NOTE: I AM NOT SAYING THAT A MAN SHOULD PRIORITIZE EXTERNAL BEAUTY OVER INNER BEAUTY. I AM ALSO NOT SAYING THAT MEN SHOULD ONLY DATE HOT WOMEN. YOU DO YOU. I AM ALSO NOT SAYING THAT AN UNATTRACTIVE WOMAN HAS DONE ANYTHING WRONG OR SINNED, UNLESS GLUTTONY, SLOTH, ETC. ARE INVOLVED IN THE REASON FOR HER UNATTRACTIVENESS. I AM SIMPLY POINTING OUT THE IDIOTIC THINGS THAT ARE TAUGHT TO MEN AND WOMEN IN THE CHURCH.


AN OBJECTOR IN MY POST ABOUT OBJECTORS

With the above cautionary in mind, in one of my recent posts, I paraphrased things I have personally heard from pastors and church leaders alike. They are as follows:

  • "Women shouldn't have to dress up and do their hair to look good. We should love them just as they are."
  • "Men shouldn't evaluate a woman by her looks, but by her character."
  • "Women, your heart is all that should matter. God can see that. If the man you want can't see that, then he doesn't see you the way God does, and you shouldn't want an ungodly man anyway."
  • "If a man won't date a girl because she's not 'hot enough' for him, he's sinning and violating 1 Peter 3. He should only be evaluating her 'inner self.'"

This was in a post addressing the objections that blue pill haters throw our way. Ironically, one such objector spoke up. If I'm right about who he is, he ticks off all three boxes I mentioned in this post: young, single, stagnant. He challenged:

Lol, who said any of these things ... Can you actually show one link or comment where someone says anything like what you've said above ... or even attempted to say something along that line?

I'll give 5 that I found in less than 5 minutes. But let's sidebar that for now and stick with this appetizer.

/u/Deep_Strength gave a fantastic reply pointing out his experience hearing and reading similar phrases both in real life and on /r/Christianmarriage. u/SeaRegion, a mod at r/ChristianMarriage stood in defense of his sub by acknowledging the truth that people do say these things, but qualifying advocates of these views to single guys who don't have active or biblical sex lives. Point well taken! And that may be true on reddit. But note two things:

  1. This doesn't change the fact that these people are often vocal and expressive with their views and even outside of r/ChristianMarriage these views are taught openly and widely.

  2. There are also countless married men and women who teach these things from a public platform with wide audiences as well, as I'll get to in a minute.

u/SeaRegion further notes: "In terms of the church, I have never once been exposed to the idea that women (and men) shouldn't care for their physical appearances." I agree. It will never come with that language. Here's why:

  • To be clear: every church recognize that we should care for our own bodies. Everyone is on the same age: we are God's temple, so care for your own body.

  • The issue isn't how much we care about our own physique, but whether or not it's okay to have any concern for the attractiveness of our (potential) spouse. That's where the problems arise.

  • There's always a communication gap between what is said and what is heard. "You should care more about a woman's inner beauty than her outer beauty" without a stipulation: "It's okay to want your wife to be hot too" leaves the audience with the impression: "Got it. I shouldn't care about outer beauty." This is what I call tactful misrepresentation. There's a reason many of my posts include "notes" and "caveats" that people joke with me about. This is the exact reason why I use them. Teaching partial truths leads to unbiblical conclusions.

  • Every preacher and author knows that they'd be faced with numerous objections if they communicated their point plainly: "It's sin to care about a woman's looks." So, instead, they couch the issue in numerous peripheral phrases that imply this conclusion without saying it. They don't have the balls to say what they're really thinking, and hope that plausible deniability will cover their butts against anyone who tries to take them at their word.

Now for the meat of this post. Let's take a look at some actual Christian resources and bloggers chock full of real and authentic quotes.


THE GOSPEL COALITION

First up is an article from The Gospel Coalition.

They commend a man for saying, "I don't care what she'll look like ... I'll love her for who she is inside." They say: "Marital love involves valuing your spouse's body. But this isn't exactly the same thing as finding it attractive, at least not in the way we typically think of finding something attractive."

Contrary to common sense, they also say that you can change what you're attracted to, if you don't find a worthy candidate attractive. "We are more capable than we often recognize of directing our preferences. We should not presume that our initial aesthetic sensibilities are unchallengeable law within us. We have some level of direction over them." Sure, this is why we say no girl is actually a 10. Because that last step from 9-10 is based on personal taste - and there's always 1 point to adjust for this. But he's basically saying that I could learn to get a hard on for morbid obesity if I just try hard enough.

Also: "Husbands and wives should be attracted to one another because they value the whole person, not because they happen to like olive skin or a firm body. Those things change, but physical attraction need not. Attraction is more a matter of my commitment to value the full breadth of who my spouse is ... This is a far more stable basis for physical attraction in marriage. And it makes for better Valentine's Day cards." Right, because I'm going to marry a woman based on how Hallmark can make more money.

Their ultimate conclusion? "Perhaps this means that singles should be willing to direct their affections toward potential spouses they may not initially find attractive." His rationale? We need to be willing to challenge our own preferences regarding physical attraction in light of the greater principle that attraction stems from valuing a person."

Translation? "Men shouldn't evaluate a woman by her looks, but by her character."


FIERCE MARRIAGE

Or what about this article from fiercemarriage.com? This sounds like a strong, masculine website. Fierce! Yes, let's see what they have to say.

"Selena [the author's wife] must be my ultimate standard of beauty ... Shifting our standard of beauty and placing our wives at it's [sic] center will profoundly and positively impact our marriages."

What does this mean? "Here's how it works. Take your wife as she is - height, weight, hair color, eye color, voice, mannerisms, everything - and set her apart in your mind. Now instead of comparing her to other women, compare other women to her. The less they look like her, exactly as she is, the less attractive they are. In other words - your wife is the ultimate example of beauty, one that can never be matched" (emphasis in original).

How does this play out in his own life? "Selena has brown hair - so I love brown hair! Selena is 5'4", so I love 5'4"!" The list goes on. Interestingly, he doesn't mention her weight, but you get the point.

For bonus points: "When we truly love our wives, we have a singular discriminatory focus on her. She is your object of affection, your ultimate prize" (emphasis added). In God's relationship with his people, did he say we were his reward? No, he said, "I am your very great reward" (Genesis 15:1). So, who is the prize? (Hint: Isaiah 54:5)


PROJECT INSPIRED

Those are both articles from men. Let's see what a woman has to say from Project Inspired.

"Because men are attracted to feminine beauty, their very first reaction - as Feldhahn says - is to be instinctively drawn to it. But godly men recognize that instinct isn't always the right choice. Beauty has a divine definition, and that's the beauty they seek to embrace."

She recognizes the hard reality that guys still want their women to be attractive, but couches it in the view that only attractive guys want attractive women. "The simple truth is that a guy who takes care of his 'temple' will look for that in a potential spouse. There is a big difference between a guy looking for someone who exemplifies cultural standards and a man who wants a partner whose priorities echo his own." In other words: Don't worry, if a guy doesn't take care of his body, he should find you beautiful even though you don't take care of your body either. While I agree that the scrawny or obese man doesn't have much room to complain, the explanation isn't all wrong. It's not that fat guys suddenly find fat girls hot and attractive. They're settling.

Here's the clincher, though: "Above all else, a man who truly loves and follows the Lord is looking more at the heart of a woman than at her body. ... the man who walks in the redemptive grace of Christ will always place spiritual unity and emotional maturity a his first priorities in a mate - as should you!" Okay, nobody is questioning this. But are you really insinuating that a godly man shouldn't care about a woman's looks as long as she's a godly woman?

Her ultimate conclusion? "Be God's woman, and God's man will appreciate all you have to offer." So, yes. Yes, that's exactly what she's insinuating.


FROM THE STUDY

I was at first encouraged by this article from a guy who affirms that these attitudes are, in fact, prevalent. I thought I randomly stumbled across a guy who "gets it" as I read the first few paragraphs. So sad that this one led down the same path as all the others ...

"I am regularly asked if it is important for a Christian man or woman to be physically attracted to the person they are dating. As I've asked this question in the past, I've found that counsel usually comes in one of two basic answers. One answer is that no, physical attraction isn't important and shouldn't be part of one's initial consideration; rather, a person's godly character should be the paramount factor. Another answer suggests that while godly character should be the primary factor, physical attraction is important and should also be part of the equation." He goes on to say that neither of these common answers are satisfactory to him. Excellent! I don't like them either.

He notes his own experiences: "I've observed situations, however, where godly, well-intentioned and otherwise wise men have counseled single brothers to not let the lack of physical attraction keep them from pursuing a godly woman." He adds: "When a young man asks me, 'Do you believe I should be physically attracted to my girlfriend,' I answer, 'Yes!'" Sounds good, right? Yes. So far, so good. He's going to start explaining why physical attraction is an essential component in a healthy marriage, right?

Then he starts going cockeyed.

  • "When we have a clear view of what we truly deserve - an eternity enduring God's righteous judgment against our sin - that simple, godly girl we've known for the past couple years begins to appear very attractive, almost irresistible. A man should be attracted to the woman he is pursuing, but pride will often keep many a man from appreciating the beauty of the women already in his midst." Translation: If you don't find unattractive yet godly girls beautiful, then you're probably sinning with pride.

  • "Attraction his [sic] holistic, and it [sic] possible that physical attraction is lacking in a man if he is not placing enough emphasis on a woman's character which will, over time, serve to adorn her physical beauty in his eyes ... [these men are] better served if they were told that physical attraction can and should grow when proper weight is given to a woman's inner beauty." Translation: You're wrong for not giving enough weight to inner beauty, and if you did you'd suddenly find her attractive.

  • "We are also taught to value physical beauty supremely and treat a woman's inner beauty as secondary. This mindset is devastating to our relationships and our hope for marriage ... When we are walking in humility and pursuing the right things, it is possible to be physically attracted to many different kinds of women, not merely those who appear on the magazine cover." Translation: If you're not physically attracted to plain Jane, you're not walking in humility and pursuing the right things. Ergo, you're sinning.

I was about done with this article at that point. But for bonus points, let's keep reading.

  • "God has created the man to be the pursuer and the one who woos and wins his wife." Right. Has he studied this in the Bible at all? Who is the pursuer between God/Christ and his people? I've done that study - I read every single verse that ever said "pursue" or "seek" or "chase." Know what I found? For ever 1 instance of God seeking us, there are at least 20 (might have been a 1::22 ratio) instances of the imperative for us to seek God. Should husbands pursue their wives? In select circumstances, as God models to us, sure. I'll concede that. But I challenge you all to find me one sermon where it is preached that it is primarily the wife's obligation to seek and pursue her husband's affection. I tried once and didn't have any luck. Maybe you all are better at internet research than me. Best I could find was general "following" and "submissiveness," which are incredibly different from the attitude that is conveyed when we read: "Seek after me" or "seek first my kingdom" or any of that stuff.

  • "As a man pursues a woman, she often naturally grows more and more physically attracted to him as she is able to perceive his godly character and intentional leadership." Huh? This doesn't make any sense to me. How is he leading her if he's pursuing her? She's in front but ... somehow ... following behind him? As to the underlying sentiment, to his credit, for the first couple months this might ring true - because women love the validation of a new man showing interest. That's why so many people get fooled by this thinking. Brand new relationships do seem to give off this vibe. But this thinking always fails in longevity. A man's pursuit of a woman will, in time, always cause her to lose interest, just as many men often lose interest in a woman after having sex with her several times. While there are ways to keep this active, once he feels like he has "sexually conquered" her, his interest wanes, just as women's interest in a man wanes when she feels like she has "relationally conquered" him (see Genesis 3 for more).

  • He cites several reasons why men and women may not find someone else attractive: "The reasons [physical attraction] may be lacking in some women can be similar to the reasons it is lacking in men: pride, not enough attention given to man's godliness, concern about the lack of euphoric romantic feelings, a wrong standard of male handsomeneses, same-sex attraction, and, now more than ever, pornography." Notice he didn't say: "Perhaps attraction is lacking because the other person is obese, hasn't showered in a week, wears shoddy clothes, etc." No. This Christian man would ever insinuate that such people are unattractive. It must be a failure to see the inner beauty.


BIBLE.ORG

For fun, I decided to check out one of the numerous study materials available on bible.org. They often have good things to say, and a lot of people rely on it, so let's check it out. Forewarning: it's a VERY long post. I'll cut to the relevant parts. And I'll note that not all of it is bad. There's good content too. But when they start talking about appearances ...

"The Christian home is not superficial, concerned with the outward appearance. The are not consumed with the external appearance in their clothes, makeup, or skin." This is an example of an author trying to pull a fast one. Notice the word choice? First it's that we're not concerned at all, then it's that we're not consumed by it. Which is it? Because if we say we're not "concerned" with it, then we shouldn't be considering it as a factor at all. But by changing words to "consumed" later, he creates plausible deniability.a

"Let it be known that this focus on the outward appearance is a major struggle for many families including Christian ones ... The godly home is totally consumed with the inside ... The godly home is all about the inside ... How can Christian marriages protect themselves from this shallow focus on the external?" Combine this with the fact that there is no affirmation: It's okay to want to marry someone you find attractive, and do you see how easily these teachings can lead men astray?


LET'S PROCESS THIS

I used the following two searches:

  • "Dating for attractiveness, Christians"

  • "Should Christian men care about looks?"

The results I gave were on the first page of Google for each search. They are not some podunk blog that only gets read by the author's family members.

While most authors are cautious enough to avoid saying bluntly: "You should find fat girls hot if they're godly," (because they'd have to deal with the obvious back-lash) they do everything in their power to convey this idea without actually saying the words. They say the principle without being willing to address the obvious implications and questions that arise:

  1. TGC: "Husbands and wives should be attracted to one another because they value the whole person, not because they happen to like olive skin or a firm body." - What if there is a WHOLE lot of her person? Is that just all the more of her to love? Or is it okay for me to pass on a godly woman because she's not attractive to me?

  2. FM: "Now instead of comparing her to other women, compare other women to her" - Okay, I did. And what if in doing that I still think, "Yep, when measured against the standard of my wife, that other girl is still more attractive"?

  3. PI: "Be God's woman, and God's man will appreciate all you have to offer" - So does that mean if I don't find my wife attractive and I don't appreciate the way she looks or has failed to take care of her body, that I am somehow not "God's man"?

  4. "A man should be attracted to the woman he is pursuing, but pride will often keep many a man from appreciating the beauty of the women already in his midst" - So if a godly woman asks me out and I don't find her attractive, does that mean I'm prideful and arrogant? Am I allowed to have standards, or is that sinning?

  5. B.O: "How can Christian marriages protect themselves from this shallow focus on the external?" - Does this mean I'm shallow and ungodly if I actually care what my girlfriend or wife looks like?

All of these authors wanted to make a point, but they're not willing to grapple with these questions. If they did, they'd have to find themselves back-pedaling and finally adding in the qualifiers that they refused to include.

All of these authors create false dichotomies, acting as if attraction is either internal or external. In reality, they function as a scale. While a woman might be an 8 at physical attraction, perhaps her inner beauty is only a 4. I would not personally date such a person. But if a woman were a 9 at inner beauty and only a 2 in physical beauty, I probably wouldn't date her either - AND THAT IS NOT SIN!

The TGC article actually said my exact thoughts on this issue, then dismissed it as sarcasm: "You can make a pretty girl spiritual, but you can't make a spiritual girl pretty." In the article, I get the impression that everyone laughs this away as a joke, but it's the truth. I can take a girl who is physically a 9 and disciple her from a spiritual 3 to a 10. I cannot take a spiritual 10 and improve her looks from a 3 to a 10. If she's truly a spiritual 10, I might be able to get her in great physical shape and lead her in the right clothes to wear, etc. to bump up a few points, but there's still always going to be a cap that just can't be crossed, including personal taste. I can't teach a girl to have a different natural chest size (implants don't do it for me) or to have a different ethnic presence about her that turns me on. So, why not give that youth pastor some credit?


CONCLUSION

Yes, the church absolutely teaches that men shouldn't care about what a woman looks like, and that internal beauty should somehow make her seem hot to him, regardless of what her external features may be. This is absolutely absurd. It sickens me just writing this post. I'm not even going to finish this conclusion. I'm so done with this.