: Sex has been
defined by our culture as the act of sexual intercourse but God meant sex to be
experienced as relationship, a relationship of mutuality and unity. Sex as
relationship begins with community and communication, the simple enjoyment of
the presence of another. Consider taking some time to do this very thing. Set a
time when you and your spouse can spend time just being together, enjoying one
another’s company. We recommend doing things that encourage conversation rather
than things that discourage conversation such as a movie, but if movies are
your thing, plan on doing coffee afterwards and bring a game to play together.
No comments:
Post a Comment