Damaged Goods

Last updated on: June 6, 2015 at 1:08 pm by James F. McGrath

Damaged Goods 2015-06-06T13:08:47-04:00 James F. McGrath

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

I am grateful to have been sent a review copy of Damaged Goods: New Perspectives on Christian Purity by Dianna Anderson. Anderson’s book explores the purity culture of the Evangelical background in which she was raised, and its approach to sex and gender, arguing that there is a need for a radically different approach to sexual ethics among Christians.

The book offers a combination of Anderson’s own experience, the experience of others, her interviews with representatives of Evangelical purity culture in its modern form (such as Quiverfull and the Gospel Coalition), as well as historical background. Anderson highlights that the view of the nuclear family that is a key component of the viewpoint she critiques is in fact a relatively recent invention (pp.12-17). She tells the experience of losing her virginity, and how she wishes that her upbringing had prepared her differently for the experience and had equipped her to approach not just that moment (which is mythologized by conservative Evangelicals) but sexuality in a different way. The harm that purity culture inflicts on women – and also men – is presented, using well-known examples such as the case of Elizabeth Smart, but also more everyday instances. Her analysis is consistently on target not just about the consequences, but about the problematic modes of thought that underpin them. Here is an example (p.109):

Evangelicals, especially those in the purity movement, have so steeped themselves in the language of counterculture, of being set apart in holiness, of being separate from the secular world, that it becomes hard to even find middle ground to communicate. The belief becomes law becomes immutable fact. This is a form of confirmation bias, to be sure, but it is also the result of not listening well to divergent viewpoints, resulting in a very narrow and constrained perception of how humans interact with the world around them.

In place of the purity approach, Anderson suggests another that is just as fundamentally founded on Christian principles. It starts with seeking the good of others, not harming them, and not using other people simply as a means to an end (pp.188-190). Consent as key is emphasized throughout the book. Anderson writes, “Christian sexual ethics need to be about honoring the humanity of individuals, and honoring the community in which we live and breathe. This is not a matter of when sex happens, but rather a matter of attitudes, postures, and understanding” (p.190). And in contrast (p.191),

By injecting shame, especially into something as personal as sexuality, we turn words of grace and freedom into blunt objects for beating people into submission. We buy into sinful patriarchal structures that say men and women are genders first and people second. We buy into harmful rape cultures that blame victims for their own rapes. We treat women as public property, open for comment and use. We create a church unable to communicate with the outside world, one that sets itself further and further away from actual people and becomes a bastion of shame and guilty for so many.

As you can see, this is an important book, voicing views that I am sure many within Evangelicalism already hold, but may need to read in print or hear voiced aloud by others before they can have the courage to do so themselves. And so hopefully they will find their way to Anderson’s book.

One important positive aspect of the book is that Anderson does not offer a one-size-fits-all approach to sexuality, nor does she substitute her own authority for that of patriarchal leaders in Evangelicalism. She encourages readers to question not only their church leaders and themselves but also her (p.203). And she emphasizes the need not to merely swing the pendulum the other way, so that instead of shaming those who have had sex, we instead shame those who have not (pp.194-5).

One thing that the book is not is a detailed reexamination of the sexual values reflected in the Bible, the cultural context that shaped them, and a detailed exegetical treatment of passages that are used to support purity culture. There is some treatment of relevant passages in Anderson’s book, but it isn’t the focus, and covers around 17 pages in total. If one is looking for more treatment of that topic, they should supplement Anderson’s volume with the forthcoming book by Kendra Irons and Melanie Mock, If Eve Only Knew: Freeing Yourself from Biblical Womanhood and Becoming All God Means for You to Be. You can read my endorsement for that book on the Chalice Press website. Some readers will need more treatment of Biblical passages than Anderson provides, as these will stand in the way of many Evangelical accepting the need to revise their approach to sexual ethics.

I personally would also have liked more exploration of the point implicit in the phrase that is adopted for the book’s title. The phrase “damaged goods,” like the image of already-chewed bubble gum for women who have lost their virginity, all reflects the view of women as property, with the potential husband wanting to purchase for his own use and enjoyment a product that is in pristine condition, since settling for something used is second best. The phrases and analogies do not make sense outside of that patriarchal view of women as a commodity for men, and while the images are critiqued in the book, and the “transactional nature of marriage” in the Bible is highlighted (p.28), I got the sense that Anderson so takes for granted that such ideas cannot be seriously embraced today, that she didn’t make as much of an effort as she could have to argue against those views and those who at least try to accept them.

But what Anderson offers is arguably the most important thing, namely stories of how human beings are damaged by purity culture, and how one can formulate a genuinely Christian approach to sexual ethics that abandons the patriarchal and property-oriented approach that is taken for granted in the Bible. I don’t want to sound like I am criticizing Anderson for not spelling out what arguably ought to be obvious to any Christian, because it is one of the key teachings of Jesus: human beings and their well-being takes priority over rules. While some still need to be persuaded of that point, Anderson takes it as a given and builds her case upon it. And at least for those who’ve already grasped Jesus’ prioritization of principles, and the patriarchal cultural context that shaped the Bible and is reflected in it, Anderson’s case will be persuasive.

See also blog reviews by Samantha Field, Caryn Riswold, Sarah Moon, and Morgan Guyton about Dianna Anderson’s book Damaged Goods.

Previous Post

June 6, 2015

Job 41 - Godzilla Edition

Next Post

June 6, 2015 Fundamentalists and Scholarship

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category 1 Corinthians 1 John 1 Peter 1 Samuel 1 Thessalonians 1 Timothy 2 Corinthians 2 Kings 2 Peter 2 Samuel 2 Thessalonians 2 Timothy academia Acts of the Apostles afterlife Akhaten Alcatraz American Academy of Religion Amos Anglican Arabic Aramaic archaeology art artificial intelligence astronomy atheism atonement Babylon 5 Baptists Battlestar Galactica Bible Biblical Studies Carnival biblioblogging Black Mirror Blade Runner Book of Job book review Buddhism Call for Papers China Christianity Christmas Christology Chronicles Coptic creation Daniel Deuteronomy Doctor Who Dune Easter Ecclesiastes economics education Eldad Keynan Enoch Seminar Ephesians eschatology Esther Evangelicals evolution Exodus Expanse Ezekiel Ezra fantasy Fringe fundamentalism Galatians games Ge'ez genealogy Genesis Gnosticism Gospel of Jesus' Wife Gospel of John Gospel of Judas Gospel of Luke Gospel of Mark Gospel of Matthew Gospel of Peter Gospel of Thomas Greek Harry Potter Hebrew Hebrews Hinduism historical Jesus history Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy Holidays horror Hosea humor incarnation India inerrancy information literacy inspirational Intelligent Design Ireland Isaiah Islam Israel Italy James Jeremiah John the Baptist Jonah Joshua Judaism Jude Judges Judith Lamentations languages Latin Leviticus libraries literature Lord of the Rings LOST Mandaeans Mandaic memes Methodism Micah monotheism morality Mormons movies music mythicism NASSCAL Nehemiah new perspective New Testament news Numbers Orthodox paganism panentheism pantheism Patheos Paul and his letters Pentecostals Philippians Philippians 2:6-11 philosophy physics Planet of the Apes podcast politics Progressive Christianity Protestantism Proverbs Psalms pseudoscience racism religion Revelation Roman Catholicism Romania Romans Ruth scams science science fiction Secret Gospel of Mark Society of Biblical Literature Song of Songs Star Trek Star Wars Stargate Swahili Syriac Taoism technology Terminator The Handmaid's Tale The Hobbit The Matrix theodicy theology theory Timeless Titus tomb Torchwood travel TRON Uncategorized United Kingdom Westworld X-Files young-earth creationism Zechariah

Select a Month October 2026 September 2026 August 2026 July 2026 June 2026 May 2026 April 2026 March 2026 February 2026 January 2026 December 2025 November 2025 October 2025 September 2025 July 2025 June 2025 May 2025 April 2025 March 2025 February 2025 January 2025 December 2024 November 2024 October 2024 September 2024 August 2024 July 2024 June 2024 May 2024 April 2024 March 2024 February 2024 January 2024 December 2023 November 2023 October 2023 September 2023 August 2023 July 2023 May 2023 April 2023 March 2023 February 2023 January 2023 December 2022 November 2022 October 2022 September 2022 August 2022 July 2022 June 2022 May 2022 April 2022 March 2022 February 2022 January 2022 December 2021 November 2021 October 2021 September 2021 August 2021 July 2021 June 2021 May 2021 April 2021 March 2021 February 2021 January 2021 December 2020 November 2020 October 2020 September 2020 August 2020 July 2020 June 2020 May 2020 April 2020 March 2020 February 2020 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 May 2011 April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 January 2011 December 2010 November 2010 October 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010 June 2010 May 2010 April 2010 March 2010 February 2010 January 2010 December 2009 November 2009 October 2009 September 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 February 2007 January 2001

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz