Desiring a Husband but no Kids

Jun//Getty Images

It seems to be a controversial statement in conservative Christian culture to want a husband, but not want kids.

My primary response to people who are upset at the concept is "why do you care?!"

It actually is my body, and I do have my own personal reasons for why I don't want kids, my age being foremost in my mind now since I've turned 40. I believe it's called a geriatric pregnancy at my age and . . . no thanks, nothing about that sounds like a healthy idea for myself or for potential offspring.

But I do not think that my lack of desire for children should EXCLUDE me from desiring a husband!

I have always been an extremely affectionate and playful person with people I trust and am fond of. I love touching and hugging and snuggling and all the things, and, forgive me, but I would love to do those things with a husband without the added pressure of "I'm doing it with the hope of bringing children into the world someday." I'm sorry, am I not enough as a partner for you? I want to do those things because they feel good to both of us, not because there's additional expectations.

There is a lot of pressure put on women like me, and by me, I mean Christian women who are sensual by nature and want to share that side of themselves with someone without the offspring string attached. Can't I just want that relationship for me? But no, it seems like it's considered selfish in mainstream Christianity to desire a sexual relationship with a man without the expectation of children. As if the thought is, if you don't want kids, why do you want a husband? Ummm, because I do. Isn't that enough?

Turning 40 has been a milestone. I didn't cry or get overly emotional at putting my young adulthood behind me. Instead, it's helped me realize there are things I want in life. Like, a healthier lifestyle concerning my weight. I'm confident when I work out and eat better and weigh less. It's my reality and it's what I'm extremely proud to be working towards. I want that both for myself and for a potential mate because I know what I find attractive in a man and I would like him to find me attractive too. Our relationship would not be cemented together by children so there would need to be other incentives and reasons for why we're together.

And yes, while I want a husband who is a believer, I am not going to settle for a man whose personality type is literally "Evangelical Christian" and there is nothing interesting about him. That was my problem when I was in youth group and young adult groups in church. The guys weren't INTERESTING because all they talked about was purity and Christ, skiing and football, and, I'm sorry, to me that is boring. It was boring to me then, even though I didn't say so out loud or even really allow myself to think it, and it is incredibly boring to me now. Surely not all of them really wanted to be youth pastors and worship leaders!

It does my heart an incredible amount of good to see Christian parents with their kiddos in church together, worshipping and listening to the pastor and just spending quality time. I am so happy that these family units exist because they are so important. I just wish I felt accepted as a Christian woman who realllllllllllllllllllly wants to be a part of an A+B relationship but without C thrown in.

This rant went a little long, oh well. This is what happens when I go online and find young Christian conservative women in their twenties waxing profound on what it should mean to be a woman, including the maternal instinct, and that if you don't want kids now, you will someday. Sorry, but that box doesn't fit me. And I should still be allowed to find a husband who loves me for me, not for the offspring I can give him.

This post might seem harsh, especially since I haven't posted in so long. But it is genuinely how I feel from my perspective. And I'm not sorry.

Read More

A Nudge from C.S. Lewis

Sometimes it's hard to read complete books by C.S. Lewis. The man was such a master of the English language and his thoughts were so precise and so incredibly acurate to reality that it almost hurts trying to make sense of everything he said. Which is why I'm happy to have found a book called The Joyful Christian so I can read individual blurbs taken from his various books in the hopes that what he says will sink in and stay. Because let's be honest, Lewis had a lot of crucial insights into humanity in general and Christianity specifically.

So I just read the very 1st blurb which deals with *drumroll please* Right & Wrong. Since this is only a blurb it only skirts the basics of what Lewis wrote but it's enough to give me food for thought. When we hear arguments in our daily lives it's usually based on the idea that we share a similar view of Right & Wrong with the other person involved in the argument. In Lewis' words, "he is appealing to some kind of standard of behavior which he expects the other man to know about."

A standard of behavior. An accepted norm that this is right and something else is wrong. I love how Lewis remarks that humanity rarely argues with the Right & Wrong standard but tries instead of make a special case for himself as to why it doesn't apply to him in a given situation. That standard applied to a friend in another situation but not to me right now because . . .

I'm reading a book by Alison Strobel called Worlds Collide and it's fascinating watching the hero come to the realization that he needs Christ. He moves through logical moments of denial and need before asking himself some very basic questions such as does God exist and if so what is he going to do about it. Once he moves past those two levels he realizes the question of truth must also be answered. Is it relative or absolute? His conclusion is, according to the very fact that we can say something is wrong and/or sinful, that absolute truth exists.

Most people realize there is a right and a wrong. And most, if they thought about it long enough, would realize that it's not based on what they think at the moment. I'm sure that slavery was not considered a sin in the South but it still was one regardless of what they thought. Imagine the slaughter in the Roman games with Gladiators and Christians and wild beasts. It was a horrific evil committed against mankind regardless of whether they saw it as a sin or not. Human perception doesn't matter. Truth is absolute.

Which means that inwardly that standard of Right & Wrong exists in most people. If it didn't then there would be no point in quarrelling with someone because you don't have the same standard. Makes me feel sometimes as if I shouldn't even bother arguing with those of a more liberal bent because nothing I say is going to change their mind which means they don't believe in this Law of Right & Wrong or as Lewis describes it The Law of Human Nature. In his words "a body could choose either to obey the Law of Human Nature or to disobey it."

A person might choose to not participate in this Law of Human Nature but denying its existence doesn't work either. I could go on for paragraph after paragraph and reiterate the same thing but I won't. All I will say is WOW! Lewis managed to wrap up in a few paragraphs what it takes some authors 100s of pages to say. Truth is absolute and the majority of men are held to a certain standard or law. Disobeying is their choice but it doesn't mean the standard ceases to exist.

Read More