Godly Women · Traditionalist Bird

Seducers

Lori posts today on the same article I did a year ago. Here is what I originally wrote:

Elizabeth Gilbert now admits that she is a seduction Addict. But wait, how is that bad? There are countless articles about how women should seduce their men, their husbands. Aw, but I know…its A-OK to seduce when its your husband. Addicted to seducing random men —bad. Addicted to seducing husband or significant other– good. Bad Lust. Good Lust.

Much like the controversial definition I pointed out in this post, Elizabeth says:

“Seduction is the art of coercing somebody to desire you, of orchestrating somebody else’s longings to suit your own hungry agenda. Seduction was never a casual sport for me; it was more like a heist, adrenalizing and urgent.”

If desire is naturally there, you don’t need seduction, don’t need to manipulate and coerce. You seduce when you are lacking. When nothing else works to get what you want. Generally, women simply being feminine is enough to spark desire for men. No tricks or frills needed. There are men out there who praise women who talk about seducing their husbands and significant others, but then its often the same men who lambast someone like Elizabeth for doing the same thing. Its all double standards and whether you are on their special snowflake list.

In the end, I suspect seduction will maintain its status as a good thing, but with a warning–just don’t get addicted to it. That was Elizabeth’s fatal flaw. It will be rationalized that is what makes Elizabeth so much worse than other women–she was addicted and let it control her. Other women can’t possibly let that happen, because ya know—NAWALT.

To add to that, another word I see floating around is “intoxicate”. Women are to intoxicate men with love and sex. Its a word with a negative connotation and is not appropriate for healthy relationship. It means to poison or make someone lose control. Its no wonder women and especially Christian women get so confused. They hear all their life sex is bad, bad, bad (before marriage) and they know the proper definition of seduction is bad too. Then after marriage they are expected to just flip the switch and become seducing, intoxicating sex goddesses. A woman who seduces before marriage or outside of marriage is a feminist. A woman who seduces in marriage and her own husband is godly

 

Advertisements

5 thoughts on “Seducers

  1. I agree with IB as well. I’m not stooping so low as to compete with a seductress for my husband’s love. He’s too good a man to be treated in such a way.

    Also, Stone is right, intoxication is loss of control. I’m sure we’ve all seen men who lose their reason when they become the target of a seductress. In fact, this is one of the frustrations of young unmarried Christian women – he seemed interested until a woman came along who knows, obviously from much experience, exactly how to lead a man astray. It’s foolishness for a wife to think she can combat such a thing. She can be a refuge from it for him. She can provide goodness when badness presents a temptation, but his refusal must come from his own love of God and self respect. I’ve watched my daughters deal with this and while it’s useful for knowing which men have self control and self respect it’s just reality that a sexually inexperienced girl can’t compete with a seductress. The same goes for a wife who entered marriage inexperienced. She learns her man, not every other man in the world. When a woman has been with many men she knows things a one-man woman doesn’t know. So a man has to choose every time he’s tempted: To love what God has given him or to take what is not his. His choice is his, not his wife’s.

    From looking at the meaning of the word some translations render intoxication I think the ones which use enraptured are getting closer to the idea. Intoxication implies loss of choice; enraptured implies a choice to concentrate on the beloved. This is a duty of all married people – keep your focus on your beloved.

    Like

  2. Yes, Eavan. I agree with you about the focus being shifted away from what the original meaning of Proverbs 5:19 implies. More evidence of the need for the wife to wrest control or seduce.

    I thought the context for why the word “intoxicate” is used because to be sure someone, upon reading the thread would reply, “But it’s in the Bible!”

    Liked by 1 person

  3. Proverbs 5:19 is confusing because in context it seems like a command to husbands – to choose to be intoxicated with his wife and not with other women – but in the intoxication Stone is discussing it seems wives are supposed to actively seek his intoxication. In other words it’s her responsibility, not his.

    Liked by 1 person

  4. I’ve written about seduction a few times myself, the root origins of that word, from the Latin seducere, from se- ‘away, apart’ + ducere ‘to lead.’ It’s the implied feminine power “to lead” that freaks some people out. Men as powerless wildebeests, easily lead astray by a seductive woman.

    Lori said something about fighting for your husband’s sexual purity. That kind of made me laugh. I’m not the least bit interested in fighting for his affections, in driving off the hoards of seductive women circling around ready to feast off his milkshake. What in the world is wrong with people?

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s