Buddhist Catholic Contemplative Evangelical General Christian Hindu Jewish Latter-day Saint Muslim New Visions Progressive Christian

Beliefs

Topics

Columnists

Resource Library

Research Tools

Video

Podcasts

Thought Readers

Faith In Media Tracker

Newsletters

Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In Subscription Support

Follow Patheos

Love, Joy, Feminism

Home
Nonreligious
Well-Known Evangelical Pastor Justifies Slut Shaming (and More)

Well-Known Evangelical Pastor Justifies Slut Shaming (and More)

Last updated on: July 25, 2018 at 5:00 am by Libby Anne

Well-Known Evangelical Pastor Justifies Slut Shaming (and More) 2018-07-24T08:06:26-04:00 Libby Anne

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.

Doug Wilson, an influential Idaho pastor, holds the ear of some of the most prominent evangelical leaders in the country. He is also a sexist, homophobic blowhard who has asked judges to offer leniency to child abusers in his congregation and published a pamphlet praising slavery in the antebellum South, declaring that: “There has never been a multi-racial society which has existed with such mutual intimacy and harmony in the history of the world.”

I bring him up because, in the context of a much longer post aimed at helping a man combat his wife’s feminist leanings, Wilson recently penned the following justification of slut shaming:

Why, if a woman sleeps with a hundred men, is she slut-shamed, but if a man sleeps with a hundred women, he can get away with bragging about his “conquests”? Well, consider this factor. A key that opens a hundred locks can claim to be a master key. A lock that opens to a hundred keys can only claim to be pretty much worthless.

Perhaps the most bizarre thing about this statement is that Wilson follows it with claims that he is not saying that both acts aren’t sin:

And lest you think that I am somehow “approving” of the man in this instance, I actually include him among the fornicators who will not inherit the kingdom of heaven (1 Cor. 6:9). The point is not that his sin is praiseworthy and the immoral woman’s is not, but rather that their sins are radically different because they are radically different. But to say they are radically different is not to say one is blameworthy and the other not. He is a scoundrel, and she is a tramp—let us not praise either one, but let us not confuse them either.

We should not praise either one, he says—but he has already done just that by comparing a man who has sex with a hundred women to “a master key” while comparing a woman who has sex with a hundred men to a lock that is “pretty much worthless.” Besides, his entire analogy is created to justify the selective slut shaming of women. He does view the man in this scenario as one with room to boast (albeit of sin) and the woman as one who should rightly be shamed (because she has opened her legs to so man, and not because she has sinned).

I grew up in a family in Wilson’s sphere of influence. These paragraphs are the dirty, disgusting underbelly of the fine, shiny ideals I was presented.

As a girl, I was taught that women were delicate vessels deserving of protection by fathers, brothers, and husbands. In the comparison Wilson makes above, that ideal is thrown to the wind—a man who has sex with a hundred women treated as brag-worthy—though a sinner, of course—rather than as a harmer of women. And rather than lamenting that the woman who had sex with a hundred men was failed by her father or brothers—who ought to have protected her—and violated by men who ought to have treated her with respect, Wilson calls this woman a “tramp.”

There is no consistency in what Wilson teaches. A woman is a delicate vessel deserving of protection—until she isn’t. And then she’s a tramp, while a man who goes out and violates (by Wilson’s way of thinking) a hundred women is described as a “master key” with who can well and deservedly get away with “bragging” about his “conquests.” Where is the shame for him? Where is his obligation not to violate the sexual purity of women he has not married?

But then, this is classic Wilson—he pretends to be all “hip” and “cool” and “edgy” and goes all “he-man” and says horrible disgusting things, things that are not consistent at all, all the while claiming to be a valiant protector and champion of women, and not actually a vile misogynist. Meanwhile, church leaders and evangelical stalwarts praise him and pat him on the back and invite him to their conferences and cite him as a valiant hero of the Reformation.

The whole thing is rotted out from its core.

I do want to draw attention to one last, short section in Wilson’s post before I close.

Here it is:

Here is a difference that seems “unfair” to the men, also taken from the world. When a woman has a husband who strays, she can count on sympathy and commiseration from other women. When a man has a wife who is unfaithful to him, he can count on being the butt of the joke among the other men—he is the cuckold.

First of all, let’s be perfectly clear that in Wilson’s world, women whose husbands cheat on them are treated as suspect of not putting out, or otherwise not meeting their husbands’ needs. What did you do wrong? Why didn’t you work harder to keep him? Women are not simply offered sympathy and commiseration. (This isn’t limited to Wilson’s world, either—the idea that a wife whose husband cheated must have done something to lose him is fairly widespread.)

Further, to the extent that men whose wives cheat are treated as the butt of a joke and a “cuckold” in “the world” (as Wilson puts it), that is a problem. I am skeptical of how far this is actually true today, however. I have a feeling that a man who is cheated on would get commiseration and sympathy too. Wilson has an uncanny ability to treat ossified sexist tropes as universal social norms, when I’m not sure they are—or when they’re in the process of changing.

And let’s pause to note that all of this was stated in the context of advising a man on standing strong in opposition to a wife with feminist leanings. Pointing out that some double standards act against men isn’t going to help this man’s cause when those are the same double standards feminism wants dissolved. This man’s feminist wife is going to respond with enthusiasm: “Exactly, that’s what I’m saying! That needs to change!” And then what is he going to say?

Wilson is not only not a wit, he’s not particularly well informed about the subjects he pretends he’s an expert on. But he’s edgy and hip and ends up drawing the same sort of following as certain forums of reddit, or MRAs or PUAs, or “incel” forums, just with an added Christian gloss. Is this where I add something about lipstick on a pig?

It’s long past time mainstream evangelicals dropped Wilson and did everything in their power to marginalize him and his influence.

I have a Patreon! Please support my writing!

Evangelicalism/Fundamentalism

Feminism

Doug Wilson

slut-shaming

Previous Post

July 24, 2018

Checklist: An Evangelical Approach to the Marriage Market

Next Post

July 26, 2018 Why Do So Many White Evangelicals Object to the Browning of America?

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category Atheism Evangelicalism/Fundamentalism Family Feminism Homeschool Meta Parenting Patriarchy Politics Purity Quiverfull Social Justice Uncategorized Worthwhile reads

Select a Month 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

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

What Christian group emphasizes speaking in tongues as evidence of faith?

Select your answer to see how you score.

Pentecostals Catholics Presbyterians Methodists