Tuesday, May 31, 2005
The Sensibilities of Men
by Jennifer K. Luther
from the poetry contest of Writers' Journal
Romeo would have eventually explained to Juliet that
they were young when they met.
He needs to explore his options and find himself.
You cannot adequately experience life if you commit
when you are fourteen.

Snow White's man would later clarify that the draw
had been necrophilia.
She had become far too animated for him.
However, they could try coma-inducing drugs if she is
desperate to hold on.

Cinderella's uncomfortable shoe would eventually
shatter against the wall.
Someone forgot about compatiability of personality at
the four-hour gala.
His mother considers her "white trash," and he wishes
He had married a princess.

Esmerelda never tamed and was sent back to the
hunchback.
She was not "military-wife" material.

Prince Erik would resent Ariel's fish past.
He ponders the possibility of having tuna for children.

The Beast would have declared that she was great
while he sported the hair.
But look at him now; so handsome, so chisled.
He must be shared.

Sleeping Beauty was 100 years older than her
prince.
No man can overlook that age difference.

Rapunzel, Rapunzel, why did you cut your hair?
Your comfort does not incite his libido.
The pounds of drag and the extra conditioner were a
small load to bear, a labor of love.

The miller's daughter lied about spinning the gold.
She risked having his son taken by a dancing gnome.

The deceitful, common, peasant witch; her head came
off without a hitch.

Women learn that "happily ever after" lasts as long as
it takes to close the book.

Monday, May 30, 2005
Friendly tip o' the day:
To stop the rare pop-ups/unders that appear on Firefox, here's the fix. You can thank me later. (for those of you that are still using IE, join the cool kids club and use Firefox. You'll never go back.)

via Troy.



This picture is just begging for a caption.
To all my friends, family, and fellow slackers who have not yet RSVP'd for my upcoming wedding reception:

Répondez s'il vous plaît, already!

Today is supposedly the day you're supposed to either email or call me to say if you're coming or not. Granted, you're still welcomed to come, even if you don't RSVP -- but because I'm such a manners/conscientious person (hah), I'm reminding you now.

Sunday, May 29, 2005
More fun with Revolve. Some questions are just funny ("Was Jesus a vegetarian?") to the following which are subtly scary:

Q. I found out that my friend, who is 15, sells and smokes weed. What should I say? Should I try to help him?
A. You best bet is to find out more about him. What’s up in his life? Does he have problems? Does he know that God has a purpose for his life and pot will destroy that? Love him like Jesus would. Be there for him, but you can’t hang out with him and get involved in this stuff. Talk to a pastor and have him talk with your friend. It’s better for a guy to talk to him than you, as a girl.

Q. What do you think about boyfriends tickling their girlfriends?
A. Tickling = foreplay. That is straight from a guy’s perspective. It is sexual. Girls can call it flirting, playing, or whatever. Guys want to be able to touch your body. And they are going to let their hands tickle you everywhere they can touch. Because “Hey, we were just playing. It was no big deal.”

Q. Hey, my question is how do you tell a friend that’s your crush that you’re into him without ruining your friendship?
A. You don’t. Sorry. You just don’t tell him without it ruining your friendship. God made guys to be the leaders. That means that they lead in relationships. They tell you they like you. It is just an all around bad idea for girls to take on a guy’s responsibility.

Nothing like reinforcing your grandmother's patriarchy in a 21st century medium. Oy.

Saturday, May 28, 2005
I'm still transcribing those horrid "Blab" question and answer columns for my thesis (so far, 12 pages of 10 pt. font, single spaced fluff -- what layer of the Inferno am I on?) . I fluxuate from laughing hilariously at what I'm reading to being really angry at some of the sentiments expressed in this "hip" medium.

What's even funnier are the typos I inadvertently type when my eyes start to cross after typing too long. For example, here's one question in the text:
Q. The Bible says I'm supposed to be loving my enemies. Does this mean I'm supposed to love Satan?
A. The answer is no, we are not to love Satan. Satan is the enemy of God. He is more than a foe to us; he is evil itself and as children of light we cannot love darkness of have any part in it.
Stupid question, I know. When I was typing it out though, I misspelled "Satan." Instead, I typed
Satin is the enemy of God.

Heh. Now there's some theology for you on a Saturday afternoon. Church dismissed.

UPDATE: (2 days later) TWENTY pages of this dribble I just finished transcribing. Yikes.

You didn’t ask to be born but here you are, breathing, moving, living. You’re holding onto a rising balloon that you can’t let go of because by the time you realize you’re holding onto the thing, you’re already too far off the ground. But you know one day it will pop. In the meantime, you have to find something to do. Quite a predicament.

The fear of life can be overpowering. Much of the fear of life comes from fear of the unknown, of not knowing what to expect. The photographer Diane Arbus, famous for portraits of the retarded, the poor, and the forgotten in America, remarked, “Most people go through life dreading they’ll have a traumatic experience. Freaks are born with their trauma. They’re aristocrats.”

from The Anti-Purpose-Driven Life
by Lincoln Swain


Friday, May 27, 2005
Ah, mindless work. I crave thee.

Tonight, Chapter 1 is on the back burner, and I'm starting on the next chapter on footing. My plan is to tackle those horrific "Blab" question and answers in Revolve -- which means I need to transcribe them all into one document, so I can dissect 'em like mad. According to the cover, there's "200+" of these babies to record, so most likely I will be throwing things at my monitor by the end of the night. Behold, research!

And with that, I'm officially out of things to say. I have no mindless memes, quizzes, links, or controversies to bring up -- so it's your turn. Entertain (and/or distract) me in the comments. ttfn.

p.s. I found a new station on Live365 to dig -- Musical Justice. Lame name, cool tunes.

Thursday, May 26, 2005
Ah therapy. I find it in the oddest places. I'm not one to lay on a couch and confess to an overpriced professional -- so instead, I find my theraputic fix in other places: a bubble bath with a good book, a long conversation with a good friend, a cup of my favorite tea, a quirky foreign film, or in the lyrics of a forgotten song. These lyrics especially hit me tonight:

part of the lyrics to Virginia Woolf
Indigo Girls
The hatches were battened
The thunderclouds rolled and the critics stormed
The battle surrounded the white flag of your youth
If you need to know that you weathered the storm
Of cruel mortality
A hundred years later I’m sitting here living proof
So you know you’re all right
Life will come and life will go
Still you’ll feel it’s all right
Someone’ll get a letter to your soul

When your whole life is on the tip of your tongue
Empty pages for the no longer young
The apathy of time laughed in your face
Did you hear me say each life has it’s place

The place where you hold me
Dark in a pocket of truth
The moon had swallowed the sun and the light of the earth
And so it was for you
When the river eclipsed your life
And sent your soul like a message in a bottle to me
And it was my rebirth

I feel better already.
Yikes.

"Reverend" Lovelace is yet another reason why I won't be associated with anything on the religious right -- and why it's increasingly difficult to be from the Bible belt. His church sign unabashedly reads: "The Koran needs to be flushed."

How can someone so hateful claim to be in God's service? And not only that, but he's getting air time on MSNBC?! If it wasn't so comically false and contemptible, I would almost laugh.

Back home, it's not the Koran that needs a good flushing.
Meh, forget hockey. International Movie Night on CBC makes Becky one happy girl.

Tonight's film was just the escape I needed -- 'cept now I have an overwhelming desire to watch Bette Davis.

Mental note: If I ever leave Canada, I must find a cable system that carries the CBC.



Wednesday, May 25, 2005
We received an unusual artifact of religious media in the mail today -- a stealth Christian campaign for the new Russell Crowe movie, Cinderella Man. The movie, as far as we know, is not a "Christian" movie; but Grace Hill Media is trying to flack it as such to those in the know, a "must-see film about inspiration, hope and faith." And what Hollywood movie -- besides Revenge of the Sith -- isn't? But Grace Hill is going for something more pointed here, with just three blurbs, from Christianity Today, something called the St. Anthony Messenger, and every Christian conservative's favorite Jewish movie critic, Michael Medved. Nowhere in the release is religion, much less Christianity, specifically mentioned; but the PR guy encourages us to "share the good news" with readers.

So here it is, folks: "Liberal" Hollywood has learned the true lesson of The Passion: Christian conservatives are a market. And that's one hell of a racket.

Go grad student go!

Despite having a mini-pity party for myself last night, I got a lot accomplished on the thesis. I'm thinking by the end of the week I'll be moving onto a new chapter (which is HUGE!). I really need to have 2 good chapter drafts going by the time my family arrives next month.

Not only did I get some writing accomplished, but I also added some friends to my banner up above. My hubby said the photo showing the serenity of nature combined with "simple silliness" is truly indicative of me.

Maybe he knows me after all.


Oy, the things that amuse me at 4AM in the morning.

Tuesday, May 24, 2005
10 Questions for Brian McLaren
by Terry L. Heaton

I'm going to put you on the spot and ask for your thoughts about some conservative Christian organizations, like the Parents Television Council, seeking to pressure the government into censoring television programming. Is this going to work or will it backfire?
I think the Christian community is making an extremely dangerous mistake with this. The mistake is we are going from dissatisfaction to legislation and missing the middle step of persuasion. Now you would think, from our beliefs from the Gospels, that God isn't just interested in us being focused on the law, but he actually wants to change our hearts. That’s my understanding of how the Kingdom of God works, but we (the church) don't seem to understand that.

So our first move when we're unhappy about something is to get laws passed about it. To me that is pure Colonialism, Colonialism says change the world, by controlling other people against their will. The work of persuasion would be much harder, and it requires us to change our rhetoric 180 degrees. You can't, you don't, influence people you identify as the other side of the culture war. The language of the culture war is the language of "strength on our side" to dominate the other side. That leads to belief in things like redemptive violence, which is incredibly widespread in the Christian community, and which, I think, needs to be questioned in light of the teachings of Jesus. That discussion you certainly aren't going to hear on religious broadcasting.

So, firstly, I think it’s a gross and foolish mistake of strategy. If we were to take 30 percent of the effort spent on legislation and invest it instead on sensible and palpable persuasion, we would get an awful lot farther.

Secondly, it’s hypocritical, because the conservative religious value always talks about how we want to weaken federal government. They want to weaken the federal government when it talks about the government helping the poor, preserving the environment or doing a lot of other things that I think Christians should care about, and they want to strengthen the government in all these other ways. They ought to at least be honest and say, "We want to strengthen the federal government for our agenda and not somebody else’s." I think it’s incredibly duplicitous to, in one breath, call for weakening the federal government and then try to use it for your advantage. I'm stunned that people who call themselves Christians would practice that kind of duplicity. It's stunning. It feels to me like George Orwell.

The rest of the interview is here.

After reading this, I can see why some out there are labelling him as "the biggest threat" to Christianity -- but it's not for the same reasons they'd list! (oh, and gold star to McLaren for using persuasion/rhetoric correctly!)


It's quite something to look at pictures of your dad from 45 or so years ago.

What a cute kid! (and I'm really digging my auntie's hornrimmed glasses!)

I've had a hard couple of days. But I think I may have found something to cheer me up.

July 21-24 is the Calgary Folk Festival -- and I really wanna go. I think it'll be the perfect get-away, right when we'll need one.

Some of the performers:
Arrested Development
Indigo Girls (!!)
Hawksley Workman (yes, he did call me "cute")
Ron Sexsmith
Sarah Harmer
Shelby Lynne
...and a bunch of others.
Looks like so much fun. Maybe if we really save our pennies we can retreat out west for some good music and time away. I'll hope, anyway.

Anyone else from Saskatoon wanna come? We could make it a trip, and share camping together!
The Philosophy of Loss
Indigo Girls
Welcome to why the church has died
In the heart of the exiled in the kingdom of hate
Who owns the land & keeps the commands
And marries itself to the state
Modern scribes write in Jesus Christ

Everyone is free

And the doors open wide to all straight men & women
But they are not open to me
And who is teaching kids to be soldiers
To be marked by a plain white cross
And we kill just a little to save a lot more

The philosophy of loss
There are a few who would be true out of love
And love is hard

And don't think that our hands haven't shoveled the dirt
Over their central American graveyards
Doctors & witch hunters stripped you bare
Left you nothing for your earthly sins
Yeah but who made this noise just a bunch of boys
And the one with the most toys wins
Who is teaching kids to be gamblers
Life is a coin toss
And of course what you give up is what you gain

The philosophy of loss

Whatever has happened to anyone else
Could happen to you & to me
And the end of my youth was the possible truth
That it all happens randomly
Who is teaching kids to be leaders
and the way that it is meant to be
the philosophy of loss

It's their hidden track on the album, Come on Now Social -- and one of my favorites.

Monday, May 23, 2005
The latest literary victim for hubby and I is Nathaniel Hawthorne's novel The Scarlet Letter. We've picked this book for a variety of reasons -- mainly because it's a classic he's never encountered (and one I haven't read in at least 10 years), plus it just seems apt.

The story is known by everyone. After having a baby out of wedlock, Hester Prynne is punished by her Puritan community by being forced to wear the scarlet-red letter A on her clothes -- signifying (and humiliating) her for her sexual sin.

I love the language of this book. Reading it again is transporting me back to Mr. Crosby's 11th grade AP Composition class.

Here's the pivotal opening scene, when Hester first appears in the community, wearing her punishment:
When the young woman -- the mother of this child -- stood fully revealed before the crowd, it seemed to be her first impulse to clasp the infant closely to her bosom; not so much by an impulse of motherly affection, as that she might thereby conceal a certain token, which was wrought or fastened into her dress. In a moment, however, wisely judging that one token of her shame would but poorly serve to hide another, she took the baby on her arm, and, with a burning blush, and yet a haughty smile, and a glance that would not be abashed, looked around at her townspeople and neighbors.

On the breast of her gown, in fine red cloth, surrounded with an elaborate embroidery and fantastic flourishes of gold thread, appeared the letter A. It was so artistically done, and with so much fertility and gorgeous luxuriance of fancy, that it had all the effect of a last and fitting decoration to the apparel which she wore; and which was a splendor in accordance with the taste of the age, but greatly beyond what was allowed by the sumptuary regulations of the colony.
What a scene!

Maybe one reason I'm encountering this book again is because I can relate to how Hester feels. Literally. No, there's no baby involved in my plight -- but I know what it's like to have someone look at you differently because of choices you have made in your past.

There's nothing like it. To be sitting with someone, having a fairly intimate conversation -- and then to be, in an instant, looked at differently because of your past choice/mistake. It's as if you are branded -- and the only thing a person will see is this particular "sin," and not you or the person they have come to know.

And I hate to say it, but religious people are the worst at these disregarding looks. It seems as if there's a ranking system of sins out there. If you're gay, divorced, had an abortion, hold "liberal" views of the Bible or anything else the church deems "immoral" -- well, then you're looked at as if you're damaged goods. And that's not cool -- nor is it biblical.

That old cliched saying "be in the world, not of it" causes more damage than good in Christian communities, in my opinion. People so far remove themselves from society and its problems that when they're confronted with them -- they either run away, verbally devastate the "sinner" (in Christian love, of course), or blankly stare instead of dealing with it. These are not effective options, and they only hurt those people and push them further away.

This isn't directed at any one particular group/church/or organization. It's just something I've observed and experienced recently -- and it's something I would like to see stopped.

We all have our own "scarlet letters" -- no one is perfect. Maybe it's time to stop gazing at these labels, and start looking at the people who are behind them. Or, better yet, let's scrap the whole labeling process altogether.
It's quite amazing (and beautiful) to be driving home and see the moon setting on one side of the prairie sky -- and the sun rising on the other.

It was a photographic moment, but rather than dragging my camera out, I took the picture with my mind. Sometimes the world is best viewed that way, rather than through a viewfinder.

Sunday, May 22, 2005
Interesting week I have had. (yes, I saw it tonight)

My week has caused me pause, and in more ways than one. It's got me thinking about the concept of injustice -- and more particularly, how one deals with it.

If you've read my blog for any period of time, you would have noticed by now I tend to get worked up over certain issues -- particularly ones concerning social justice. Between my rants and raves, I've struggled to find ways to address particular injustices I've noticed in the world around me. I've argued, I've written letters, and I've protested. I've even been accused of inconsistency in my railings -- with some people insisting I should support Iraq war efforts as they're supposedly spreading "freedom."

My question is, how does one respond to injustice? Or better yet, how should we?

I know I have a tendency to get a little vigilante when I see injustices being committed. Granted, my sphere of influence is severely limited, but I'll at least make my voice be known. One of the main things I have a hard time dealing with is intolerance -- be it in a President who accuses me of being unpatriotic because I question his war criminal actions, or in the condescending or disregarding look a person gives when they look at you through the lens of their own righteousness.

After the last week I've had, I suppose a better question for me to ask is how does one respond to injustices... particularly when you are the one who has been wronged? I can think of a variety of answers -- ranging from the Sunday School "right" ones (ie., forgiving and forgetting) to the more fun Clint Eastwood options (showdown confrontation).

But how to respond? I want to let people know that I feel wounded -- but in letting that be known, I'll probably be doing some wounding in return, and that'll defeat the purpose. How do you get past the hurt feelings? Are you literally supposed to forget them? And if you do, does that make you a doormat and inadvertently condone the actions of the wrongers?

I'm just not sure.

Saturday, May 21, 2005


It's just been one of those weeks.

Friday, May 20, 2005



All week I've felt (and probably looked) just like that doll to the left.

I've felt literally "wound up" -- between school issues, money issues, personal issues, and lack-of-substantial-sleep issues, I'm living in a type of haze these days.

I think part of me is just waiting for the moment when my energy finally gives up on me and I crash. Hard.


Comparatively speaking, I know I have things pretty good. But I only realize this when I think rationally. When the emotional side of me gets going, there's not much right (or seemingly good) in the world.

But like that familiar annoying bunny of our commercialized past, I somehow keep going, and going, and going ...

Then again, today starts the weekend, which looks to be beautiful. I have a substantial draft of my literature review in hand, and I can face my supervisor this morning somewhat confidently. I have 2 tickets to the 10:10 showing of Sith on Saturday. I have barbeques, fire pits, and time with newfound family and friends ahead of me all weekend.

Here's hoping that'll charge up these batteries of mine.

Thursday, May 19, 2005
Do you think it's a bad sign for the Saskatchewan Centennial Gala when the opening song is sung flat by most of those singing? Well, all except Megan Lane, of course. She's amazing -- and now no-longer dreadlocked!

Brent Butt isn't even funny. So glad I didn't dish out the money for this "celebration 100 years in the making." I can watch it on CBC in my 'jamas, in the comfort of my futon and fleecy blanket.
The government survives!

Now only if the Parliament will actually let each other get a word in edgewise (I still have a hard time believing the yelling and shouting that goes on in there on a daily basis).

I think it's great that this came down to independent votes -- voting on party lines doesn't seem as genuine as someone with no real party affiliation, who reasons through what is best for his constituents first -- before toeing his party's interests. And yes, I'm happy that the NDP's bill of social programs and delay of corporate tax cuts passed the House.

Anyway, I'm glad there's not going to be an election this summer and that it'll wait until all the evidence from the Gomery trial is in. That said, I was impressed with Harper's uncharacteristic? gracious concede, at least for the time being. Can't wait til 10pm tonight -- I'm either becoming a National junkie or a Mansbridge groupie.
Teaser trailer for The DaVinci Code -- too bad it's out in exactly a year from now. But, the cast looks interesting -- though I am a bit skeptical about Hanks as Langdon.
There's something about being awake when most of the world is asleep (except for the night-shifters at Tim's). There's also something about driving around and experiencing night transitioning into morning.

One unique thing about living this far North -- in the summer, morning arrives really early. We're talking 4AM early, which takes a while to get used to. Back in Georgia, our dawns were fairly consistent -- usually between 6:30-7:30am-ish. Here, by 6:30, it's full-fledged morning already. It's quite the contrast to it being still pitch black dark at 9am in the winter.

Lately my thoughts have been much clearer at this time of the day/night. I'm making progress (I think), and I'm not beating myself so much over what I've written down. I've even broken down this chapter into stages, with (high) hopes that'll be finished by the end of the weekend. Well, by finished I mean this one particular draft -- but I'll take accomplishments any place I can.

I'm off to go finish talking about enthymemes and influence in rhetoric. But before I go, here's a question for all of you readers out there who are smarter than I: Can someone explain to me the saying "It's always darkest right before dawn" ? I know someone once tried to explain it to me, but I'm still confused when I think about that silly cliche. For me, it seems that right before dawn would be the time when light is just beginning to peek under the horizon. Maybe it all depends on when you define "dawn." Ugh!

And yes, that's exactly how fast it takes for me to start thinking about something other than what I'm supposed to be thinking of and writing about. It's my new-found talent.
Can't resist:

... and if you need further distracting, check out this huge list of Chomsky torrents -- Documentaries, talks, interviews, and all sorts of Noam-y goodness.

Which reminds me, I need to check this book out of the library. (Like I have time to read for fun)

via.
Imagine Dubya singing Lennon's Imagine -- it's easy if you click the link.

And it's pretty amusing, as well.

Wednesday, May 18, 2005
Meh.
In between pulling my hair out over this chapter draft, I found two DVDs I must possess:


and
Oh. my. goodness. I loved these shows, back in the day.

I thought I was Clarissa, and I adored the quirkyness of each of these shows. It's too exciting that they're coming out on dvd. Now, if I only had a dvd player (other than on my laptop), and unlimited funds -- these would be in my possession. Yes they would.

Anyone else remember these shows? I've been so nostaglic lately.
Does anyone locally need a microwave? Hubby and I have an extra one -- it's a little on the old side, but it still nukes food like a charm. Email me (becky @ grrrlmeetsworld.com) or leave a note in the comments below, and it's all yours.

Tuesday, May 17, 2005
Warning, this may shock some of you out there: People in politics often have ulterior motives -- and yes, do things for their own gain.

Yes, yes, I know that this is shocking a lot of people here in Canada today -- especially since Conservative Stronach defected to the Liberal party. Background to non-Canadians: there's a big vote in Parliament on Thursday. If the federal budget is passed, there will be no summer election. If it doesn't, then we'll have another election, with probably the same result (the Liberals re-elected).

The hyperbolic vehemence I've read and heard today has been quite amusing. Stronach has been labeled the "Paris Hilton" of Canadian politics, accused of "whoring" herself out, called an "attractive dipstick," and she's been likened to Satan or Judas Iscariot betraying Christ. I wonder if such vehemence would be directed to a man? I've never heard a man's sexuality used against him, when he does things for political gain.

That said, can we all have a chorus of "puh-leaze?"

Granted, it is a bit slimy that she's transferred over to the Liberal party and into an automatic cabinet position. But I thought it was just as sleazy when Harper joined hands with the seperatist party of Quebec -- and that union has far more reaching implications for the country than a person switching parties in Parliament.

I know this will all eventually blow over -- it's similar to Jim Jeffords switch from Republican to Independent in the US Senate, years ago.

In the meantime, I'm just going sit back and enjoy the entertainment and wait for the vote on Thursday.
What a difference a day three years makes!
May 11, 2002 -- I graduate with an Honors degree in English Literature from Armstrong Atlantic State University in Savannah, GA.

May 11, 2002 (6 hours later) -- I board a plane in Jacksonville, Florida -- bound for Saskatoon, Saskatchewan!

May 13, 2002 -- I start summer undergraduate classes (in preparation for MA in English). Two months, 4.5 hours a day of Chaucer, and then Shakespeare. Ugh.

May 16, 2002 -- Attend a matinee showing of Attack of the Clones.*

Isn't it funny how history has a way of repeating itself? Here I am, three years later, in a very different situation altogether. Not only am I in a different degree program (and yes, still in the process of completing it) -- but I'm married to a brilliant Canadian (who so happens to be my soulmate), I have a different outlook on life (particularly when it comes to spiritual things), and I have my own life here -- 2500 miles from where I originally started. (and I still use an inordinate amount of parentheses!)

It's pretty amazing for me, actually, to think of where I've come from -- and to now think of the direction I'm heading. When I'm not beating myself up over the lack of apparent progress on my writing, I get excited when I think about all the possibilies that are now unfolding ahead of me. I took such a risk coming here -- but I'm so glad I did.

I know my life would be so different if I had not listened to my inner voice, and followed a haphazard dream that lead me North. I also know my life would not be as full if it weren't for the people and friendships I've encountered along the way.

When I was growing up in the church, I used to always lament the fact that I didn't have a "cool testimony" I could share when it came to be my turn. Nowadays, I know I have some pretty neat stories to share, and I don't have to wait until some superfluous sharing time to tell them.

(*and yes, I'll be one of the first in line to catch Revenge of the Sith this week, too.)
Cross the Floor

Cross the Floor, originally uploaded by Jordon.

Heh, Belinda joins the Liberals. I love it. I only WISH I could have seen Harper's face when he first heard the news.

This will definitely make for an interesting vote on Thursday.


Monday, May 16, 2005
Lauren Winner: Reformed Sinner or Canny Opportunist?

Just before I processed down the aisle to take my ordination vows as an Episcopal priest, an older priest leaned over and said, “Astrid, just remember that priests are bottom feeders; so if you’re going to be in a job that’s nourished off the misery of others, at least try not to contribute to that misery, too.”

Perhaps Lauren Winner, the popular twentysomething journalist/author and self-styled expert in contemporary Christian morality, could use that advice. It’s bad enough that in her latest book, “Real Sex: the Naked Truth about Chastity,” Winner might be contributing to that misery by doling out dubious marriage advice to impressionable young people. But what’s worse is that if all goes as planned, Winner will soon become an Episcopal priest—a scary thought to those of us who may end up having to minister to the casualties of her evangelically hip but potentially destructive theology.

In an increasingly conservative world where everybody wants the answers without having to ask the questions, “Real Sex: the Naked Truth About Chastity” is undoubtedly destined to become a bandwagon bestseller. It deals with the evils of premarital sex and the biblically correct approach to sex, i.e. confined to marriage. The topic is so ancient it creaks, but Winner is nothing if not media-savvy, and has added lots of perky yet supposedly scholarly window-dressing to what is essentially fundamentalism at its most insidious. A sharp young woman with a degree from Columbia, making an intellectually arguable case for chastity for her generation? Bring on the talk shows!

[...]Or maybe she should stop forming her view of the world based on what goes on at frat parties. Did it ever even occur to Winner to take into account the people I deal with day in and day out? People like the gay couple that can’t take marriage vows; the older couples whose spouses have died and who aren’t quite ready to tie the knot again; or the many intelligent, sexually active thirtysomething Christians in my congregation? Just because sex is performed outside the context of marriage doesn’t mean that it is automatically promiscuous, vacuous, and self-serving. In attempting to provide all of humanity with a blanket formula for