Patheos

BuddhistCatholicContemplativeEvangelicalGeneral ChristianHinduJewishLatter-day SaintMuslimNew VisionsProgressive Christian

Beliefs

Topics

Columnists

Resource Library

Research Tools

Video

Podcasts

Thought Readers

Faith In Media Tracker

Newsletters

Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In Subscription Support

Patheos

Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In Subscription Support

Follow Patheos Patheos on Facebook Patheos on YouTube

Love, Joy, Feminism

Lori Alexander on Co-sleeping and Sexual Availability

Last updated on: October 7, 2019 at 5:20 am   by Libby Anne

Lori Alexander on Co-sleeping and Sexual Availability 2019-10-02T14:25:04-04:00 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.

Oh, co-sleeping. There’s little better way to sow division in a local mother’s facebook group than to post something absolutist about co-sleeping. (Or vaccines. Or breast-feeding. Or—you know what, never mind, the mommy wars are completely out of hand. But that’s a topic for another day.)

Fundamentalist blogger Lori Alexander wants women to think twice about co-sleeping. Because, you know, women always need to be sexually available to their husbands, and having a child in bed rather puts the kibosh on that extremely important completely and constant sexual availability.

Lori begins as follows:

 

This topic is one that I have written about before and received many angry comments and even blog posts written against what I taught. There’s not one verse in the entire Bible that commands that parents sleep with their children. No, not one. Usually, it’s the wife who wants this to happen. If the husband wants it, that’s fine but if not, it’s not.

See, in Lori’s world, sexual availability goes one way and one way only.

Some have said I was wrong teaching this because mothers know what is best for their babies and children, but God commands wives to submit to and obey their husbands in everything! If a husband doesn’t want children sharing the marital bed with him, then they should not! Wives obeying their husband is clear in Scripture. Husband, after all, are the leaders of their families!

I’m curious, what is the point of naming women the keepers of their homes if husbands are allowed to overturn any decision they want?

Lori links to an article by a psychologist who claims that co-sleeping destroyed his marriage. Um. Okay.

The modern motherhood monster stalks the earth, dropping in on facebook groups or mommy baby library circles snatching women and carrying them off to its lair. There, women subsequently spend countless hours researching the perfect organic, non-GMO baby food, paging through vaccine-related injuries, and god knows what else. Women’s sense of self can all but disappear, absorbed in this thing that has taken them.

And yeah, that can be bad for marriages. Also women. It is bad for women. I wonder about it, sometimes. Where did it come from, this creature? When did it begin preying on women? What is it that makes some women so susceptible to its wiles? If I had to guess, I would suggest that it was born out of a larger problem in modern society. For instance, the gender wage and opportunity gap. Or perhaps, a deep and abiding fear that one’s children will be worse off than oneself economically unless they have a leg up.

Perhaps trying to be the absolute best BEST mother at home can distract from problems at work. Or maybe stay at home mothers are attracted to the mommy wars as a way to find validation, in absence of a career. It’s possible that income inequality plays a role as well—if I had to guess, I would posit that the women most engaged in fights over vaccines, say, are those with the most free time and disposable income.

We’re ranging a bit far afield, here, though. My point is simply this: co-sleeping does not destroy marriages. Failure to communicate destroys marriage. Failure to work through disagreement destroys marriage. An inability to find some sort of compromise destroys marriage. Refusal to listen to one’s partner destroys marriage. Allowing your kids to sleep in your bed? That does not destroy marriages.

When my children were young, my husband and I co-slept. We threw three foam mats on the floor, creating a king sized bed (and then some). The four of us slept there together, all piled up. There was plenty of room. If I was ever squished, I would just get up and move to another part of the mattress. Sometimes I even slept crosswise, below my children’s feet. Sometimes I miss those days.

My husband and I were both on board with this plan. It saved a lot of trouble at bedtime, and it worked for us. What about sex? Well, it wasn’t like that was the only room in the house.

But does Lori know that?

 

If your husband doesn’t want the children in bed with you, then obey him! Our children never slept in our bed and our children turned out to be wonderful adults. Your marriage bed is for you and your husband alone. There’s no great benefit to children sleeping with their parents. After all, everyone is sleeping. It matters not where they sleep, but it is important to be available sexually to your husbands when they desire it (1 Corinthians 7:5). Children in the bed interfere with this important aspect of marriage. Don’t allow co-sleeping to destroy your marriage!

I have … questions.

This need for sexual availability. Do some men’s sexual urges happen so quickly that it’s impossible to get out bed and relocate to another room? Is that what’s going on here? Because frankly, I’m skeptical.

There are plenty of reasons not to co-sleep. Now that I don’t co-sleep, I love being able to roll over—or get out of bed—without worrying about waking one of my children. My youngest used to wake up when I got up early to get grad school reading done, which absolutely sucked. But of all the reasons not to co-sleep, the need to be able to have spontaneous, immediate sex at the drop of a hat seems like a weak one.

That said, if spontaneous, immediate sex is your thing, definitely don’t co-sleep! There is no one-size fits all here. You do you!

Also, here is what I Corinthians 7:5 actually says:

Do not deprive each other except perhaps by mutual consent and for a time, so that you may devote yourselves to prayer. Then come together again so that Satan will not tempt you because of your lack of self-control.

Lori’s paraphrase of this text, remember, was that “it is important to be available sexually to your husbands when they desire it.” I don’t think that is what that verse says.

For one thing, this verse doesn’t gender it. For another thing, the verse is about whether it makes sense for a married couple to be abstinent so that both parties can devote themselves to prayer. The answer is, yes, provided both parties have agreed to it, and provided it is only for a time, and not permanent. The verse does not say you must always and at every second be sexually available to your husband.

You know what? Let me put this verse in its context.

Now for the matters you wrote about: “It is good for a man not to have sexual relations with a woman.” But since sexual immorality is occurring, each man should have sexual relations with his own wife, and each woman with her own husband. The husband should fulfill his marital duty to his wife, and likewise the wife to her husband. The wife does not have authority over her own body but yields it to her husband. In the same way, the husband does not have authority over his own body but yields it to his wife. Do not deprive each other except perhaps by mutual consent and for a time, so that you may devote yourselves to prayer. Then come together again so that Satan will not tempt you because of your lack of self-control. I say this as a concession, not as a command. I wish that all of you were as I am. But each of you has your own gift from God; one has this gift, another has that.

First, nothing here is gendered. You literally cannot read this passage and come away thinking men are all horny and sexual and that their wives need to put out to keep them satisfied. That isn’t what it says.

Second, the whole point of this passage is that it is better not to have sex and that having sex is a concession. Do Lori and her husband abstain from sex from time to time to engage in prayer? Because frankly, that’s something a straightforward reading of this text suggests that they should be doing.

I can’t even with this. Why do some people have to make parenting—and relationships—so dang formulaic and complicated? It’s as though people delight in making life harder for themselves.

I have a Patreon! Please support my writing! 

Evangelicalism/Fundamentalism

co-sleep

Lori Alexander

Previous Post



October 6, 2019

Lesbian Duplex 244: An Open Thread

Next Post



October 7, 2019 Does God Use Hell as a Threat? John Piper Seems to Think So


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


Follow Us!

Follow Us on Facebook Follow Us on Twitter



TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

What weapon did David use to defeat Goliath?

Select your answer to see how you score.

A sword A bow and arrow A spear A sling and a stone

Related posts from Love, Joy, Feminism

Nonreligious

Maybe Let's Not Read More Puritans

Love, Joy, Feminism

Nonreligious

Feminists, Repent!

Love, Joy, Feminism

Nonreligious

"So Your Problem with Christianity is the Jesus...

Love, Joy, Feminism

Nonreligious

No, the "Second Shift" Isn't Feminism's Fault

Love, Joy, Feminism

TRENDING AT PATHEOS Nonreligious

Dethroning Jesus and Enthroning Yourself

Jesus Never Asked to Be Worshipped. He Asked to Be Understood. Christianity...

Why Most Christians are Really Paulians and Jobians

I Don't Care, But It Matters Let's get this out of the...

Essential Tips to Successfully Navigate the Selling Process

Selling a house can feel overwhelming, but it doesn’t have to be....

To Make Remote Work Effective, Think About Others

The COVID-19 pandemic forced many companies to rapidly transition to remote work....

Flexibility Is Key to Solving Problems of Tomorrow

The world of work is undergoing a dramatic transformation. The COVID-19 pandemic...

view all Nonreligious blogs

Patheos on Facebook Patheos on YouTube

Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In Subscription Support

Copyright 2008-2026, Patheos. All rights reserved.

Subscription Support Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In

Follow Patheos Patheos on Facebook Patheos on YouTube