Will someone please tell Becky that there are stages between “nothing” and “sex”. If she wants to have a taste, she can have one without going all the way. Two girls can to all kinds of stuff entirely above the waist.
Yeah but she’s not holding on to ALL her principles.
I know I said it’s a good idea just below but it will be super individual, especially because she probably will get over various hangups over time, even if she keeps quite a few things as post marriage.
I was more suggesting that the Bible itself only actually calls out two acts as sinful (according to a former girlfriend from Israel).
Spilling male seed (so any non-married, non-procreative male ejaculation)
Anal sex of any sort.
SO technically lesbians aren’t sinful according to the Torah, which the Old Testament was directly based on, as long as they avoid butt stuff. Again, according to a Jewish lesbian I used to date – I’m no expert on this side of things, just repeating what I was told.
Actually, she went on to claim that, according to the Torah, female orgasms were a “mitzvah” (a good deed”) meaning that lesbians were actually blessed of god… but she didn’t provide sources or anything, and I certainly didn’t ask for citations. But I digress….
Now, that said, one can surmise that, since lesbians can now get married, the “no sex before marriage” rule would supersede all of that – but again, nowhere does the Bible mention anything to do with female breasts (or male ones for that matter).
OR, if anything sexual counts, then Becky has already passed that threshold by kissing her roommate at Anderson.
*Technical correction.
Okay, the Torah also calls out necrophilia and bestiality as sinful, but I figured those sexual acts were rather beyond the scope of the conversation. Just wanted to add this before someone pointed that out.
What the Bible actually says has much less to do with any given church’s teachings than most want to admit. The guilt and shame she’s been programmed with go far beyond any simple reading of the Bible.
And I don’t think Becky’s the type to go for textual analysis to justify what she wants. She wasn’t impressed with Joyce when she did that to justify accepting homosexuality.
“I’ve done everything the bible says. Even the stuff that contradicts the other stuff.”
– Ned Flanders (The Simpsons)
The fact is, the Bible is a mess of contradictions, and you can use it to justify or condemn almost any act you wish. That’s what churches do… they cherry-pick sections in order to support their already pre-conceived opinion. Remember, the bible was used in the 1800s to both justify and condemn slavery…. finding support in it to both condemn and justify premarital sex shouldn’t be too much of a stretch.
Kind of. Though I think it’s more organic than that. It’s not like someone founds a church, then goes through the Bible to find verses that justify theology they came up with independently.
The opinions and beliefs grow up along with the references to support them. Sometimes people challenging the orthodoxy they grew up with dig through the text to justify their changed beliefs – see Joyce.
“It’s not like someone founds a church, then goes through the Bible to find verses that justify theology they came up with independently.”
No, it is more like someone founds a church to control the behavior of large groups of people and find verses to justify theology they came up with the purpose of controlling the masses.
Onan wasn’t smote for spilling seed generally. He was screwing his brother’s widow with the goal of providing her with an heir and then pulled out, frustrated that the child wouldn’t be considered “his” and the firstborn’s share of inheritance would go to the child (since it would officially be a child of his elder brother) rather than to him.
Can I get chapter and verse on that? Considering how important sex (specifically the absence thereof) is to religious types, how little of the Torah, Bible, and Koran actually cover the subject, and how specific religious “leaders” get when relaying God’s word on the subject, I’d like to hear where the rules about boobs and licky-boom-boom-now are laid out.
I dunno if it’s the sort of abstinence only teaching that sort of groups all of that together? Like sexy stuff = sex. I wasn’t raised with organized religion so I don’t know if it’s sort of viewed as “all intimate acts wait until marriage”
Plus if both partners are like, eager, things can escalate quickly.
Eh, the “vaginal intercourse” angle still holds some weight. I didn’t masterbate until I was 17, out of fear that if hell existed, that would be a first-class ticket. But I started watching porn a year earlier, just without any physical self-gratification–my reasoning? “Well, pornography wasn’t invented when the Bible was written, right?”
Oh they definitely had pornography. I think from the time humans started drawing in the dirt with sticks there’s been pornography. Pottery is a good example – someone just showed me a piece of pottery at a museum that has a satyr masturbating on it.
I mean, it’s not like “fertility worship” and “porn” are mutually exclusive. What better way to pray to a sex god/goddess than by masturbating to them?
Hell, you can still *see* it. In Pompeii, at the old brothels, there’s wall art depicting sexual acts. Sure, it might technically be more of advertising than straight pornography, but it still definitely existed.
honestly my partner and I did this, spending a ton of time on every tiny incremental step between holding hands and making out and making out and sexual-but-not-sex things, and those and finally having sex, then different types of sex, and it meant that a) we technically took things slower than any couple I knew, and b) we got really good at a lot of things. It’s a good plan*.
(probably works less good if you break up, though. no idea how well either of us would be suited to anyone except each other, especially now that we’ve been together ten years)
*if you want to take things slow and/or like to get used to things
I would love it if I had a super hot girlfriend who was ready to do sexy things with me whenever I’m willing. Though I also wasn’t raised with fundie Christian levels of sexual repression and such.
Because maybe getting a teenage marriage just because your horny and your fundie upbringing frowns on premarital sex is a bad idea even when you’re not straight?
From the cult’s perspective, “no sex before marriage” is an almost perfect method of entrapment; virtually guaranteed to work with no downsides.
Because young peoples’ hormones are in overdrive and marriage is the only outlet (can’t even masturbate!), they’re pushed into marriage. And because they’re deliberately misinformed as to family planning, they are almost guaranteed to produce offspring for the cult, leading to more members.
When these marriages don’t work out (which is more common with them than the rest of society), the cult gets to blame them and not itself, for setting them up for failure. What’s more, unpreparedness for such early childrearing keeps the members too busy and tired to question, which also works in the cults favour. Members are unlikely to think about where the blame actually lies.
Really, purity culture has no downsides for the cult. Except when ex-members start howling about how abusive it is. But they’re apostates and get demonized anyway, so they have little impact on those still in.
…also, purity culture is rape culture, but that’s another topic.
On the other hand, it all made a lot of practical sense back in days of old – before effective birth control. Sex was likely to produce kids and postponing it until marriage meant the kids could be supported. Especially in days when you really did need a family.
One thing religions are really good at, even without negative motivations, is preserving old rules, even when they’re not longer useful.
It all gets blurred together in “sex stuff bad, don’t do”. Obviously opposition to homosexual sex doesn’t link to children either.
Mostly just pointing out that “no sex before marriage” itself was adaptive for a long time. For society at large, not just the cult in question.
In the specific case of the Abrahamic religions, I strongly suspect the broader sex hangups are also tied to conflicts with the existing fertility religions in Canaan that the Israelites lived among.
On the other hand, there were societies without rules like that that ended up fine, so it’s not like it’s the only adaptive way. Heck, there’s lots of sex stuff that can be done without marriage that doesn’t cause those concerns or marriage inherently meant support OR you specifically needed the parent that knocked you up’s support (there are societies where the woman’s family does the lion’s share instead) so it’s not even like it was ever a super inherently useful thing. And there’ve always been methods of birth control – condoms made from animal guts, herbs that prevented implantation or caused abortions, etc.
Actually, I’m pretty sure the Oral and Anal stuff came from the really early Jewish origin stuff.
The main reason being that the Jewish people have, historically, often been at risk of being exterminated. There were 12 tribes, but they were eliminated, one way or another, down to just one.
Oral sex is “wasted sperm” that could make a new baby of the tribe. Same for masturbation. They wanted teens getting married, fucking like rabbits, and having tons of kids to keep their culture from being wiped out.
Survive and reproduce. Don’t waste energy on any sex that doesn’t serve that goal.
Or, to rephrase, “be fruitful and multiply.”
(Again, I can take no credit for this theory – just repeating an Ex)
If she was raised super fundie, I doubt they couched lesbianism as an acceptable path. And she completely tossed that out because it has no relevance to who she actually is.
It’s funny that she clings to the whole “premarital” trope as if that somehow DID have relevance. How can she recognize one as invalid but not the other? It’s some tough mind programming I guess.
I actually think that’s a good thing. If a group/person/ideology seems right to you on all points and you later learn that one of those points is actually invalid, it would be foolish to throw out everything. Put up some question marks, re-evaluate why you thought things are “right” or “wrong”, sure. But if your maths teacher was wrong on a problem once, they probably still know a lot of proper maths. So if your preacher was wrong on the lesbian thing, that doesn’t automatically mean they’re wrong on everything.
“So if your preacher was wrong on the lesbian thing, that doesn’t automatically mean they’re wrong on everything.”
( Pause While I apologize all my Lesbian and BI sisters/nonbinary siblings, and you should too )
Being Lesbian and in a relationship is a Cumulative subject, that I can assure from lots of observation of family/ friends .
Just like some parts of Math is Cumulative and builds on what goes before.
If your Math Teacher tells you Triangles have for 4 sides, you dont go to him to learn Trig. If your math teacher tells you Girls must use 5 for PI you dont go to him for Trig.
Its NOt 1 problem, its your whole future in math.
Like are you actually suggesting Lesbian readers should consult people who want to kidnap, brainwash them on their relationships ( which are hell of a lot more stable than Het Ones ) , and wait for a marriage they think is an even bigger wrong. None of that makes any sense.
Look, just let me assure you that EVERY lesbian in the Universe knows a lot more about Lesbianing , and by the actual stats , successful Monogamous committed pairbonding , than you ( or I ) ever will.
The “Preachers” ( and you ) ought to be taking lessons from them.
***
They are both virgins, this is a healthy relationship noone can get a disease or get pregnant.
But they could be wrong for each other, or sexually incompatible and not know it until taking the next step.
Using Guilt to trick people into the wrong relationships is evil.
Becky is acting out of fear and guilt put on her by an evil cult that wanted to harm her. The healthiest thing is to not to act from negative emotions.
whatever step Becky takes could fill her with Pride and Shame due to conditioning, or social acceptance. Dina is till figuring out her sexuality and needs Becky to do so. There is no Guidebook for that.
Becky is ready. She just needs to feel permission to get over a start line. This is common in teens.
***
You Ron are literally acting like a slutshaming Joyce.
When what the story needs is Joyce Helping her friend and making her feel accepted , for taking the next step: While Undoing her prior psychological projection that Becky isnt ready must be chaste.
Especially as that may help Becky get over her prior Crush on Joyce. Its 100% wrong for Joyce to put sexual ties on Becky.
If anything Joyce should admit to Becky how her iown chaste horniness/repression misleads her and got her to lie and manipulate.
In the future please dont pretend being LGBT is just a small deal and hatred and marginalisation is a little math problem or a rounding error.
im sure if the story was about KIdnapping arrogant straight incels and brainwashing them into acting against their nature, you wouldnt think this was a rounding math error.
It would be a Huge DEAL and you wouldnt send these innocent virginwool straightboy sheep back to the wolves to ask them what grass to much on.
So does that mean that if your church is wrong about homosexuality, you should throw out everything else they taught you? No need to sort through and try to unpack what parts might be good or bad, it’s all wrong?
Of course some parts of any church’s teachings are good – we wouldn’t decide that lying is ok, that charity is bad, etc.
There are also plenty of other churches that accept LGBTQ folks, but still teach that sex is for marriage.
I mean, I agree that they’re wrong, but the logic of throwing it all out if even one major thing is wrong doesn’t follow.
I mean, I agree that they’re wrong, but the logic of throwing it all out if even one major thing is wrong doesn’t follow.
It’s not “The church is 100% wrong about everything”; it’s “the church has no moral authority, and therefore its moral pronouncements are meaningless.” Whatever goodness remains in its message is something you can gain from another moral source–and, ultimately, must gain from another source.
For instance, you brought up “charity.” It’s true that even the most conservative churches teach “charity,” but their teachings load the word down with extra baggage. Their charity requires that you avoid “condoning sin” or avoid giving people a “free ride” or always use charity to proselytize, and also that your charity include at least 10% of your income donated directly to the church. Sure, you can keep the concept of “charity” and try to clean it off, but doing so requires scrutinizing it with a different moral source (whether it be a different church, a different religion, or a non-theistic philosophy), and at that point you might as well just accept that source’s definition of “charity” directly.
There’s a bit of a knee-jerk reaction against throwing the baby out with the bathwater, but sometimes the bathwater’s actually a bubbling vat of toxic sludge, and maybe you could sift through all that and piece together the skeleton of a baby, but why not just get a brand-new bath with a brand-new baby?
But in their case (Becky and Joyce) all their moral understanding is grounded in that church that has no moral authority. Is it reasonable to ask them to throw it all out at once and start building a new moral foundation from scratch?
In the long run, they’re going to have to do that, though they’ll likely be unearthing hangups linked to their upbringing for decades. Expecting them to within a matter of weeks reject everything we think is foolish, but keep the morals we agree with?
I think you’re overreacting a little. Ron isn’t saying it isn’t a big deal but that just because an ideology, or person is wrong about 1 major thing doesn’t mean you suddenly disagree with them about *everything* and it is up to Becky to actually look at it hard and say if this is something she still wants to uphold or is only clinging to out of her own personal fear.
You don’t need to go off in a huge rant over a bad analogy, you can just ask the person to please be more careful about the way they phrase it because it comes across as downplaying how seriously that one thing does affect Becky.
I made that joke over a week ago.
Not about Dina specifically (lacking the context), but about the Little Caesars marketing being a lesbian come-on.
Of course, I was quoting a Puella Magi Madoka Magica abridged series, so I can’t actually take credit for coming up with said joke, but…
….
… what was my point again?
Thjey were well on their way, it appears. Both Beckie and Kaitlin have lost the long pants, it appears Kaitlin has ditched the hoodie, shoes and socks have vanished, and Kaitlin’s glasses have been put aside since they are not needed for close-in work.
Those panels represent different days and different stages, I think, not them stripping down.
Becky at least in shorts in the first panel and long pants in the second.
“Yeah, Becky, Dorothy and I were talking about stuff. Y’know that I really empathise with your problem here because I’m going through much the same thing but I really wish that you’d vent somewhere else?”
That alt text! I haven’t listened to Rebecca St. James in years. Becky just needs to center herself, to find the course of action she’s happy with, and pursuing it. Talking it out with close friends will help. And as prior commenters have said, it’s not a binary sex/no sex situation.
So, I don’t know if it’s somehow my computer or what, but this strip is not allowing me to move on to the next one; if I go to the main page, it will display today’s strip, but if I navigate to the previous strip (i.e. this one), it won’t allow me to navigate to the next one, either by clicking next or clicking on the strip itself. Figured I’d let mention it, since I’ve never seen one do this, and I usually read the strips pretty much right after their uploaded.
Dorothy seems pretty calm considering Becky just stepped on her leg. It looks like she hasn’t moved for the entire page, and Joyce only reacts in panel 3.
Loading ...
“Becky, calm down and go in your bedroom and pet the cat”
“There’s a cat in there??”
Becky and Dina Pet the Kitty: A Dumbing of Age PornographiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiHAHA FOOLED YOU
Hahaha wonderful
*Becky goes inside the room only to discover that BlowJob cat has taken over*
It’s so hard not to do follow up jokes that will make this worse.
bruh
awwwww, Becky <3
This strip makes me laugh and want to hug her at the same time.
Same, her adorable levels are off the chart here.
*plays The Clash’s “Should I Stay Or Should I Go?” on the hacked Muzak*
Beware of summoning the Demogorgon.
Is Rebeca St James in the Clash? I think not.
Unless of course she is, in which case nevermind.
YAY THE CLASH
Also perfect music for this
Also Stranger Things
Also awkward first relationship milestones
Dangit Becky, get out of the room Joyce and Dorothy are in and get into your girlfriend’s pants.
*mildly shrugs*
“Oh look, the devil’s advocates table, er, corner!”
Will someone please tell Becky that there are stages between “nothing” and “sex”. If she wants to have a taste, she can have one without going all the way. Two girls can to all kinds of stuff entirely above the waist.
Yeah, but… it isn’t like any of that ISN’T a sin.
(Unless you’re one of those really fringe fundies who thinks it’s only a sin when it’s vaginal intercourse, and anything else is a-OK)
Yeah but she’s not holding on to ALL her principles.
I know I said it’s a good idea just below but it will be super individual, especially because she probably will get over various hangups over time, even if she keeps quite a few things as post marriage.
I was more suggesting that the Bible itself only actually calls out two acts as sinful (according to a former girlfriend from Israel).
Spilling male seed (so any non-married, non-procreative male ejaculation)
Anal sex of any sort.
SO technically lesbians aren’t sinful according to the Torah, which the Old Testament was directly based on, as long as they avoid butt stuff. Again, according to a Jewish lesbian I used to date – I’m no expert on this side of things, just repeating what I was told.
Actually, she went on to claim that, according to the Torah, female orgasms were a “mitzvah” (a good deed”) meaning that lesbians were actually blessed of god… but she didn’t provide sources or anything, and I certainly didn’t ask for citations. But I digress….
Now, that said, one can surmise that, since lesbians can now get married, the “no sex before marriage” rule would supersede all of that – but again, nowhere does the Bible mention anything to do with female breasts (or male ones for that matter).
OR, if anything sexual counts, then Becky has already passed that threshold by kissing her roommate at Anderson.
*Technical correction.
Okay, the Torah also calls out necrophilia and bestiality as sinful, but I figured those sexual acts were rather beyond the scope of the conversation. Just wanted to add this before someone pointed that out.
Thankfully, everyone else seems to have understood this, though thank you for clarifying.
What the Bible actually says has much less to do with any given church’s teachings than most want to admit. The guilt and shame she’s been programmed with go far beyond any simple reading of the Bible.
And I don’t think Becky’s the type to go for textual analysis to justify what she wants. She wasn’t impressed with Joyce when she did that to justify accepting homosexuality.
“I’ve done everything the bible says. Even the stuff that contradicts the other stuff.”
– Ned Flanders (The Simpsons)
The fact is, the Bible is a mess of contradictions, and you can use it to justify or condemn almost any act you wish. That’s what churches do… they cherry-pick sections in order to support their already pre-conceived opinion. Remember, the bible was used in the 1800s to both justify and condemn slavery…. finding support in it to both condemn and justify premarital sex shouldn’t be too much of a stretch.
Kind of. Though I think it’s more organic than that. It’s not like someone founds a church, then goes through the Bible to find verses that justify theology they came up with independently.
The opinions and beliefs grow up along with the references to support them. Sometimes people challenging the orthodoxy they grew up with dig through the text to justify their changed beliefs – see Joyce.
“It’s not like someone founds a church, then goes through the Bible to find verses that justify theology they came up with independently.”
No, it is more like someone founds a church to control the behavior of large groups of people and find verses to justify theology they came up with the purpose of controlling the masses.
Onan wasn’t smote for spilling seed generally. He was screwing his brother’s widow with the goal of providing her with an heir and then pulled out, frustrated that the child wouldn’t be considered “his” and the firstborn’s share of inheritance would go to the child (since it would officially be a child of his elder brother) rather than to him.
Can I get chapter and verse on that? Considering how important sex (specifically the absence thereof) is to religious types, how little of the Torah, Bible, and Koran actually cover the subject, and how specific religious “leaders” get when relaying God’s word on the subject, I’d like to hear where the rules about boobs and licky-boom-boom-now are laid out.
Fuck me in the ass cause i love Jesus – The good lord would want it that way!
I dunno if it’s the sort of abstinence only teaching that sort of groups all of that together? Like sexy stuff = sex. I wasn’t raised with organized religion so I don’t know if it’s sort of viewed as “all intimate acts wait until marriage”
Plus if both partners are like, eager, things can escalate quickly.
Eh, the “vaginal intercourse” angle still holds some weight. I didn’t masterbate until I was 17, out of fear that if hell existed, that would be a first-class ticket. But I started watching porn a year earlier, just without any physical self-gratification–my reasoning? “Well, pornography wasn’t invented when the Bible was written, right?”
*self-depricating facepalm*
I didn’t even grow up in a religious household.
Educate yourselves, kids.
Oh they definitely had pornography. I think from the time humans started drawing in the dirt with sticks there’s been pornography. Pottery is a good example – someone just showed me a piece of pottery at a museum that has a satyr masturbating on it.
There’s some hypothesis that the Venus of Willendorf was early porn. Even though it’s only a pair of boobish shapes and a slit.
Of course, that does nothing to negate the “fertility worship” hypothesis.
I mean, it’s not like “fertility worship” and “porn” are mutually exclusive. What better way to pray to a sex god/goddess than by masturbating to them?
Whoops – misread your post. I somehow got the exact opposite meaning out of your last sentence. So yeah, we’re in agreement! Yay!
Not to negate the point – but the better way would be actual sex in the fields. 🙂
To answer Leslie’s Hypothetical question: By fucking in a way that could result in conception, probably.
Fair point.
I was thinking solo worship.
The bible takes place in (among other places) the Roman Empire and Ancient Egypt. I PROMISE there was porn.
Hell, you can still *see* it. In Pompeii, at the old brothels, there’s wall art depicting sexual acts. Sure, it might technically be more of advertising than straight pornography, but it still definitely existed.
If I recall correctly, there’s one famous graffiti from some guy bragging about how he did 2 women AND a guy at the same time. XD
honestly my partner and I did this, spending a ton of time on every tiny incremental step between holding hands and making out and making out and sexual-but-not-sex things, and those and finally having sex, then different types of sex, and it meant that a) we technically took things slower than any couple I knew, and b) we got really good at a lot of things. It’s a good plan*.
(probably works less good if you break up, though. no idea how well either of us would be suited to anyone except each other, especially now that we’ve been together ten years)
*if you want to take things slow and/or like to get used to things
I suspect that she’s worried that going beyond “nothing” will end in “sex”, because she won’t be able to stop.
That rings way too true.
Becky’s fears and worries here are hilarious to imagine her bouncing off of Joyce because I can’t imagine Joyce having any better input.
Also, it’s officially my birthday, so Sarah and I are now sharing a birthday(for this brief moment), hooray!
Happy birthday!!!!
Happy happy!
Happy birthday! You share your birthday with St Nicholas! (or at least the european version of St Nicholas…)
Happy Birthday!
Have a most pleasant natality!
poor Becky. she sure has a lot of practice putting on the happy face for people and feeling an intense burden about it.
This is going to lead to that frank discussion about sexual repression between Dorothy and Joyce, isn’t it? http://www.dumbingofage.com/2018/comic/book-8/04-of-mike-and-men/halfirritated/
Nope. Joyce doesn’t have a receipt.
We can always remember the wisdom of Mr. Warner: Get in there and tap that ample hein… wait, wait, no, that might not be helpful right now…
Becky, Rich Mullins can pencil you in for a dream intervention soon, get on the waiting list.
I would love it if I had a super hot girlfriend who was ready to do sexy things with me whenever I’m willing. Though I also wasn’t raised with fundie Christian levels of sexual repression and such.
I didn’t know that was a requirement…
An atheist, an… atheist?, and a lesbian sit on the floor and contemplate their life choices and how romance is hard.
I think Joyce qualifies as an agnostic at the moment.
Dunno, to me it seems like she still believes in god, she’s just starting to think he might be a real jerk who shouldn’t be obeyed.
Misotheist then.
Nope, atheist. Or possibly agnostic if you go by popular useage, at least until she firms up her thoughts more. See here.
Questioning.
Doubting.
Going through a crisis of faith.
Possibly even recovering.
She’s certainly not to atheist. Maybe agnostic, but I wouldn’t go that far.
It’s hard to apply labels to someone in transition.
The composition of the drawing in this strip feels like a Neon Genesis Evangelion reference, especially in panels 2 and 5.
First thing I thought of was The Sims, because of the isometric camera angle.
Just marry Dina.
I don’t see the issue.
“it’s ok, it only apply with boys”
Because maybe getting a teenage marriage just because your horny and your fundie upbringing frowns on premarital sex is a bad idea even when you’re not straight?
Tell that to half of my old youth group
Too late!
One of the big problems with the emphasis on no sex before marriage.
From the cult’s perspective, “no sex before marriage” is an almost perfect method of entrapment; virtually guaranteed to work with no downsides.
Because young peoples’ hormones are in overdrive and marriage is the only outlet (can’t even masturbate!), they’re pushed into marriage. And because they’re deliberately misinformed as to family planning, they are almost guaranteed to produce offspring for the cult, leading to more members.
When these marriages don’t work out (which is more common with them than the rest of society), the cult gets to blame them and not itself, for setting them up for failure. What’s more, unpreparedness for such early childrearing keeps the members too busy and tired to question, which also works in the cults favour. Members are unlikely to think about where the blame actually lies.
Really, purity culture has no downsides for the cult. Except when ex-members start howling about how abusive it is. But they’re apostates and get demonized anyway, so they have little impact on those still in.
…also, purity culture is rape culture, but that’s another topic.
On the other hand, it all made a lot of practical sense back in days of old – before effective birth control. Sex was likely to produce kids and postponing it until marriage meant the kids could be supported. Especially in days when you really did need a family.
One thing religions are really good at, even without negative motivations, is preserving old rules, even when they’re not longer useful.
Doesn’t explain the masturbating part.
Damn cut offs. Doesn’t explain the masturbating part (or any problem with oral or hands or anal), but that was likely part of the rationale
It all gets blurred together in “sex stuff bad, don’t do”. Obviously opposition to homosexual sex doesn’t link to children either.
Mostly just pointing out that “no sex before marriage” itself was adaptive for a long time. For society at large, not just the cult in question.
In the specific case of the Abrahamic religions, I strongly suspect the broader sex hangups are also tied to conflicts with the existing fertility religions in Canaan that the Israelites lived among.
On the other hand, there were societies without rules like that that ended up fine, so it’s not like it’s the only adaptive way. Heck, there’s lots of sex stuff that can be done without marriage that doesn’t cause those concerns or marriage inherently meant support OR you specifically needed the parent that knocked you up’s support (there are societies where the woman’s family does the lion’s share instead) so it’s not even like it was ever a super inherently useful thing. And there’ve always been methods of birth control – condoms made from animal guts, herbs that prevented implantation or caused abortions, etc.
Actually, I’m pretty sure the Oral and Anal stuff came from the really early Jewish origin stuff.
The main reason being that the Jewish people have, historically, often been at risk of being exterminated. There were 12 tribes, but they were eliminated, one way or another, down to just one.
Oral sex is “wasted sperm” that could make a new baby of the tribe. Same for masturbation. They wanted teens getting married, fucking like rabbits, and having tons of kids to keep their culture from being wiped out.
Survive and reproduce. Don’t waste energy on any sex that doesn’t serve that goal.
Or, to rephrase, “be fruitful and multiply.”
(Again, I can take no credit for this theory – just repeating an Ex)
No, tell us how purity culture is rape culture
Honestly, most of the people I know that got married or engaged within a short span of dating are fundies, so…
Didn’t Joyce’s fanfic imply that they’d also been raised to believe you needed a five year courtship to make the marriage respectable?
Not really. She had her perfect relationship take place over five years but it’s never been brought up as a social emphasis.
Wonder if Sarah/Ruth are hearing all that from the other side of the door
I mean, they could always get married. . .
hm; would they have a dinosaur themed wedding?
and then. . . uh, fulfill marital duties atop the giant Velociraptor?
Well, I think I know what type of wedding rings they would get…
You can actually buy rings that are inlaid with actual real dinosaur bone.
If she was raised super fundie, I doubt they couched lesbianism as an acceptable path. And she completely tossed that out because it has no relevance to who she actually is.
It’s funny that she clings to the whole “premarital” trope as if that somehow DID have relevance. How can she recognize one as invalid but not the other? It’s some tough mind programming I guess.
“if being a lesbian doesn’t make the baby Jesus sad, maybe premarital doesn’t either”
I actually think that’s a good thing. If a group/person/ideology seems right to you on all points and you later learn that one of those points is actually invalid, it would be foolish to throw out everything. Put up some question marks, re-evaluate why you thought things are “right” or “wrong”, sure. But if your maths teacher was wrong on a problem once, they probably still know a lot of proper maths. So if your preacher was wrong on the lesbian thing, that doesn’t automatically mean they’re wrong on everything.
Sorry for ranting on like that…
“So if your preacher was wrong on the lesbian thing, that doesn’t automatically mean they’re wrong on everything.”
( Pause While I apologize all my Lesbian and BI sisters/nonbinary siblings, and you should too )
Being Lesbian and in a relationship is a Cumulative subject, that I can assure from lots of observation of family/ friends .
Just like some parts of Math is Cumulative and builds on what goes before.
If your Math Teacher tells you Triangles have for 4 sides, you dont go to him to learn Trig. If your math teacher tells you Girls must use 5 for PI you dont go to him for Trig.
Its NOt 1 problem, its your whole future in math.
Like are you actually suggesting Lesbian readers should consult people who want to kidnap, brainwash them on their relationships ( which are hell of a lot more stable than Het Ones ) , and wait for a marriage they think is an even bigger wrong. None of that makes any sense.
Look, just let me assure you that EVERY lesbian in the Universe knows a lot more about Lesbianing , and by the actual stats , successful Monogamous committed pairbonding , than you ( or I ) ever will.
The “Preachers” ( and you ) ought to be taking lessons from them.
***
They are both virgins, this is a healthy relationship noone can get a disease or get pregnant.
But they could be wrong for each other, or sexually incompatible and not know it until taking the next step.
Using Guilt to trick people into the wrong relationships is evil.
Becky is acting out of fear and guilt put on her by an evil cult that wanted to harm her. The healthiest thing is to not to act from negative emotions.
whatever step Becky takes could fill her with Pride and Shame due to conditioning, or social acceptance. Dina is till figuring out her sexuality and needs Becky to do so. There is no Guidebook for that.
Becky is ready. She just needs to feel permission to get over a start line. This is common in teens.
***
You Ron are literally acting like a slutshaming Joyce.
When what the story needs is Joyce Helping her friend and making her feel accepted , for taking the next step: While Undoing her prior psychological projection that Becky isnt ready must be chaste.
Especially as that may help Becky get over her prior Crush on Joyce. Its 100% wrong for Joyce to put sexual ties on Becky.
If anything Joyce should admit to Becky how her iown chaste horniness/repression misleads her and got her to lie and manipulate.
In the future please dont pretend being LGBT is just a small deal and hatred and marginalisation is a little math problem or a rounding error.
im sure if the story was about KIdnapping arrogant straight incels and brainwashing them into acting against their nature, you wouldnt think this was a rounding math error.
It would be a Huge DEAL and you wouldnt send these innocent virginwool straightboy sheep back to the wolves to ask them what grass to much on.
that you can learn from Empathy.
So does that mean that if your church is wrong about homosexuality, you should throw out everything else they taught you? No need to sort through and try to unpack what parts might be good or bad, it’s all wrong?
Of course some parts of any church’s teachings are good – we wouldn’t decide that lying is ok, that charity is bad, etc.
There are also plenty of other churches that accept LGBTQ folks, but still teach that sex is for marriage.
I mean, I agree that they’re wrong, but the logic of throwing it all out if even one major thing is wrong doesn’t follow.
It’s not “The church is 100% wrong about everything”; it’s “the church has no moral authority, and therefore its moral pronouncements are meaningless.” Whatever goodness remains in its message is something you can gain from another moral source–and, ultimately, must gain from another source.
For instance, you brought up “charity.” It’s true that even the most conservative churches teach “charity,” but their teachings load the word down with extra baggage. Their charity requires that you avoid “condoning sin” or avoid giving people a “free ride” or always use charity to proselytize, and also that your charity include at least 10% of your income donated directly to the church. Sure, you can keep the concept of “charity” and try to clean it off, but doing so requires scrutinizing it with a different moral source (whether it be a different church, a different religion, or a non-theistic philosophy), and at that point you might as well just accept that source’s definition of “charity” directly.
There’s a bit of a knee-jerk reaction against throwing the baby out with the bathwater, but sometimes the bathwater’s actually a bubbling vat of toxic sludge, and maybe you could sift through all that and piece together the skeleton of a baby, but why not just get a brand-new bath with a brand-new baby?
But in their case (Becky and Joyce) all their moral understanding is grounded in that church that has no moral authority. Is it reasonable to ask them to throw it all out at once and start building a new moral foundation from scratch?
In the long run, they’re going to have to do that, though they’ll likely be unearthing hangups linked to their upbringing for decades. Expecting them to within a matter of weeks reject everything we think is foolish, but keep the morals we agree with?
I think you’re overreacting a little. Ron isn’t saying it isn’t a big deal but that just because an ideology, or person is wrong about 1 major thing doesn’t mean you suddenly disagree with them about *everything* and it is up to Becky to actually look at it hard and say if this is something she still wants to uphold or is only clinging to out of her own personal fear.
You don’t need to go off in a huge rant over a bad analogy, you can just ask the person to please be more careful about the way they phrase it because it comes across as downplaying how seriously that one thing does affect Becky.
love the look on joyce 😀
Well, kiddo, time to decide what those principles mean to you in practice, not just in theory.
Religion is so wack yo
So I just realized that the Little Caesar’s pizza was foreshadowing to Dina’s come on (“Hot and Ready”).
what are the Toppings?!
Triceratoppings, obviously.
So all the Frills,
( or is that bellasaurus and W ISCHISAURUS
? )
just think, a few weeks ago Becky didnt have a Centosaurus to her Name )
Now we just need to know if Becky Wannasaurus
( ok this is too easy they arnt even puns )
You can read the whole thing in renowned smut writer Michael Dichton’s next novel, Jurassic Tart.
Apple and pear and peach and cherry.
I made that joke over a week ago.
Not about Dina specifically (lacking the context), but about the Little Caesars marketing being a lesbian come-on.
Of course, I was quoting a Puella Magi Madoka Magica abridged series, so I can’t actually take credit for coming up with said joke, but…
….
… what was my point again?
Man I really hope Becky and Dina work out in the end and stay together
It’s canon in the walkyverse so make of that what you will
really?
when did that happen?
( I remember her tying up Mike way back and getting him plastered. Yeah shes Dom)
Post SP! strip. They show up together as part of the anti-Soggie resistance.
So confused. I had thought that Becky and a lady at her old college did sexy things… obv. I got that wrong/confused. Track-backs anyone?
Oh here
http://www.dumbingofage.com/2014/comic/book-5/01-when-somebody-loved-me/definitely/
They didn’t get as far as below the clothes due to door related issues (although Kaitlin DOES have a bare head…)
Thjey were well on their way, it appears. Both Beckie and Kaitlin have lost the long pants, it appears Kaitlin has ditched the hoodie, shoes and socks have vanished, and Kaitlin’s glasses have been put aside since they are not needed for close-in work.
Those panels represent different days and different stages, I think, not them stripping down.
Becky at least in shorts in the first panel and long pants in the second.
I agree. Different days.
“Yeah, Becky, Dorothy and I were talking about stuff. Y’know that I really empathise with your problem here because I’m going through much the same thing but I really wish that you’d vent somewhere else?”
It would be reeeally out of character for Joyce to tell her best friend to scram because she’s occupied.
Becky is discovering that it’s not so easy to say “lead me not into temptation” when the temptation is right there in front of you.
Good talk, good talk.
No seriously, I’m glad that Becky opens up to her friends about a really pressing issue!
That alt text! I haven’t listened to Rebecca St. James in years. Becky just needs to center herself, to find the course of action she’s happy with, and pursuing it. Talking it out with close friends will help. And as prior commenters have said, it’s not a binary sex/no sex situation.
sure: theres soloing. Theres 3s ( looks over at Mandy )
There is getting Full crotchless Dino suits and re-enacting scenes from Land of the Lost.
I only know of Rebecca St. James through Willis’ work… but now I really want to listen to whatever song applies to Becky’s situation here.
“go and sin no more”
I am not falling for it. I am not googling Rebecca St. James. I did that with Rich Mullins and lost hours if not days of my life.
Although I have to admit, half the attraction of Rich Mullins was the hammered dulcimer. I’m assuming that’s not a problem with Rebecca St. James.
It’s always the right time for a good discussion with your friends about your problems.
So, I don’t know if it’s somehow my computer or what, but this strip is not allowing me to move on to the next one; if I go to the main page, it will display today’s strip, but if I navigate to the previous strip (i.e. this one), it won’t allow me to navigate to the next one, either by clicking next or clicking on the strip itself. Figured I’d let mention it, since I’ve never seen one do this, and I usually read the strips pretty much right after their uploaded.
And like, right after I posted it, now it seems to be working as normal.
Dorothy seems pretty calm considering Becky just stepped on her leg. It looks like she hasn’t moved for the entire page, and Joyce only reacts in panel 3.