A PHENOMENOLOGICAL INQUIRY INTO MESSAGES OF SEX AND THEIR IMPACTS ON NEWLYWED CHRISTIAN MEN by DANIEL DOERKSEN Bachelor of Arts in Psychology, Simon Fraser University, 2017, with Distinction Thesis submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of MASTER OF ARTS IN MARRIAGE AND FAMILY THERAPY in the ASSOCIATED CANADIAN THEOLOGICAL SCHOOLS (ACTS) TRINITY WESTERN UNIVERSITY December 2022 © Daniel Doerksen, 2022 ii ABSTRACT Religion, and Christianity in particular, holds considerable influence on experiences and perceptions of sexuality. However, there is little research on how this influence is experienced. While there has been some research on how Christian sexual messages influence women’s sexual experiences (Klement & Sagarin, 2017; Moon & Reger, 2014), there has been little research that explores men’s experience. Therefore, the primary research question of this study is: how do newlywed heterosexual Christian men experience religious messages about sex, and what are the impacts of these messages on their sexuality? This study uses a qualitative phenomenological approach to understand how participants experienced Christian sexual messages before and within marriage. Data analysis was conducted using Creswell’s (2013) adaptation of Moustakas’ (1994) phenomenological design. Participants indicated five overarching themes regarding messages of sex and how these messages influence them: (1) conflicting messages about sex; (2) the need for accountability; (3) premarital sexuality as a journey; (4) changing understandings of sex within marriage; and (5) changing the conversation. Therapeutic and pastoral implications of the findings are further discussed. Keywords: sexuality, marriage, religion, men, Christianity iii PREFACE This research project was approved by the Trinity Western University Human Research Ethics Board on January 19, 2022 (HREB File No. 21G17). iv ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS There were a number of people who deeply impacted and supported me during the long years of this thesis work, and I would like to acknowledge my gratitude to them. First, I am so grateful for my thesis supervisor, Dr. Danielle Vriend Fluit, who offered compassionate guidance throughout the process, and who journeyed with me in her first experience supervising a thesis project. I am grateful for Dr. Chuck MacKnee and Dr. Deepak Mathew, who both offered feedback and assistance in the research process. I am also thankful for the ACTS MFT Program Director, Dr. Estera Boldut, who persevered and advocated for the various resources needed to get this project off the ground, as well as encouraged me to keep going despite the many hurdles. Finally, I would like to thank Isabella Potter and Hannah Raine, who provided valuable insight and helped bolster the rigour of the results with their feedback. Beyond the academics, I could not have done this without my loving and supportive parents, my dear roommates, and the many friends I spoke with (and screamed to in frustration/exhaustion/excitement about the project) along the way. Of course, I am honoured to be able to share the stories and experiences of the five men who volunteered their time to be interviewed for this project. Thank you all for being vulnerable and trusting me in this process. v TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT ...................................................................................................................................ii PREFACE ......................................................................................................................................iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS............................................................................................................iv TABLE OF CONTENTS ...............................................................................................................v LIST OF TABLES ........................................................................................................................ix CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................1 Overview of the Thesis .......................................................................................................2 CHAPTER 2: REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE..........................................................................4 Messages and their Impact...................................................................................................4 Christianity and Sexuality....................................................................................................6 Christian Messages and Sexuality.......................................................................................8 History of Major Christian Messages......................................................................8 Purity Culture.........................................................................................................10 Alternative Christian Messages – Embodied Theology.........................................12 Sexual Guilt and Shame.....................................................................................................14 Distinguishing Guilt and Shame............................................................................14 Sexual Guilt...........................................................................................................15 Sexual Shame.........................................................................................................16 Sexual Sanctification ........................................................................................................18 Gaps in Research ...............................................................................................................20 CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY.................................................................................................22 Study Design......................................................................................................................23 vi Rationale................................................................................................................23 Philosophy of Phenomenology..............................................................................24 Design....................................................................................................................27 Participants.........................................................................................................................28 Inclusion/Exclusion Criteria and Screening...........................................................28 Recruitment............................................................................................................29 Participant Descriptions.........................................................................................29 Data Collection..................................................................................................................31 Interview Questions...............................................................................................32 Data Storage and Retention...................................................................................33 Data Analysis.....................................................................................................................33 Rigour and Quality.............................................................................................................36 Ethical Considerations.......................................................................................................38 Potential Risks and Benefits to Participants..........................................................38 Confidentiality.......................................................................................................39 CHAPTER 4: FINDINGS.............................................................................................................39 Chapter Overview..............................................................................................................39 Presentation of Essential Themes......................................................................................40 Theme 1: Conflicting Messages About Sex...........................................................41 Sex is Dangerous........................................................................................41 Sex isn’t Talked About..............................................................................44 Sex is God-Given.......................................................................................46 Sex is Permissible......................................................................................47 vii Sex is Shameful..........................................................................................48 Theme 2: The Need for Accountability.................................................................50 Accountability when Single.......................................................................51 Accountability when Dating......................................................................52 Theme 3: Premarital Sexuality as a Journey..........................................................53 Needing a Stronger “Why” .......................................................................54 Testing, Justification, and Taking Inventory.............................................56 Resources...................................................................................................59 Landing in the Same Place.........................................................................59 Greater Openness.......................................................................................61 Theme 4: Changing Understandings of Sex in Marriage.......................................62 The Safety of Marriage..............................................................................63 Masculinity................................................................................................64 Sex is About Us.........................................................................................65 Curiosity and Grace...................................................................................66 Overhauling Sexual Expectations..............................................................67 Theme 5: Changing the Conversation....................................................................69 Past – Openness, Honesty, and Compassion.............................................70 Future – Pre-emptive Conversations..........................................................72 Common Story...................................................................................................................73 CHAPTER 5: DISCUSSION.........................................................................................................78 Summary of Purpose and Results......................................................................................78 Relation to Existing Research............................................................................................79 viii Consistent Themes.................................................................................................79 Proscriptive Sexual Messages....................................................................80 Sexual Shame.............................................................................................81 Unique Themes......................................................................................................82 Working Through Sexual Shame Before Marriage...................................83 Sexual Sanctification.................................................................................84 Reflection on Past Experience and Looking to the Future........................85 Clinical and Pastoral Implications.....................................................................................86 Clinical Implications..............................................................................................86 Pastoral Implications..............................................................................................88 Strengths and Limitations..................................................................................................90 Strengths................................................................................................................90 Limitations.............................................................................................................91 Recommendations for Future Research.............................................................................93 Summary............................................................................................................................94 REFERENCES .............................................................................................................................96 APPENDIX A: CHARACTERISTICS OF THE RESEARCHER.............................................109 APPENDIX B: SCREENING SCRIPT.......................................................................................113 APPENDIX C: INFORMED CONSENT FORM.......................................................................115 APPENDIX D: ADVERTISEMENT..........................................................................................118 APPENDIX E: DEBRIEFING SCRIPT......................................................................................119 ix LIST OF TABLES Table 1. Participant Descriptions...................................................................................................31 Table 2. Themes and Subthemes...................................................................................................40 1 CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION Sex is an integral component in marriage, with sexual satisfaction strongly linked to marital satisfaction (Schoenfeld et al., 2017). While there are many factors that influence one’s perceptions and experiences of sex, religion often plays a role as a “gatekeeper of sexual attitudes and behaviours” (Murray et al., 2007, p. 222). Often, religion prescribes what is considered appropriate in regard to sex. Within much of Christianity, sex is condoned only in the context of heterosexual marriage, with all other forms of sex, such as premarital and extramarital sex, same-sex sex, masturbation, and the use of pornography, considered deviant. For some, Christian messages regarding sex take on a shaming and silencing tone, usually with the goal of demarcating the boundaries within which sex is permissible (Sellers, 2017). Silence around sexuality is common within Christian communities, and when there is silence surrounding a topic, it is often implicitly (or sometimes explicitly) communicated that it is shameful to bring it up (Sellers, 2017). Moreover, religious messages to men and women regarding sex frequently vary. Women are often considered the gatekeepers of sex, and men are often reduced to animals with untempered sexual drives (Moon & Reger, 2014). There tends to be greater leniency around male sexuality outside of marriage (Bordini & Sperb, 2013), as well as an assumption that men will have knowledge about sex and be more apt to initiate sex than women (Taylor & Mudge, 2021). More attention has been paid in the literature to the religious messages women receive about sex (Gregoire et al., 2021; Klement & Sagarin, 2017; Moon & Reger, 2014), with much less research exploring the experience of men. Clinicians have noted that religious messages around sexual shame and silence can be some of the most challenging issues to work with in couple therapy (Slowinski, 2001; Telfer, 2 2015). Furthermore, newlywed Christian couples may be particularly vulnerable to sexual issues if shame based religious messages promulgated during their premarital lives are strongly internalized (Sellers, 2017). That being said, there is evidence that some religious messages, such as the notion that sex within marriage is a sanctified act blessed by God, can have a positive impact on sexual satisfaction within marriage (Leondardt, Busby, Hanna-Walker, & Leavitt, 2020). Overview of the Thesis In light of the often-strict religious messages present in Christianity surrounding sex, the clinical evidence that these messages deeply affect individuals even into marriage, and the relative lack of research on how these messages affect men, this study seeks to explore how newlywed heterosexual Christian men experience religious messages about sex and the impact of these messages. The use of a phenomenological approach (Creswell, 2013) to study the experiences and meaning made by heterosexual Christian men will help bring a greater depth of understanding to the current literature. This study hopes that by illuminating the experiences of married Christian men, these explorations may positively impact the ability of therapists in their work with this population. It is important to note that this study will be focusing on men who identify as heterosexual, as religious messages regarding homosexuality and their impact are more researched (Rodriguez, 2009). Part of the foundation of this study is the importance of sexual satisfaction in marriage. Sexual satisfaction is strongly linked to marital satisfaction (Schoenfeld et al., 2017). Couples often report that “sex is an integral part of marital success” and describe sex as a “barometer of the health of their own marriage” (Elliott & Umberson, 2008, p. 396). Sexual satisfaction has also been linked to greater relationship stability in both dating and married couples (Edwards & 3 Booth, 1994; Sprecher, 2002). It is therefore integral for the well-being of marriages that couples have a positive experience of sexual intimacy. It has also been noted that newlywed couples come with certain expectations of marriage which, when not met, can decrease satisfaction (Baucom et al., 1996). In particular, sex can often be a domain where premarital expectations are unmet in marriage, especially if the couple had not been sexually active before marriage (Hall & Adams, 2011). Understanding what newlywed Christian men expect regarding sex, and how these expectations influence their experience of marital sex, is another important component of this study. The theoretical and clinical work of Karen McClintock (2001) and Tina Schermer Sellers (2017) on sexual shame within Christian communities are also foundational components of this study. Both argue that the predominant ways in which Christianity in the West has dealt with sexuality, particularly non-marital sexuality, has been through the use of shame and silence, as well as through the splitting off and denigration of the body. In their clinical experience, both have witnessed how shame and silence-based messages negatively influence sexuality within marriage. Yet, they note how Christian messages of love, divinity, and mutuality can positively influence couples’ sexual lives through “embracing their desires, seeing them as a gift, and even using them as worship” (Sellers, 2017, p. 65). The term sexual sanctification has been used to describe the view that sex is imbued with divine qualities (Hernandez et al., 2011), and may be an antidote to more shame-based views of sex (Sellers, 2017). Shame and sanctification may both be at play when newlyweds engage in sex. The first portion of this thesis includes a review of the literature and provides definitions for important terms used throughout the study. The foundational components of this study include research on how messages impact future attitudes and behaviours, the interplay of 4 Christianity and sexuality, Christian messages directed toward men regarding sex, sexual guilt and shame, and sexual sanctification. The gaps in the literature will be more thoroughly addressed at the end of Chapter 2. Chapter 3 will provide an explanation of the methods of this study, including the study design, participant information, interview outline, data analysis, ethical considerations, and rigour and quality considerations. Chapter 4 presents the findings of the study, elucidating common themes and structures in newlywed Christian men’s experience of religious sexual messages. Finally, Chapter 5 outlines how the findings align with previous research, implications for clinical and pastoral work, and proposes further research opportunities on this topic. CHAPTER 2: REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE Messages and their Impact One of the assumptions of this thesis is that sexual messages received from religious sources are likely to have some level of impact on a person’s sexuality both presently and in the future. Therefore, it is important to consider research that has explored the impact of different types of messages. One of the main ways messages of any kind impact future action is by evoking emotion: Frijda (2010) writes that emotions “are among the main direct causes of action” (p. 570). While emotions may directly cause action (e.g. fear causing someone to immediately run away), Baumeister and colleagues (2007) argue that emotions primarily impact action based on their influence on cognitive processes. A situation in which guilt arises best illustrates the influence of past emotions on future behaviour: A person performs a behavior that causes distress to a friend. The person therefore feels guilty afterwards. The guilt prompts the person to consider what he or she did wrong and how to avoid similar outcomes in the future. The next time a comparable situation arises, 5 there may be a brief twinge of guilty affect that helps the person choose a course of action that will not bring distress to friends (and more guilt to the self). (Baumeister et al., 2007, p. 172-173). Further, Gollwitzer (1999) argues that the choice of action in a given moment is impacted by previous if-then rules, and “emotion provides feedback about recent actions and, by implication, about the adequacy of the current if-then rules on which those actions were based” (Baumeister et al., 2007, p. 173). Therefore, previous emotional experiences are likely to impact current and future choices of action in similar situations. While it is commonly understood that many messages produce emotional reactions (e.g. messages about the health effects of cigarette use causing negative emotion [Durkin et al., 2018]), communications research has shown that messages may also stir up emotions unintentionally (Dillard & Nabi, 2006). For example, Bennett (1998) found that shame was evoked when messages were intended only to produce guilt in recipients, and Dillard and colleagues (1996) found that messages meant to only arouse fear also shifted other emotional states. Understanding which emotions are evoked by a particular message is important, as different emotions are associated with different cognitive appraisals (Scherer et al., 2011), which then impact what actions are likely to be taken (Baumeister et al., 2007). Additionally, Cialdini (2001) notes that people in authority (whether real authority or merely in appearance) convey greater persuasive influence. This is important to consider when discussing the effect of different messages on behaviours and attitudes, as messages received from those in authority are likely to have a greater impact on attitudes and behaviours. Cialdini and Goldstein (2004) point to the Milgram (1974) experiments, where subordinates gave electric shocks to others when instructed by their superiors, as one of the most profound examples of the 6 persuasive influence of authority. When thinking about the impact of Christian messages, it is necessary to consider the level of social authority religious figures and institutions exude. The influence of Christianity on sexuality is discussed further below. Christianity and Sexuality Sexuality has been defined as “attitudes and behaviors about sex that are shaped by cultural norms” (Hernandez et al., 2014, p. 425). One predominant cultural influence in most societies is religion, which can be defined as an organized means of finding significance in regard to the sacred (Pargament, 2007). While the importance of religion has been waning in Canada, it is still a significant aspect in many peoples’ lives (Cornelissen, 2021), and as such, exerts a strong influence on sexuality. In particular, Christianity holds that sexuality is properly expressed within the context of heterosexual marriage, and any form of sexuality apart from this is considered deviant (Hernandez et al., 2014). While there are more liberal streams of Christianity that view sex as ethically permissible in some contexts outside heterosexual marriage (Thornton & Camburn, 1989), many North American denominations hold that sex is reserved solely for heterosexual marriage. Early studies by Kinsey and colleagues (1948, 1953) illustrated that religious beliefs influence sexual attitudes and behaviours. Masters and Johnson (1970) found greater levels of sexual dysfunction, including erectile, orgasm, and genital pain disorders, in those with stricter Catholic, Protestant, and Jewish upbringings. More recent research has show there is a strong correlation between higher levels of religiosity and more conservative sexual attitudes, including lower endorsement of sexual permissiveness and sex for the sake of pleasure (Beckwith & Morrow, 2005). Higher religiosity has also been associated with more negative attitudes towards oral and anal sex (Davidson et al., 2004), and there has generally been an aversion towards 7 masturbation in Christianity (Sanford, 1994), particularly with the use of pornography (Volk et al., 2016). Research on religiosity and sexual satisfaction is mixed, especially in studies investigating a direct relationship between the two. There have been positive direct associations (Murray-Swank et al., 2005), negative direct associations (Leondardt, Busby, Hanna-Walker, & Leavitt, 2020), and no direct associations found (Ashdown et al., 2011). Given the complexity of religion and sexuality, Leonhardt, Busby, and Willoughby (2020) propose that, “the inconsistent link may be due to neglecting explanatory variables between religiosity and sexual satisfaction. Rather than having a direct link, religiosity may indirectly influence sexual satisfaction by informing sexual meaning or attitudes” (p. 213). Religiosity has been shown to be indirectly related to sexual satisfaction through sex guilt (Hackathorn et al., 2016), chastity values (Hardy & Willoughby, 2017), and sexual sanctification (Leondardt, Busby, Hanna-Walker, & Leavitt, 2020; Leonhardt, Busby & Willoughby, 2020). While religion plays an integral role in sexuality, there is little research addressing the interplay of religion and sex within heterosexual marriage (Hernandez et al., 2014). Much of the research on religion and sex has focussed on premarital or extramarital sex, but rarely has religion and sex been studied in a marital context (McFarland et al., 2011). Furthermore, in much of the research that includes married participants, they are analysed together with unmarried partnered participants (a notable exception being Hackathorn et al., [2016]). This may be problematic, given the moral distinction present between premarital and marital sex, and may unnecessarily distort the results. Along with the lack of research specifically on religiosity and marital sex, Woo and colleagues (2011) note that measures of religiosity are often based on dubious assumptions of what connotes religiosity (i.e. religious service attendance as a proxy for 8 religiosity). Religiosity encompasses many dimensions (Glock & Stark, 1965), but it is commonly reduced to only intrinsic (e.g. a personal faith in God) and extrinsic dimensions (e.g. church attendance rates) (Allport & Ross, 1967). Lack of continuity in how religiosity is defined is, therefore, a barrier to understanding the relationship between religiosity and sexuality. Furthermore, there is often no distinction between type of religion or denomination, despite evidence of varying sexual attitudes and messages (Hassell, 2008; Thornton & Camburn, 1989). This makes the relationship between religiosity and sexuality even more of a challenge to define and untangle. While formal research is lacking, there is clinical evidence from couple therapists that marital problems pertaining to sexuality and religion, particularly Christianity, tend to be some of the most challenging issues to work with, as religious beliefs around sexuality may be inflexibly held (Slowinski, 2001; Telfer, 2015). For those who hold a fixed view of religious teachings and see these teachings as absolutely authoritative, there can be little room in therapy for exploring alternatives (Slowinski, 2001). Christian Messages and Sexuality History of Major Christian Messages Christian tradition has historically been aligned with Platonic ideas of the separateness of the mind/soul/spirit and the body (Farley, 2006). The body has typically been viewed as a representation of the sinful nature humans carry in their earthly existence, and something that must be tamed by the mind and the spirit (Sellers, 2017). From this stance, sexual desire is seen as unsavory, with Saint Augustine viewing sexuality as a weakness requiring God’s grace to overcome (Wiesner-Hanks, 2001). Augustine, at times, insisted that desire for sex, even with one’s spouse, is considered concupiscence (Kelly, 1983). Influenced by Augustine, the Catholic 9 church developed a sexual ethic in the Penitentials, proscribing “adultery, fornication, oral and anal sex, masturbation, and even certain positions for sexual intercourse if they were thought to be departures from the procreative norm” (Farley, 2006, p. 41). In addition, historically there has been an emphasis on celibacy as superior to sexuality, and priority given to procreation over sexual pleasure, if sex for pleasure was permitted at all (Thornton & Camburn, 1989). By the time of the Reformation in the 16th century, the duality of mind and body was entrenched in Christianity, with Sellers (2017) noting that “theological pursuits of the mind were highly valued, while emotions, the body, desires, and experiences were seen as untrustworthy, irrelevant, primitive, and dangerous” (p. 34). A consequence of these messages has been a great amount of denigration promulgated from the pulpit regarding sexual desire and the body (Brown, 1988). While the procreative purpose of sex has been traditionally prioritized, many contemporary Christian denominations hold the view that sex is a sacred act between husband and wife, representing God’s love for his people (Gardner, 2002). This may lead couples to regard sex as a sanctified act within marriage that is imbued with divine qualities (Hernandez et al., 2011). From this view, many couples believe they are called to preserve themselves sexually for marriage or else spoil this sanctity (Moon & Reger, 2014). The prohibition of sex before marriage typically includes partnered sex of any kind (e.g. oral, vaginal, anal), masturbation and pornography use, and even fantasizing about sex (Sanford, 1994). All of these acts are understood to diminish the sacredness of marital sex (Edger, 2012). These perspectives are commonly associated with the 20th century phenomena know as “purity culture”. 10 Purity Culture With the prominence of the sexual revolution in many Western nations in the 1960s came the rise of the sexual purity movement (Edger, 2012), particularly in conservative Christianity. For the purpose of this study, conservative Christianity is defined by Sellers (2017) as those that take “a literal view of the Bible…and typically [view] an as-is, plain-sense reading of the biblical text as the rule of life and practice” (p. xxiii). The core of purity culture consists of the following themes: waiting until marriage is God’s original design for sex; your body is God’s temple, so don’t desecrate it with sexual sin; lust is a ceaseless battle; men are pursuers and women are passive; pursuing purity is not just about virginity but about righteousness and holiness too; and true heterosexual love is like Christ’s love for his feminised church (Stanley, 2020, p. 116). Edger (2012) notes that within purity culture, lust is the ultimate enemy, and the goal is to defend and preserve virginity until the time of holy matrimony. Lust is often portrayed as insidious, and Stanley (2020) notes that a common biblical reference quoted in support of this notion is Matthew 5:27-28 where Jesus states, “You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall not commit adultery.’ But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart” (NIV). Therefore, sexual purity includes “refraining from any expression of sexual desire: no masturbation, longing, touching, fantasizing, and so on” (Sellers, 2017, p. 10, emphasis in original). The gendered phrasing of this passage also implies this to be a primarily male issue, and that lust is a “helplessness that men are goaded into” (Stanley, 2020, p. 122). 11 Books on dating written by conservative Christian authors have been a major source of messages related to purity culture, with well known examples being I Kissed Dating Goodbye (2003) by Joshua Harris and Every Young Man’s Battle (2009) by Stephen Arterburn, Fred Stoeker, and Mike Yorkey. While attention in the literature has primarily been paid to messages directed at women in Christian books on sexuality (Gregoire et al., 2021; Klement & Sagarin, 2017; Moon & Reger, 2014), there has been some attention directed towards to men. Moon and Reger (2014) found that animalization, the “tendency to view a person as uncivilized, or as having the properties and characteristics of animals” (p. 58), of both men and women was present in many popular Christian dating books. These researchers note that men “are treated as animals that cannot control themselves” (p. 69), needing protection from falling prematurely into female sexuality. They also note that while there are calls for men to be respectful towards women, men are paradoxically portrayed as exhibiting poor impulse control. Furthermore, messages around sex extend into marriage, with many books extoling women to have sex with her husband and vilifying her if she chooses not to (Gregoire, 2021). The message that women who withhold sex are “selfish lovers” (Driscoll & Driscoll, 2012, p. 156) implies to men that sex can be expected, and even demanded, within marriage (Klement & Sagarin, 2017). For both men and women, a central theme in Christian dating books is the maintenance of purity, both physically (i.e. not engaging in sex outside of marriage) and emotionally (i.e. not becoming emotionally intimate with someone outside of marriage) (Klement & Sagarin, 2017). However, the threshold of what is considered impure is often very low, and includes even subtle experiences of sexual attraction, “regardless of whether [the person] consciously notices it” (Sellers, 2017, p. 11). A corresponding message is that if one is not pure, there is a loss of personal value, which carries the implication that sexuality is finite (Klement & Sagarin, 2017). 12 Moon and Reger (2014) highlight a story from I Kissed Dating Goodbye (2003) that describes how all of a man’s ex-partners are present at the alter when he marries his wife. The researchers note this story serves as a warning against becoming too emotionally or physically involved with someone in case the relationship does not end in marriage. Another message in many conservative Christian circles is that, “sex is for marriage, and that’s all you need to know” (Sellers, 2017, p. 7), particularly in conversations with children and adolescents. It has been noted that the absence of conversations and education around sex often leaves those who seek information feeling embarrassed and ashamed (Sellers, 2017). McClintock’s (2001) work on sexual shame highlights how silence around sex sends the message that it is separate from spirituality and religion. Sexual shame is addressed in further sections of this literature review. Alternative Christian Messages – Embodied Theology Despite the sexually strict messages associated historically with Augustine, as well as those more recently found within purity culture, there are other Christian messages that frame sexuality in a more positive light. Farley (2006) notes that around the time of the Protestant Reformation, there were shifts in how sexual desire was perceived. She mentions how Martin Luther regarded sexual desire as a naturally occurring phenomenon needing no justification. As well, John Calvin “expanded the notion of marriage as the context for human flourishing by maintaining that the greatest good of marriage and sex is the mutual society that is formed between husband and wife” (Farley, 2006, p. 48). In Catholicism, the 1965 Second Vatican Council taught “the love essential to marriage is uniquely expressed and perfected in the act of sexual intercourse” (Farley, 2006, p. 48). The implications of these messages by revered 13 theologians and institutions are that sexual desire is good, and there is much potential for love and satisfaction through sex within marriage (Farley, 2006). Embodied theology does not hold that there is a distinction between the goodness of mind/soul/spirit and the wickedness of the body. An embodied theology seeks to unify the sexual aspects of humanity with the sacred, and “take[s] our body experiences seriously as occasions for revelation” (Nelson, 1992, p. 9). Murray-Swank and colleagues (2005) note that the Song of Songs, an erotic tale of sexual love between a bride and groom, is found within Judeo-Christian tradition. While this book has at times been interpreted allegorically or in a manner that separates the spiritual and the sexual, it is also seen as being able to help “envision a sexuality that is holy and a spirituality that courses through the whole person – that is, the whole embodied person” (Carr, 1998, p. 432). Contemporary Christian books such as God, Sex, and the Conservative Church by Sellers (2017) and The Great Sex Rescue by Gregoire and colleagues (2021) both aim to provide modern Christians with a more optimistic, embodied, and sacred view of sexuality. Sex therapist and professor Tina Schermer Sellers (2017) notes that one of the goals of her book is to “help Christian clients to believe that not only is their sexual desire good but also it’s actually an intended gift from the living God” (p. 61). Some Christian denominations are also explicit in affirming the positive nature of sexuality as a gift from God (e.g. The United Church of Canada, 2021; The Anglican Communion Office, 1998). Therefore, there are not only messages regarding the dangers of sexuality espoused in Christianity, but also messages of goodness and divine purpose. 14 Sexual Guilt and Shame Distinguishing Guilt and Shame Shame can be defined as a sense of personal unworthiness, typically taking on a more global quality within a person (Murray et al., 2007). While commonly conflated with shame, guilt is an experience of feeling bad about a specific behaviour (Murray et al., 2007). McClintock (2001) argues that the distinction is important. Guilt is considered to be largely adaptive, in that it makes people aware of when they have behaved in ways that violate their values. In contrast, shame is rarely adaptive, for “with shame, actions are not the whole story. Our very beings are at fault” (McClintock, 2001, p. 28). The action tendencies, or typical behavioural responses, of guilt and shame are also different. Guilt moves one towards interpersonal relationships in an act of repair, whereas shame causes one to withdraw and hide from others (Tangney & Dearing, 2002). There have been shown to be cross-cultural similarities in what types of behaviours are likely to induce guilt verses shame (Johnson, 1987). However, there are differences in which emotions are more prominent between cultures. In their research on Japanese, Korean, and American children, Furukawa and colleagues (2012) found the highest levels of guilt and shame were experienced by Korean and Japanese children, respectively. Further, there are cross-cultural differences in which situations are more likely to induce shame. Boiger and colleagues (2018) found that, for Americans, situations where others exposed personal flaws were more likely to cause shame, whereas for Japanese people, public situations which made them look bad were more shame inducing. Cultural differences are important to note when studying guilt and shame, as it cannot be assumed that antecedent events will produce similar intensity or type of emotion. 15 Finally, it is important to distinguish between and define shame and guilt in the context of sexuality. Sexual guilt is defined as a “generalized expectancy for self-mediated punishment for violating or anticipating violating standards for proper sexual conduct” (Mosher & Cross, 1971, p. 71), and sexual shame is defined as “the intensely painful feeling or experience of believing we are flawed and therefore unworthy of acceptance and belonging due to our current or past sexual thoughts, experiences, or behaviors” (Kyle, 2013, p. 13). Sexual Guilt Murray and colleagues (2007) note that sex guilt is more researched than sexual shame. Sex guilt has been shown to be negatively associated with sexual satisfaction (Leonhardt, Busby & Willoughby, 2020), as well as sexual desire (Brotto et al, 2011; Woo et al., 2012), with women experiencing more sex guilt overall than men (Emmers-Sommer et al., 2018). Research by Hackathorn and colleagues (2016) found a positive correlation between internalized religiosity and sex guilt for both married and unmarried individuals. However, they found that sex guilt only mediated the relationship between internalized religiosity and sexual satisfaction in unmarried individuals. Others have found no correlation between religiosity and sex guilt (Leonhardt, Busby & Willoughby, 2020), but did not test if there was a difference between married and unmarried individuals. Additionally, individuals who feel a sense of alienation from God have reported higher feelings of sexual guilt, over and above trait level guilt (Murray et al., 2007). There are also cultural differences in how sexual guilt is experienced. Woo and colleagues (2012) found that East Asian women experienced more sexual guilt compared to Euro-Canadian women, and Brotto and colleagues (2011) reported similar findings when comparing East Asian men to Euro-Canadian men. In the latter study, the level of acculturation 16 of East Asian men was inversely related to sex guilt, such that “increasing mainstream acculturation was associated with less sex guilt” (Brotto et al., 2011, p. 594). There are differences in sexual guilt between groups of European decent in Canada, such that FrancoQuebecois tend to experience less sexual guilt than Anglo-Canadians (Gravel et al., 2011). Sexual Shame Research on sexual shame is more scant, with a recent study noting it is has often been neglected in relation to religiosity (Marcinechová & Záhorcová, 2020). These researchers found that both intrinsic religiosity and a sense of alienation from God were significantly related to sexual shame. Specifically, sexual shame has been linked to religiosity in pornography users, with moral disapproval of pornography use mediating the relationship between religiosity and sexual shame (Carboneau, 2018; Volk et al., 2016). Volk and colleagues (2016) note that “sexual shame generates a high level of selfconsciousness. While perceiving and ruminating on the fear that deficiencies in the sexual self will be exposed, a hiding process is activated to prevent others from knowing the true self.” (p. 247). In her pioneering work Sexual Shame: An Urgent Call to Healing, Karen McClintock (2001) observes that sexual shame may be experienced at varying levels beyond the individual, such as within families or whole cultures. At the cultural level, particularly within certain religious cultures, she asserts that shame is embedded and used to “keep people in line, to protect the traditions of the culture, and to keep religious laws sacred” (p. 27). She discusses how sexual shame is often the most challenging form of shame to deal with, and argues that: If you are ashamed of your gender, your sexual activity, your sexual abuse of someone, or sexual abuse of which you were the victim, or if you were ashamed of your sexual attractions, partner choices, and activities, huge areas of the self are overwhelmed … If 17 you feel ashamed of yourself every time a thought on sex comes up, it will cloud your entire way of being in the world (p. 28). Coinciding with these remarks, Sellers (2017) underscores that the message that sexual thoughts are sinful often leads to feelings of sexual shame. Even those experiences that are beyond conscious control are viewed as indicative of “our battle with darkness” (Powlison, 2005 as cited in Sellers, 2017, p. 11). Unrealistic expectations that one can completely control their sexual drive can lead to shame and discouragement, since it is impossible to fight the naturalness of sexual drives. As Sellers (2017) concludes, “schools of thought that fail to differentiate between feelings (which naturally occur outside of our control) and thoughts and actions (which we can control) are a great way to lead from biology straight into shame” (p. 11, emphasis in original). Sellers (2017) also observes that these feelings of shame frequently do not relent in marriage, manifesting in sexual dysfunction and low sexual desire. She makes the point that if one is always guarded against the slightest suggestion of sexuality in premarital years, even if it is beyond conscious control, it is incredibly difficult to allow sexuality to flow once married. Slowinski (2001) remarks that “if a person feels that sexual desire and arousal equals sin, or at least the consent to the experience is something forbidden, then desire and arousal can become natural experiences which can lead to anticipatory anxiety rather than pleasure (p. 277). One therapist participant in a study by Telfer (2015) shared this sentiment, “if they [religious clients in therapy] grow up believing that sex is wrong, that it’s dirty, then why would you want to do that frequently, why would they want to engage in that?” (p. 79-80). The strongly held belief during premarital years that sex is sinful may lead to sexual repression and an inability to experience sexual pleasure (Slowinski, 2001). Though feelings of religious sexual shame may 18 predominate in the time before one is married, marriage is not a guarantee that sexual shame will abate. Finally, sexual shame may be present in the ways in which certain people are allowed to participate in the church community. In some communities, cohabitating or divorced church members are barred from taking communion (Deguara, 2019). The prohibition in partaking in communion means these members are forced to remain in their seats while others receive the eucharist, thus adding a public, communal element to their shame (Deguara, 2019). Coinciding with some messages from within purity culture, the implication is that sexual sins are irredeemable and permanent. When there is no hope for redemption from sexual digression, shame is almost inevitable. Sexual Sanctification Sanctification is defined as the perception that an aspect of life is imbued with divine qualities or characteristics (Pargament & Mahoney, 2009). Hernandez et al. (2011) note that there are both theistic and atheistic components to sanctification. The former involves the belief that God or a Higher Power is at work in some aspect of life. The latter, entitled “Sacred Qualities, is nontheistic and refers to attributing transcendence, ultimate value, and purpose to an aspect of life” (p. 775). As mentioned previously, embodied theology sits in contrast to a dualistic view of the body as separate and subordinate to the mind/soul/spirit, and seeks to integrate “human sexuality, in spite of all its ambiguities…with our experience of the sacred and with the vision of God’s shalom” (Nelson, 1992, p. 16). Murray-Swank and colleagues (2005) note that sexual sanctification is an expression of embodied theology. Sexuality is viewed as a process of cocreation with God in some religious circles (Hernandez et al., 2014), and some Tantric 19 practices teach techniques which integrate spirituality and sexuality (Sokol, 1986). Furthermore, sexuality may be understood as having sacred qualities in and of itself (Murray-Swank et al., 2005). Therefore, sexuality may be seen as a sanctified act in both a theistic sense (i.e. through sex one is connected to God) and an atheistic sense (i.e. sex is sacred in its own right). In an embodied Christian theology, sex is viewed as both an act connecting one to God and as a sanctified act in and of itself. There are a number of benefits associated with viewing sexuality as sanctified. Sexual sanctification has been shown to have a direct positive association with sexual satisfaction (Hernandez et al., 2011; Leonhardt, Busby & Willoughby, 2020). In a study by Leonhardt, Busby, Hanna-Walker, and Leavitt (2020), sexual sanctification was shown to mediate the relationship between religiosity and sexual satisfaction for both men and women, such that increased religiosity was positively associated with sexual sanctification which, in turn, was positively associated with sexual satisfaction. This finding is especially intriguing considering the direct relationship between religiosity and sexual satisfaction was found to be negative. Higher levels of sanctification of sexuality have also been shown to be positively associated with sexual intimacy, marital satisfaction, and spiritual intimacy in newlywed couples (Hernandez et al., 2011). Sexual sanctification is related to higher sexual satisfaction in unmarried couples as well (Murray-Swank et al., 2005). An interesting aspect in this study is that there was no relationship found between religiosity and sexual sanctification, meaning that one need not be religious to view sexuality as sacred. While the research shows a positive association between sexual sanctification and sexual satisfaction, it may be that when sexuality, particularly marital sexuality, is held in such sanctified regard by Christians, this creates an environment where strict purity culture messages 20 and subsequent shame can emerge. For example, if marital sexuality is sacred, it may be thought, then, that any form of sexuality outside of marriage defiles the sacredness of the eventual marriage bed. When noting some of the stricter messages from within purity culture (e.g. merely a thought about sex that emerges without conscious choice is considered lust), it is not hard to see how this could lead to shame if one sees even these small aspects as defiling their future marriage. Yet, as noted by Hackathorn and colleagues (2016), viewing the marriage bed as sacred may buffer against feelings of guilt for premarital sexuality once one is married. Therefore, there are a number of complexities when considering the impact of sexual sanctification on marital sexuality. Gaps in Research Religion and sexuality are inarguably complex aspects of human experience. Unfortunately, there is limited research on how religion, and in particular Christianity, influences marital sexuality (Hernandez et al., 2014). Research that explores the relationship between religiosity and marital sexuality has often conflated the data with that of unmarried individuals (Leondardt, Busby, Hanna-Walker, & Leavitt, 2020; Leonhardt, Busby & Willoughby, 2020). Given that in many religions sex is only condoned in the context of heterosexual marriage, the conflation of data from married and unmarried individuals likely dilutes important distinctions. Moreover, as previously mentioned, the relationship between religion and sexuality is likely mediated by many different factors (Leonhardt, Busby & Willoughby, 2020). The quantitative nature of most, if not all, research on religion and marital sexuality unfortunately restricts researchers in their search for mediating factors, making it impossible to test all potential variables. This limitation of quantitative research highlights the need for in-depth, qualitative research in order to investigate more fully how religion and marital sexuality may 21 relate. A qualitative, phenomenological study allows for the lived experience of participants, along with the meaning they make from their experiences, to be illuminated through participants’ responses (Creswell, 2013). Additionally, there is a dearth of research on the link between religious messages about sex, especially Christian messages, and their impact on marital sexuality. While there is clinical evidence that many of the restrictive and shaming messages within purity culture impact married couples (Sellers, 2017; Slowinski, 2001; Telfer, 2015), these are mostly from the perspective of couple therapists, rather than couples themselves. Furthermore, the experiences of married couples have been reported primarily through anecdotes (Sellers, 2017), rather than as formal research. As with religion and sexuality in general, the relationship between religious messages about sex and marital sexuality is likely complex. The previous literature review has pointed to two likely possibilities, among many others, that could arise from various Christian sexual messages: sexual shame (e.g. “I am bad because of my sexuality”) and sexual sanctification (e.g. “Sex is sacred and beautiful because God created it to be so”). There is a need to understand the many potential ways in which Christian sexual messages influence how marital sexuality is experienced. The final gap noted addresses gendered messages. Religious messages toward sex have been explored primarily with the aim of illuminating how they speak to and impact women (Gregoire et al., 2021; Klement & Sagarin, 2017; Moon & Reger, 2014). This is understandable, given the androcentric nature of much of the research on sex (Klein et al., 2021) as well as the experiences of sexism and patriarchy within Christianity (Jost et al., 2014). However, it could be argued that, while a course correction in research is certainly necessary, there has been an 22 overcorrection to the detriment of understanding of men’s experiences. There is still a need to look particularly at the ways in which men experience religious messages about sex and to understand more fully how they relate these messages to their experience of sex. Given that religious sexual messages can differ between those directed towards men and women (Moon & Reger, 2014), attention is warranted in understanding men’s experience. With the strong link between sexual and marital satisfaction (Schoenfeld et al., 2017), it is critical to understand men’s experiences for their own sake and for the sake of the couple. CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY This study aims to address gaps in the literature on the connection between religion and marital sexuality by asking the question: how do newlywed Christian men experience religious sexual messages, and what are the impacts of these messages on newlywed sexuality? This is an important question to ask because sexual satisfaction is strongly linked to marital satisfaction (Schoenfeld et al., 2017), and sexual satisfaction is often viewed a gauge of the health of a marriage (Elliott & Umberson, 2008). As 47% of Canadian men report religion as a somewhat or very important aspect of their lives (Cornelissen, 2021), it is imperative to better understand how religious messages affect this large segment of the population. Further, this study aims to address the gendered gap In the literature by investigating the experiences of Christian men. This study addresses the lack of research through the use of qualitative phenomenological methods to provide a rich description of part of the complex relationship between religion and sexuality, namely, how newlywed heterosexual Christian men experience religious messages about sex. A further goal of the study is to better understand the impact of these messages with the hope of better informing counselling clinicians and clergy as they support these men individually and in their marriages. 23 Study Design Rationale To begin, qualitative inquiry is best used for the study of human experience and meaning (Guba & Lincoln, 1994). Creswell (2013) notes that qualitative studies are useful when an issue of study is complex and multifaceted, requiring detailed description in order to bring about greater understanding, and when an issue is hidden. Because of the hidden, private, and intimate nature of sexuality, as well as the internal nature of meaning making, qualitative inquiry is best suited to uncover the breadth and depth of participants’ experiences in this domain. Phenomenology, in particular, is interested in the “life world” (Wertz et al., 2011, p. 125) of participants, and of understanding the “what” and “how” of participants’ lived experience of a phenomenon (Moustakas, 1994). Phenomenology is used to understand the irreducible qualities of a phenomenon based on the experience of many participants, as opposed to a case study which is interested in an in-depth understanding of one idiosyncratic experience (Creswell, 2013). Phenomenology is “committed to descriptions of experiences, not explanations or analyses” (Moustakas, 1994, p. 58). There is currently no formal research on the lived experience of Christian newlywed men regarding what religious messages they have received about sex and how that has impacted their marital sexual experience. Because sexuality is a nearly ubiquitous human experience, and because Christianity, in general, holds strong positions regarding sexuality (Hernandez et al., 2014), a phenomenological approach was used to uncover the common, essential, and possibly unique qualities of how Christian newlywed men experience religious sexual messages in their sex lives. 24 Philosophy of Phenomenology Philosophical assumptions of any methodology are important to consider, as they shape what is researched, how the research is formulated, and the kinds of outcomes that can be expected (Huff, 2009). Philosophical assumptions are particularly important in phenomenology, as it is based on the work of philosopher Edmund Husserl (Creswell, 2013). There are some philosophical differences between major schools of phenomenology (Creswell, 2013), and therefore this study will focus on those presented by Moustakas (1994). The first assumption regards the interplay of subject and object. Moustakas (1994) relies heavily on Descartes’ (1977) assertion that whatever exists in the world objectively is only ever able to be apprehended in subjective consciousness. Therefore, “the objective is the manifest presence of what appears and can be recognized only subjectively by the person who is perceiving it” (Moustakas, 1994, p. 47). There is not a total denial of the objective world or of its importance, for “a unity must exist between ourselves as knowers and the things or objects that we come to know and depend upon” (Moustakas, 1994, p. 44). Therefore, phenomenology aligns more closely with a constructivist understanding of ontology and epistemology, but with elements of positivism (Creswell, 2013). An objective world does exist (a positivist assumption), but we can only ever know for certain what is experienced in consciousness, rather than the object itself (a constructivist assumption) (Moustakas, 1994). Because there is an objective world, but one that is only ever experienced subjectively, phenomenology seeks to uncover the essential qualities that are experienced by those who have encountered the phenomenon in question (Creswell, 2013). Wertz and colleagues (2011) explain, “if it is impossible to imagine an example of the kind without a particular characteristic, that characteristic is essential” (p. 127). Verifiable, objective reality is not of interest to phenomenology (Creswell, 2013); what is 25 of interest are the essential meanings made from the shared subjective experience of an objective reality (Moustakas, 1994). Furthermore, when the subjective is privileged, there are further assumptions regarding the nature of consciousness to consider. First, anything that appears in consciousness is considered a phenomenon and appropriate for study (Moustakas, 1994). Second, consciousness is intentional and relational (Wertz et al., 2011). It is intentional in that consciousness is always focused on something, and it is relational “in that by perceiving, behaving, imagining, anticipating, and so on, the person—as center of passivities, activities, possibilities, and habitualities—relates to the world” (Wertz et al., 2011, p. 126). Third, phenomenology privileges consciousness as “dependable and verifiable…we can always be certain of its veracity because both the presentation and the real object exists within our consciousness” (Moustakas, 1994, p. 50). While consciousness is inherently subjective, it is still related to an objective reality (Moustakas, 1994). Because consciousness is experienced as real, it is considered real, and therefore, phenomenology holds that subjective conscious experiences is the only way to apprehend and study the objective world (Moustakas, 1994). Conscious experience, then, directly relates to the primary questions of “what” is experienced and “how” it is experienced in phenomenology (Creswell, 2013). With consciousness as the realm of inquiry, perception is the “primary source of knowledge, the source that cannot be doubted” (Moustakas, 1994, p. 52). When perceiving a phenomenon, one views it from a particular angle, or “horizon” (Moustakas, 1994). By viewing a phenomenon from multiple horizons (called “horizonalization of perceptions” [Moustakas, 1994, p. 53]), one comes to a more complete understanding of the phenomenon. Importantly, in phenomenology all horizons are considered to be of equal value in uncovering a new 26 understanding and meaning of the phenomenon, and there are limitless horizons (Moustakas, 1994). In perception, there is both the thing/phenomenon that is perceived, recalled, or judged (the noema) and the act of perception, recollection, and judgement (the noesis) (Moustakas, 1994). The noema is the “what”; the noesis is the “how”. The concepts of noema and noesis are related to two fundamental components of phenomenological inquiry: texture and structure, respectively. The former is the description of what is experienced (e.g. sights, sounds, emotions, bodily sensations, words), with all aspects given equal weight (Moustakas, 1994). The latter is the process of how the phenomenon is experienced; it is “the order embedded in everyday experience which can be grasped only through reflection” (Keen, 1975, as cited in Moustakas, 1994, p. 79). Both texture and structure are inherently connected, for “it is not possible to describe texture without implicit notions of structure” (Keen, 1975, as cited in Moustakas, 1994, p. 79). It is important for qualitative researchers to be aware of their own ontological and epistemological views in order to ensure the research methodology aligns with the researcher’s positions (Creswell, 2013). My own ontological and epistemological views align well with those which undergird Moustakas’ (1994) phenomenology. Most importantly, I hold that, while there is an objective reality, it can only be known through our perception, therefore rendering individual perception the most meaningful way to know and explore the human experience. It is a person’s perception of the phenomenon which dictates the impact of the phenomenon, and therefore why it is best to prioritize perception as the means of knowing. While there are other means to access subjective experience (e.g. self-report rating scales), the use of language and narration to convey experience and construct meaning provides much greater nuance and depth. 27 Again, objective reality is not the focus of phenomenology; rather, the meaning and impact the phenomenon has on the life world of the individual is of paramount importance. To conclude, phenomenology as a research methodology posits that subjectivity is the only means available to know an object, and therefore, it seeks to uncover the subjective conscious experiences of those who have encountered a phenomenon. Perception in consciousness is held to be real, and as such, it is privileged above all other means of inquiry. There are limitless potential horizons of a phenomenon, and it is through the thorough exploration of these horizons that a more complete understanding is achieved. This understanding is comprised of both textural and structural elements; the “what” of the phenomenon and the “how” of its experience. Once the textual and structural elements have been examined, the essential qualities of a phenomenon can be derived. Thorough description of the essences of a phenomenon is the ultimate goal of phenomenology. Design While there are some methodological differences in how phenomenological research can be conducted, Finlay (2009) notes that according to Giorgi (1989), there are four main components to all phenomenological research: The research is rigorously descriptive, uses the phenomenological reductions, explores the intentional relationship between persons and situations, and discloses the essences, or structures, of meaning immanent in human experiences through the use of imaginative variation (p. 7, emphasis in original). This study utilized Creswell’s (2013) adaptation of the modified Stevick-Colaizzi-Keen phenomenological approach as found in Moustakas (1994). The first step was to obtain a full description of the researcher’s experience of the phenomenon of inquiry. This was done in order 28 to become aware of any preconceptions and predilections that the researcher brought into the study (Moustakas, 1994, see Appendix A for Characteristics of the Researcher). In this step, the process of epoche is introduced, where one purposefully sets aside preconceptions so that “everything is perceived freshly, as if for the first time” (Moustakas, 1994, p. 34), from a “vantage point of a pure or transcendental ego” (Moustakas, 1994, p. 33). The epoche is a space and process that is cultivated throughout the study, and “an interruption of the taken-for-granted flow of experience and a call to reflect on the lived experience of [the participant’s] reality” (Daly, 2007, p. 98). The epoche is an important aspect of a valid phenomenological study, in that researcher reflexivity is key in assessing the quality of the research (Creswell, 2013). Without the purposeful effort to maintain the epoche, the research may be unduly tainted with unacknowledged bias from the researcher. Along with writing out the researcher’s personal experience with religious messages about sex, the researcher also kept a reflexive journal of his experience throughout the study in order to maintain this bracketed space. Data was collected from semi-structured interviews with five participants. The main questions explored religious beliefs and perspectives about sexuality before marriage, after marriage, as well as what participants would have liked to know before getting married (see below for the interview script). The interviews were approximately 45 minutes to one hour in length and were conducted online via Zoom. The online interviews were recorded in order to produce verbatim transcripts. Participants Inclusion/Exclusion Criteria and Screening Inclusion criteria for this study included being male, identifying as heterosexual, currently identifying as Christian, and being married for two years or less. Participants who were 29 interested were screened by the principal investigator over Zoom to ensure they met the inclusion criteria for the study (see Appendix B). In current research on newlyweds, there is a range of time cut-offs used to demarcate who is defined as a newlywed (e.g. nine months [Lorenzo et al., 2018], two and a half years [Williamson, 2020], and four years [Ariela & Ariela, 2020]). Therefore, two years was chosen to be somewhere close to the midpoint of these different cutoffs. The screening interview also provided an opportunity for prospective participants to ask questions about the study and to build rapport before the main interview. Further, the principal investigator went through the informed consent form during the screening interview (see Appendix C). There were no exclusion criteria based on age, race/ethnicity, or socioeconomic status. Due to the researcher’s inability to speak other languages, those who were not able to fluently speak English were excluded from the study. Recruitment Recruitment was performed through poster advertisements (see Appendix D) at two Evangelical universities in British Columbia, via social media, through a local church in the researcher’s area, and through word of mouth. Recruitment was difficult, with only six participants expressing interest and only five willing to be interviewed. Participant Descriptions As mentioned, five men participated in the study, and the general demographic information can be seen in Table 1. All currently identified as Christian, although not all were part of a faith community at the time of the interview. All were in their first marriages for less than two years. Pseudonyms are used to protect participant confidentiality. 30 Derrick was 25 years old and had been together with his wife for two years and nine months and married for one year and three months of that time. He grew up in Baptist and other nondenominational Protestant churches, but currently identified as “a deconstructed Christian.” He came into the interview with a lot of enthusiasm to discuss his experience, especially in light of his deconstruction process. Martin was 23 years old and had been married for a year and a half. He started dating his wife two years prior to getting married. He grew up in a Mennonite Brethren church and still was a member of the denomination, although he mentioned having experiences in other denominations as well. He described having a period of a few years after high school where he was not involved in Christianity, but came back to his faith about two years ago. Martin spoke carefully during the interview and seemed somewhat guarded about his experience. Craig was the youngest participant at 21 years old. He was also the newest to marriage, having only married his wife seven months prior to the interview. They had been together for just under two years total. He was currently a member of an Alliance church, and had grown up in more charismatic churches before returning to something “a bit more center of the road.” There was an eagerness to Craig, especially as he was a leader in his church working with people in a similar stage of premarital and newlywed life. He wanted to use his own premarital and newlywed experience to inform how he mentored people in his church community. Gabriel was the oldest of the group at 37 years old. He and his wife had been married for just over a year and had been together for just over two. He currently attended an Anabaptist church in Ontario. His religious history was unique compared to other participants as he grew up going to Catholic school, but “wasn’t really involved in the faith.” He “came into faith” four years ago. Gabriel spoke with warmth, but also a matter-of-factness about his experience. 31 Kevin was 30 years old and had been together with his wife the longest of the participants. While only married for nine months, they had been dating for just under four years. He was raised in an Evangelical church and still considered himself Evangelical Christian, but had not attended a church regularly in over a year. He described desiring authenticity within discussions of sexuality, and he seemed to be leading by example in the way he candidly spoke during the interview. Table 1 Participant Descriptions Name Age Faith Background Derrick 25 Baptist/Nondenominational Current Religious Affiliation “Deconstructed Christian” Length of Relationship 2 years, 9 months Length of Marriage 1 year, 3 months Martin 23 Mennonite Brethren Mennonite Brethren 3 years, 6 months 1 year, 6 months Craig 21 “Charismatic” Alliance 1 year, 11 months 7 months Gabriel 37 Catholic Anabaptist 2 years 1 year, 1 month Kevin 30 Evangelical Evangelical 3 years, 10 months 9 months Data Collection Data was obtained from one individual, in-depth interview lasting approximately 45-60 minutes. The interviews were semi-structured, with the use of open-ended questions to guide the interview while also providing latitude to ask tailored follow-up questions. The use of in-depth interviews allowed the researcher to “build upon and explore [the] participants’ responses to [their] questions” (Seidman, 2006, p. 15). The interviews were audio and video recorded and verbatim transcripts were produced by the researcher. These were the primary source of data, along with the researcher’s interview notes. The interviews were conducted via Zoom. 32 Informed consent was provided by all participants during the screening interview. All participants signed the informed consent form before the main interview and were reminded prior to commencing the interview about confidentiality, their ability to share as much or as little as they choose, and their ability to withdraw from the study at any point without consequence. After completion of the main interview, all participants were given the opportunity to debrief their experience with the principal investigator (see Appendix E). Participants were reminded of the counselling referrals included in the informed consent form and encouraged to contact the principal investigator if they needed to further debrief their experience in the interview. None of the participants reported distress at the end of the interview, and none followed up with the principal investigator. Interview Questions Demographics: a. How old are you? b. How long have you two known each other? Been dating? Married? c. What religious denomination are you currently a part of (if any)? d. What religious denomination were you a part of growing up (if any)? e. How involved are you currently in your religious/spiritual life (e.g. church attendance, personal religious practices)? 2. What religious messages have you received about sex? a. From where/whom (e.g. family, church, youth group, school)? b. In what way were these messages conveyed (e.g. tone, context, medium)? c. What specific resources (e.g. books, films, programs) were used to teach about sex? 33 d. What could be talked about and what was off limits? 3. How did you understand these religious messages about sex before you were married? a. As an adolescent/young adult/dating/single? b. Did it change over time? If so, how? 4. How have your expectations/perspectives of sex changed since first getting married? 5. Is there anything you wish you had known/understood about sex before getting married? a. How might you talk to your children differently about sex? Data Storage and Retention Interview recordings and transcripts were kept on an encrypted and password protected external hard drive, in accordance with the Tri-Council Policy Statement: Ethical Conduct for Research Involving Humans (Canadian Institutes of Health Research et al., 2018). Participants’ email information was retained if participants indicated in the informed consent form that they wished to be contacted about the results of the study and/or if they consented to the researcher checking in to verify or clarify elements of the interview. Data Analysis As mentioned previously, this study used Creswell’s (2013) six-step adaptation of the modified Stevick-Colaizzi-Keen phenomenological approach found in Moustakas (1994). Creswell (2013) notes that Moustakas (1994) provides a practical and structured approach to phenomenological data analysis in comparison to other methods, such as van Manen (1990). Briefly, the six steps are: 1. Describe the researcher’s personal experience with the phenomenon. 2. Create a list of significant statements. 3. Group significant statements into meaning units. 34 4. Create a textural description of what participants experienced. 5. Create a structural description of how the phenomenon was experienced. 6. From the textural and structural descriptions, distill them into the essences of the phenomenon. The first step, describing the researcher’s personal experience with the phenomenon of inquiry, is presented in Appendix A. Further, the researcher continued to journal as the study progressed. From the transcription of the interview, the second step was to list “‘significant statements’…[which] provide an understanding of how the participant experienced the phenomenon” (Creswell, 2013, p. 82). This is the process of horizonalization, where each nonoverlapping statement is given equal weight in describing an angle of the phenomenon (Moustakas, 1994). This process allowed for superfluous or redundant information to be excluded from further analysis. There was a vast range of significant statements depending on the length of the interview, from 43 to 104. Once all of the significant statements were noted, the third step was to “group [significant statements] into larger units of information, called ‘meaning units’ or themes” (Creswell, 2013, p. 193). There were between six and ten meaning units per participant, and many meaning units contained sub-themes. The fourth step was to engage in the process of phenomenological reduction (Moustakas, 1994) in order to come up with a “textural description” of the phenomenon (Creswell, 2013, p. 193). Textural qualities include: rough and smooth; small and large; quiet and noisy; colourful and bland; hot and cold; stationary and moving; high and low; squeezed in and expansive; fearful and courageous; angry and calm – descriptions that present varying intensities; ranges of shapes, sizes, 35 and special qualities; time references; and colours all within an experiential context (Moustakas, 1994, p. 90-91). These textural descriptions were created through re-reading and re-experiencing the data, and required that the researcher “look and describe; look again and describe; look again and describe” (Moustakas, 1994, p. 90). Within the textural description, verbatim examples were used from the interview transcripts in order to lend credibility to the descriptions produced by the researcher (Creswell, 2013). Textural descriptions focused on “what” was experienced by participants, such as their emotions and feelings, as well as what was seen and heard. The fifth step was to produce a “structural description” of how the phenomenon happened (Creswell, 2013, p. 194). This included “structures of time, space, materiality, causality, and relationship to self and other” as well as “underlying themes or contexts that account for the emergence of a phenomenon” (Moustakas, 1994, p. 99). Examples of structures include how participants were exposed to religious messages, along with the tone and contexts in which these messages were presented. Structures also include how different messages were experienced alongside each other, such as harmony or dissonance. Again, verbatim examples from the interviews were used. The sixth and final step was to compose a composite description of the essences of the phenomenon from the textual and structural descriptions of all participants (Creswell, 2013). An essence of a phenomenon is “that which is common or universal, the condition or quality without which a thing would not be what it is” (Moustakas, 1994, p. 100). The composite texturalstructural description, or common story, was produced by comparing all participants’ experiences and elucidating that which was common in all five stories. The common elements that were shared across all participants were considered essential to the overall experience of 36 newlywed Christian men. Moustakas (1994) provides examples of composite textural-structural descriptions from different studies, and there seems to be considerable latitude in how this component is presented. This study follows the example from Yoder (1990), who provides a synthesis of experience using representative quotes from participants. Quotes are used without reference to specific participants to allow for a general description of the phenomenon to emerge. Rigour and Quality Questions of rigour, quality, reliability, and validity have produced spirited debates within qualitative research (Armstrong, 2010). Mertens (2020) discusses credibility as encompassing the tension of closeness and distance with participants, sufficient engagement, and participant involvement to ensure accuracy. From a phenomenological stance, I engaged in bracketing and epoche in order to create a space in which the experience of participants could be understood as clearly as possible. This was done through the use of grounding exercises before interviews, as well as mindful awareness of reactions during the interviews. After the interviews, I journaled about personal reactions to the interview in order to make them explicit. By making reaction explicit, I was better able to be consciously aware of setting these reactions aside during the data analysis process. Furthermore, member checks were used to enhance credibility. Member checks were conducted by sending the list of meaning units derived from the significant statements to two of the participants in order to ensure the researcher accurately understood and represented their experience (Koelsch, 2013). The researcher asked selected participants to read over conclusions and provide feedback on accuracy (Lincoln & Guba, 1985). Both participants reported the meaning units accurately portrayed their experience. One participant added further information that he did not report in the initial interview in order to enhance the depth of the meaning units. 37 Confirmability is another important component in the quality of qualitative research (Mertens, 2020). Confirmability asks whether the interpretations and conclusions of the researcher are based in the data itself, rather than being made up by the researcher (Mertens, 2020). In phenomenological research, the use of direct quotes to illustrate textural and structural descriptions lends to the confirmability of the descriptions (Polkinghorne, 1989). As such, this study uses direct participant quotes throughout the results section to enable participant voices to fully emerge. Creswell (2013) discusses five specific standards that improve the quality of phenomenological research: first, the researcher thoroughly understands the philosophical presuppositions of phenomenology; second, the phenomenon of inquiry must be clear; third, the study must use an established procedure, such as Moustakas (1994); fourth, the quality of a phenomenological study is shown by its ability to capture the essence of the phenomenon with a rich description of what is experienced and how it is experienced; finally, the fifth standard requires the continued reflexivity of the researcher to enhance the study’s quality. The first three standards were met in preparation for the study, and the last two were purposefully kept as important standards throughout the research process. In particular, the researcher journaled about any personal reactions to the interview material and discussed the analytic process with their supervisor in order to maintain reflexivity. Furthermore, the researcher consulted with two fellow research assistants to solicit feedback on the researcher’s analytical processes, descriptions, and outcomes. This was done by sending two sets of significant statements and having two independent co-researchers group them into themes. The various groupings were then discussed with the primary researcher to ensure no important pieces were missed. After reviewing significant statements and theme 38 groupings, there was sufficient overlap to reach consensus between researchers regarding integral themes. Ethical Considerations Potential Risks and Benefits to Participants When discussing any sensitive subject, there are risks to participants. In particular, participants may have experienced discomfort discussing their sexual beliefs and perspectives. Additionally, the nature of the study’s questions and subsequent reflections have the potential to cause relational discord. Discomfort may have been felt during and after the interview as participants reflected on their experience (Seidman, 2006). Participants were fully informed of the nature of the research topic in order to provide informed consent. Participants were also informed that they could stop the interview at any point, and that they could choose to withdraw from the study without any consequences. Furthermore, the researcher provided counselling resources in the informed consent form should the participant want to more fully explore any discomfort raised in the interviews. The researcher checked in with all participants at the end of the interviews: some participants reported feeling more intense emotions that expected and no participant reported being in distress. Potentially, participants may have benefitted from the opportunity to reflect on their experience in a purposeful manner. The invitation may have opened up a different perspective and outlook on their experience (Reason, 1981). There was a possibility that by engaging in the process as “co-researchers” (Moustakas, 1994), participants could learn about themselves and their experiences in a new and enriching manner. Many participants shared that it was helpful to reflect on their experience. 39 Confidentiality Confidentiality in interviewing must be specified. Seidman (2006) notes that the content of the interview is not confidential, as that would mean no one but the researcher has access to what is shared. Rather, confidentiality in interviewing is in regard to participants’ identity. As previously noted, the interviews were recorded and transcribed, and all transcripts and recordings were kept on an encrypted and password protected external hard drive. Pseudonyms were used in place of participant names in the presentation of the data. Furthermore, any identifying information provided by participants included in the thesis report, such as names or particularities, were given a pseudonym or described relationally (e.g. “[My wife] and I” rather than “Sandra and I”). CHAPTER 4: FINDINGS Chapter Overview This chapter will present the following five emerging themes of how newlywed Christian men experienced and understood religious sexual messages: (1) conflicting messages about sex; (2) the need for accountability; (3) premarital sexuality as a journey; (4) changing understandings of sex within marriage; and (5) changing the conversation. After a thorough exploration of each of these themes, a composite textural-structural description (Moustakas, 1994), or common story, of how participants experienced religious sexual messages is presented. Participant responses reflected these themes to varying degrees. In fact, each theme could be its own research project when considering the contrast in each participant’s narrative. Further, many of these themes included different experiences at varying points in participants’ lives. For example, a person may have experienced an emotion differently in adolescence compared to 40 when they were dating their partner or when newly married. Despite variations between narratives, substantive consistency emerged in participants’ overall themes. In exploring these essential themes, it is important to be aware that they are not discrete, but intertwined. For the sake of clarity, themes will be described separately, then followed by a composite textural-structural description. This composite description is a narrative of how the essential elements are experienced. The use of a narrative is particularly important for this study because participants described how they experienced sexual messages growing up, in dating relationship, as a newlywed couple, and in their current experience, therefore utilizing a narrative arc in elucidating their experience. Throughout this chapter, direct quotes are used liberally to capture as much of the participant’s experience as possible, to solicit their authentic voice, and to ensure the conclusions are confirmed by the actual experience of each participant. Presentation of Essential Themes As mentioned, there were five essential themes of experience: (1) conflicting messages about sex; (2) the need for accountability; (3) premarital sexuality as a journey; (4) changing understandings of sex within marriage; and (5) changing the conversation. Within these main themes were 19 subthemes (see Table 2). The presentation of each theme begins with a general description before exploring nuances of each subtheme theme. Table 2 Themes and Subthemes Themes Conflicting Messages About Sex      Subthemes Sex is Dangerous Sex isn’t Talked About Sex is God-given Sex is Permissible Sex is Shameful 41 The Need for Accountability   Accountability when Single Accountability when Dating Premarital Sexuality as a Journey      Needing a Stronger “Why” Testing, Justification, and Taking Inventory Resources Landing in the Same Place Greater Openness Changing Understandings of Sex in Marriage      The Safety of Marriage Masculinity Sex is About Us Curiosity and Grace Overhauling Sexual Expectations Changing the Conversation   Past – Openness, Honesty, and Compassion Future – Pre-emptive Conversations Theme 1: Conflicting Messages About Sex There were various messages received about sex while the participants were growing up. Messages came from a number of different contexts, such as Sunday sermons, church youth groups, mission trips, one-on-one mentoring, home, and in religious schools. In these contexts, sexual messages came from adults in the participants’ lives. However, messages about sex were also learned from peers, and most of these interactions happened outside of a church community. With varying, and often times conflicting, sexual messages came an experience of shame. Sex is Dangerous All participants received messages from church contexts about how sex and sexuality were sinful and needed to be avoided until marriage. For Derrick, his church experience provided a long list of proscriptive rules against sex: ‘Sex should be saved with one person and with one person only and for after marriage’ [was] a theme. Masturbation and pornography are wrong in all cases, even after marriage. 42 Going any steps before marriage is dangerous and a sin... I’ve heard messages of different kinky things and sex are not natural. Sex is intended for procreation… And then the last one would be sex is between a male and a female only, and that’s honouring to God. While not all participants mentioned this litany of proscriptive religious messages, all received the message that sex was to be avoided completely before marriage, with dire consequences for oneself and one’s future marriage if there was any kind of premarital sexual engagement. For Kevin, the understanding from church was that sex was a “faucet that you didn’t touch until you got married. And when you got married, then great, you can turn on the faucet and it’s fine and it’s this beautiful thing. But until then, nothing.” There were dangers to engaging in premarital sex. For Derrick, sex was often portrayed in religious circles as a “struggle,” “temptation,” “sin,” and “unnatural.” There was an understanding that having sex before marriage would taint and warp you as a person. Derrick recalled a particularly visceral metaphor that was used to convey the dangers of having multiple sexual partners: There’s a very clear memory that I have that I’ll never forget where I was at a youth camp and the guy from the pulpit, he was a youth pastor at [a local church], and he basically brought a rose to the meeting and he passed around this rose to everyone and everyone touched it and held it and moved it around and he started talking about purity and whatever. And then he holds up this rose and he’s like ‘this rose was so beautiful, right? But now it’s been touched by so many hands and it’s so ugly and so destroyed. And who would ever want this rose, right? Who would ever want this rose?’ 43 Derrick share that the implication of the metaphor was that “if you’re putting yourself out then you’re being touched by so many people. You’re broken, you’re damaged goods.” Not only was there damage to one’s core self if they engaged in premarital sex, but it was also dangerous because this would allow for sexual comparison in one’s future marriage: “it’s better if you wait for marriage, then there’s no comparison or compatibility issues” (Derrick). The danger was that comparison to previous sexual partners would eat away at the security of the marriage, most likely leading to divorce. Further, if there were no other sexual experiences to act as a point of comparison, then issues of sexual compatibility in marriage would be avoided. Derrick also experienced a sense of guilt and responsibility when he had premarital sexual encounters with women: The narrative I would tell myself is: ‘I’m taking something away from this person, or from this female… I am taking away the specialness of them saving themselves for someone else.’ Or, ‘they’re going to look back on their life and I’m just going to be many of the people who hurt them or broke their purity.’ For Derrick, “it was [his] responsibility” as the man to protect the purity of women. There seemed to be no concern that the women he behaved sexually with “broke [his] purity,” only that he was breaking theirs. Derrick reflected during the interview that his premarital sexual experiences were “a consensual, fun thing that we did,” and that he was not, in fact, the one solely responsible for the protection or desecration of women’s sexual purity. Masturbation and pornography use were particularly perilous according to messages participants received during adolescence. Martin described how in church contexts it was seen as “failing” if someone was watching pornography. Kevin mentioned how he was told watching 44 pornography and masturbating would “ruin [his] life,” “ruin [his] future marriage,” cause “irreversible damage,” and that “God will be displeased with [him].” All participants experienced proscriptive sexual messages as strict and authoritarian. Martin’s mother conveyed messages about sex such that, “these are the standards… this is what we’re holding you up to,” with seemingly little room for missing the mark. There was often a lack of explanation as to why premarital abstinence was the standard for sexuality, especially in church contexts. Premarital abstinence was simply a rule to be followed. For some, asking questions about sex was in and of itself prohibited. Craig’s experience was an exception where, growing up, his parents explained the reason they viewed premarital abstinence to be important. Yet, even for Craig, church remained a place where sexuality was discussed in very black and white terms, providing little explanation as to why it was important to wait until marriage. Sex isn’t Talked About Along with explicit proscriptive messages around sex, participants also experienced silence around the topic of sexuality. For many, sex was not spoken about in church and/or family, apart from a general message that sex should be only for the context of marriage. Kevin shared how sexuality was not discussed in his home, apart from the “mechanics” of sex. Martin, too, expressed how sexuality was not discussed at home apart from basic sexual education. For Derrick, “when [his] parents found out about [him watching pornography], they didn’t say anything. They basically just said ‘this is bad, stop doing it’ and didn’t really have the conversations.” Therefore, there was little sense of freedom to ask questions and express curiosities as an adolescent. 45 The message from silence, in some cases, was that even thinking about sex was inappropriate. Kevin shared how discussions about sex were “completely off the table” in church contexts: Church was kind of this place where, ‘the world, the secular world, can’t touch us here,’ sort of thing. And that includes talk about sex or discussions about sexuality: ‘That’s just not allowed in here, and that’s a good thing. Good for us.’ Not only was there silence around sexuality for a number of participants, but there was also fear that there would be consequences if sexuality was brought up in discussion. Gabriel avoided asking questions about sex out of concern that it would be “embarrassing,” as well as fear of potential reprimand from parents and clergy. Martin, too, avoided raising certain topics around sexuality because “the repercussions or the punishment would have not been worth bringing it up.” The relationship between silence and openness was complex for most participants. Although there was a general sense that sexuality was something that could not be talked about in church or with family, both Martin and Craig experienced at least one moment in adolescence where they felt it was at least possible for adults to “talk about sex and not be weird about it” (Craig) which was experienced as “helpful” (Craig). For Derrick, while there were no discussions about sexuality at home, there was a much greater degree of openness in church, something that was unique to his experience compared to the other participants. Craig had the opposite experience where there was far more openness within his family, while discussions of sexuality were completely off the table at church. Gabriel found that the only place where sexuality could be discussed was with peers, as there was mostly silence at home and in Catholic school. 46 Sex is God-Given Along with proscriptive messages warning about the potential dangers of sexuality, there were also messages from church and family contexts that sexuality was God-given and that the act of sex was sanctified within marriage. Kevin was told that sex was a “sacred, holy thing,” and a “beautiful thing” within marriage. Craig received the message from his parents that sex was a “holistic” act, which “does things in your spirit, does things in your soul. It does things in places that you can’t even see.” Yet, these messages were often painted with broad strokes without providing much depth into how sex should or would be within marriage. For example, Derrick recalled a pastor who shared, “sex is so good when you’re married. It’s amazing. And my wife is so great and sex is just awesome. And sex is better if you wait for marriage – it’s more enjoyable.” These messages were often given in conjunction with proscriptive messages, seemingly to encourage teens and young adults to pursue abstinence. For some, there seemed to be an attempt to counterbalance the dangers of premarital sexuality with the beauty of marital sex, and yet without much depth or substance, these messages rang hollow for participants. Similarly, a religious message that was received by some was on the value of singleness. For Martin, it was impactful to hear about how people “don’t need to be in a relationship or in marriage or be having sex to be a full person.” This message seemed counter to much of the pervading “cultural message” that people are incomplete without a significant other. Singleness was a time to draw closer to God through one’s sexuality because, as Craig remembers hearing, God wanted to, “walk through your sex drive, your sexual desires, with you because that’s a really amazing way for you to get to know him.” Messages about the potential for wholeness and closeness to God when single, as well as the sanctified beauty of sex within marriage, seemed to be more theoretical than practical to 47 participants in their singleness. Premarital sexual temptation was a very real threat with immediate and long-lasting implications according to religious circles and many families. Therefore, messages around sexual sanctification did not carry the same emotional intensity as messages warning against the pitfalls of sexuality. Sex is Permissible None of the participants were insulated from more secular sources of sexual messages. These most often came from peers, as well as the broader “culture” (Martin) outside of religious circles. Gabriel was told by his peers that if a woman was also interested and consented to having sex, “there should be no guilt” in having casual or premarital sex. For Gabriel, there was a notion that it was a “flex” within peer groups to have sex as a teenager and young adult. Kevin shared how, as a young teen, there was social credit given to those who knew about sex, even to the point where it was “a competition to see who could know more about sex.” Further, “it was a shameful thing if you didn’t know much about sex.” There was particular dissonance for Kevin from the fact that it was shameful to not know about sex with peers, but shameful to even think about sex within religious circles. Pornography was also permissible within secular peer groups. Derrick was shown pornography around age 8 by teammates, and most other participants had watched pornography by their late teens. There was a general message from Gabriel’s peers that “there should be no guilt” in watching pornography as a means to “self-gratification.” The experience of dissonance between the permissibility of sex and pornography from peers and the messages to avoid sexual experiences from family and religious circles varied greatly between participants. On one side was Craig’s experience: 48 Being a virgin or being someone who was going to pursue abstinence throughout high school and throughout university kind of became my identity in a very secularized school. I had very different ideals of what sex would be versus people in my school or my friends. On the other side was Gabriel’s experience: I really didn’t feel I was part of the Catholic community and I just felt the Catholic church wasn’t for me. So, when my friends or influences outside church, I mean the Catholic system, were telling me ‘it was okay,’ well, I was like, ‘okay’ it’s a relief. For both participants, out of the experience of dissonance between such diverging perspectives on sex came a rejection of one perspective and adherence to the other. In Craig’s case, his family was very religious and he felt a close connection to his faith community, and so religious messages around abstinence were most influential in forming his adolescent understanding about sexuality. For Gabriel, the disconnect he felt from the Catholic system, along with the lack of religious importance in his home, seemed to create space for peer perspectives to have more influence. Others, too, experienced dissonance, but there was not such a complete denial of one perspective over the other. Sex is Shameful Shame seemed to be an inevitable experience for participants growing up as they reflected on the sexual messages they received as adolescents. As mentioned, the boundary around sexuality was so rigid and opaque for some that even thinking about sex was considered inappropriate. In most contexts, sexuality was discussed in a primarily didactic manner, rather than as a dialogue. Participants experienced very little sexual education to explain the natural process of sexual maturity apart from the basic “mechanics” (Kevin) of sex. Again, with the 49 exception of Craig, there were no conversations from family or church contexts describing, “in a relationship, here’s how sex is” (Kevin). Even though there were messages about sex being beautiful and sanctified in marriage, there was little guidance in how to navigate sexuality as a single person apart from the imperative to “eliminate the temptation” (Derrick) to engage in premarital sex and pornography. Derrick, Martin, Gabriel, and Kevin all shared that as teenagers, there were no adults in their lives who explained the importance of sexuality in singleness, and all longed for greater guidance in this part of their lives. Sexuality in singleness was only something to be guarded against, with no room to embrace this natural and emerging aspect of self, leading to an experience of dissonance and shame. For many, the main message received from family and church was “what’s wrong with you” (Gabriel) for thinking about or engaging in sexual activities growing up. These directly shaming responses were often coupled with relative silence around sexuality. The inability to ask questions led to a great deal of shame, for there was little, if any, space to be open and honest about sexuality. Martin and Gabriel specifically noted that there was fear of embarrassment or reprimand if sexuality was brought up within their family. Martin mentioned he did not bring up certain topics around sexuality to avoid negative repercussions. Similarly, Gabriel was called an “idiot” in church contexts when questions were asked. Therefore, sexuality was often something that needed to be kept hidden. Although sex was supposedly a God-ordained aspect of one’s life, in light of proscriptive sexual messages and adolescent sexual desire, a sense of shame occurred. Craig shared: [There was a message that] ‘sex is good, but there’s really bad things that could happen if you have it outside of marriage.’ And so that created some shame because it’s like, I feel 50 these things of ‘I want to have sex, I want to pursue physical relationship,’ but I’m not feeling the freedom to do that. The emergence of shame despite more positive religious messages about sexuality was experienced by all participants. There was also a sense of confusion and dissonance around being a sexual person while needing to restrict their sexuality. Participants shared how messages promoting the goodness of sexuality could not undo the immensity of shame and dissonance which emerged from proscriptive sexual messages. It is important to note that for most participants in adolescence, sexuality was a largely perceived to be a bad part of them, a part that led to dangerous and damaging behaviours and which needed to be tamed. That being said, Derrick specifically noticed that he did not feel a sense of shame growing up, in that he did not believe there was anything wrong with his inherent sexual desires. What he instead experienced was guilt when he engaged in sexual behaviours that were counter to the proscriptive messages he had internalized. Derrick recognized after talking to others who experienced sexual shame that for him it was “so much easier to compartmentalize [sex] as something that [he does], rather than who [he is].” In that statement, the distinction between sexual guilt and sexual shame is made clear. Theme 2: The Need for Accountability All participants received the religious message that sexuality included an aspect of temptation. This meant sexuality was enticing and desirable, but they should not indulge. The need for accountability emerged particularly in relation to sexual temptation in singleness, as well as in preserving physical and sexual boundaries in dating relationships. In both stages, the underlying motivation to be sexually accountable to others was to preserve physical and sexual purity for marriage. 51 Accountability when Single As mentioned, one of the most profound religious sexual messages for participants growing up was that sex and sexuality were dangerous. For Derrick, there was a need to be accountable to others because all forms of premarital sexuality were “wrong,” leading to “lust and sin,” and so there was a need to “eliminate this temptation.” There was an experience of fear and worry in the need for accountability, for there was an understanding that engaging in premarital sexuality was something that could warp part of one’s very being and lead to unforeseen challenges later in marriage. Derrick and those around him felt a “call to action” in holding themselves and others accountable to prevent indulging in sexual temptation, whether that be masturbation, watching pornography, or any kind of sexual contact with women. Accountability in Derrick’s case included church groups specifically for men, as well as “oneon-one mentoring conversations… where the prompt would be a lot of ‘you have to confess this.’” Martin recalled a group event as a teenager where peers and other adult men engaged in candid confession around pornography use. His impression at the time was one of both relief and discomfort, where it felt “good that this is something that could be talked about,” and yet it also seemed like “almost oversharing… in some ways.” The language of temptation was specifically mentioned by Kevin, who shared that the book Every Man’s Battle: Winning the War on Sexual Temptation One Victory at a Time (Arterburn, et al., 2009) was given to him as a resource by his father. The implication of receiving this book was that “this will tell you about what you can expect in terms of sexual temptation and how you need to get away from it.” Derrick’s language around a “call to action” mirrors the war motif explicitly in the subtitle of Every Man’s Battle. Sexual temptation was 52 something which needed to be conquered and squelched, particularly in singleness, often leading to a need to “repress” (Kevin) one’s sexuality. Accountability When Dating The need for accountability when dating was a prominent aspect of Craig’s experience with religious sexual messages. He and his future wife met with two Christian couples when they were dating with the hopes of building a mentoring relationship. A strong message received from the first couple was, “you guys should get married soon or you guys should break up,” which felt like a “really big weight on [their] relationship.” The reason for the imperative to get married quickly or break up appeared to be that this would reduce potential for premarital sex. There was an almost exclusive focus in this conversation on maintaining physical boundaries, meaning not “touching each other in ways that [he] wouldn’t, say, touch [his] sister,” to the detriment of other relational aspects. To Craig, it seemed that for many dating couples, “maintaining purity becomes such an idol that [people] forget about everything else that there is to do with the relationship.” In dating mentorship, “there [was] such an emphasis on sex that” it seemed as though if they had their “physical boundaries good, [their] relationship [was] good.” For Craig and his girlfriend, the implication of the narrow focus on physical boundaries was that if these strict “dos and don’ts” were not maintained, they would not reach out for support, as they “didn’t want to go through the shame of talking with [this first mentor couple].” When they sought mentorship from another Christian couple, their advice was to “take [a certain] amount of weeks apart… and just figure out [their] boundaries.” From both of these conversations, there was not only shame in talking with Christian mentor couples about physical boundaries, but fear that they would prescribe Craig and his girlfriend to break up should they 53 not maintain these boundaries. The threat of older mentors mandating an end to the relationship made it challenging to get the support that Craig and his girlfriend desired: That was kind of our assessment tool to whether we were doing okay or not, or whether we could pursue community or not. If we were doing poor on those dos and don’ts, then that subconsciously meant that we couldn’t seek connection or help with other people, with mentors and people that we actually needed in those moments. So those dos and don’ts weren’t really helpful. Gabriel also shared how, before he was married, he used to “go on [Instagram] a lot and… check out girls and see how they are.” A friend from church had challenged him to go off social media when he was dating his future wife, with the intention of “protecting [himself]” and “protect [his] relationship” from sexual temptation and lust. There was a sense that, for him, sex was like being “an alcoholic,” and he needed to take active steps to preserve the boundaries of his relationship, which included avoiding social media. Theme 3: Premarital Sexuality as a Journey Participants began a process of asking questions regarding sexuality at different points. Many participants described this as a “journey”: it was a period of reflection, exploration, entering uncharted territory, and eventual arrival at a new destination. For some, this destination was markedly different than where they started. For others, it was familiar, but more integrated. The journey of deliberate exploration continued into marriage but with new aspects that emerged within the religiously sanctioned environment of marital sexuality. The subthemes that emerged were: (a) needing a stronger “why” for premarital abstinence; (b) testing, justification, and taking inventory of religious sexual messages and beliefs; (c) helpful resources; (d) landing in the same place; and (e) greater openness to sexuality. 54 Needing a Stronger “Why” Participants reached a point in late adolescence and young adulthood when the message “don’t have sex before marriage” could no longer remain something abstract. A sense of internal dissonance emerged between the reality of being a sexual person and the need to deny their sexuality. This dissonance led to a process of exploration and questioning of religious sexual messages. For Derrick, Martin, and Craig, the impetus for exploration was the reality of sexual attraction in their dating relationships. In this context, “physical longing was quite strong” (Craig), and there was a common sentiment of needing to “put to the test” (Craig) what had been taught about premarital sex. Questions abounded: What’s actually true and what’s actually relevant? What does God actually think? (Craig) What does this mean? Why? What did Jesus say about this? (Martin) For participants, sexuality seemed to condense into something far more tangible when they were in dating relationships. Here, they had someone in particular they were committed and attracted to, which created real possibilities of going against messages promulgating premarital abstinence. Premarital sex was no longer abstract and could no longer be held uncritically as a personal value. For all participants, there was a need for “a stronger ‘why’” (Craig) for abstaining from premarital sex. For Gabriel, there was little “why” provided from his Catholic school upbringing around premarital abstinence, apart from rote reference to the Bible. Because he felt so disconnected from Catholicism, there was less personal and cultural importance in remaining abstinent. When his peers offered him an alternative, more permissible understanding of sex, it was a “relief,” for he could have sex and watch pornography with “no guilt.” It was not until Gabriel became a Christian in his 30s that he began to question messages around premarital abstinence once again, 55 sorting through and trying to reconcile his past with how he wanted to be as Christian man moving forward. Kevin also had a unique experience, in that he began the journey of asking “why” in singleness. As a young adulthood, he lived with some older Christian men, and this context provided the opportunity to ask questions such as: What are the good things about sex? What did God intend for sex? What do I even think about it? And how do I make it so that all of this internalized shame and wrongness doesn’t come into my future marriage, whenever that is? Kevin shared how these men modeled a more balanced understanding of premarital sexuality, one that was “lived very authentically:” For them being Christian was not about rules or ‘thou shalt nots.’ It was really just about relationship and belief, but also just being themselves, that God created them to be the person they are and they’re just going to be that person as much as they can. In the presence of those who were living authentically, Kevin felt the freedom to “wrestle together” through these big questions around how premarital sexuality should be lived out. Despite different starting points, all participants experienced a need to move beyond religious rules that, up until a point, appeared immutable. Participants seemed to have a hunch that there was more to sexuality than what had been taught in religious circles. All participants began to question, “what does God actually think” (Craig) about sex, as opposed to relying solely on what had been taught to them through church and family. Even though this period of questioning occurred at various life stages, all shared a desire to find a truer, more robust understanding of sexuality beyond a determinative set of religious proscriptions. 56 Testing, Justification, and Taking Inventory As mentioned, there was an experience of dissonance for participants between proscriptive religious messages around sexuality and the reality of being a sexual person. This dissonance led to a process of asking why it was important to remain abstinent. For some, questioning religious sexual messages led to examining these messages in order to better understand how they related to their circumstance. This was the case for those who began questioning while in dating relationships. Craig used the language of “testing” to describe his experience of trying to reconcile physical and sexual attraction to his girlfriend with his identity as one who would remain abstinent until marriage: I have a strong desire to please God and to honour him, but I’m still a human and there’s things that I have and I feel like God’s given me that I don’t really know how to steward [i.e. sexuality] and that creates a lot of internal conflict [around] ‘I want to please God.’ In Craig’s process of testing, questions emerged around how he and his relationship were viewed by God: What’s actually true and what’s actually relevant? What does God actually think? Is he disappointed with us? Is he happy with us? Is he completely understanding of us? What is this? It was tremendously important for Craig to continue to honour God by behaving in ways God approved and set forth, but it became more difficult to ascertain the exact limits and boundaries of behaviours. Derrick experienced a somewhat similar process of trying to reconcile proscriptive religious messages with the reality of sexual attraction in dating relationship, but with a focus on “justify[ing]” behaviours to reduce internal dissonance rather than testing religious messages. In 57 adolescence and young adulthood, sex “was a way of feeling loved or finding love. And feeling accepted when [he] felt abandoned.” However, sex “became a huge source of guilt where [he] felt…any form of physicality was... sin.” When Derrick was in dating relationships, there was profound tension as he longed for physical closeness and intimacy with his girlfriend, but felt restricted in doing so: This story that I told myself was about oneness, where I would say ‘oneness with another person is physical oneness, emotional oneness, and spiritual oneness’ and use this metaphor to say, ‘look, if I’m here in oneness emotionally and spiritually [gestures high], but I’m here physically [gestures low], then this gap is unmanageable.’ And so, to make it manageable, I need to bring this up to a place where that gap is easier to handle, or I need to bring these areas down so it’s easier to handle. And so, it was this really weird construct that I created to justify some physical action where it [felt] like it [was] impossible not to do more physically. Again, for Derrick, there was less a sense of shame and more an experience of guilt when engaging in premarital sexuality. The process of justification alleviated this guilt while allowing greater sexual freedom. Along with testing religious sexual messages and justifying premarital sexuality came a bargaining process for both Craig and Derrick. As mentioned, Derrick felt a strong longing to have physical intimacy with his girlfriend, which led to a process of bargaining the parameters around which he could engage this way. For him, “as long as [he] saved [vaginal] penetration for marriage, that was [his] ambition and goal.” There was a sense of “pride” for Derrick in saving this aspect of sex for marriage, and, as long as vaginal penetration was set aside, he felt less dissonance having other forms of physical intimacy. However, the internal bargaining could not 58 hold back the tides of guilt entirely, and so, “everything was a go instead of vaginal penetration until [he] felt guilt. And then the moment [he] felt guilt [he] would be like ‘we need to back track from this because I don’t feel good about it.’” Craig also shared how he and his future wife created a last of “dos and don’ts,” especially in light of conversations with Christian mentors about physical boundaries. There was a need to negotiate what was appropriate and what was not, with an implicit understanding that if their “physical boundaries [were] good, [their] relationship [was] good.” That being said, when they engaged in prohibited behaviours, a sense of shame emerged, as they felt the need to hide their behaviours from mentors. As previously noted, there was also fear that these mentors would force them to break up if they could not stay within the established parameters around physical intimacy. While guilt and shame were still present for Derrick and Craig in their testing and bargaining, Kevin went through a process of taking “inventory” of his sexual beliefs, of which he felt “no regrets or shame about.” This process of taking stock of sexual beliefs included conversations with his older Christian roommates, as well as reading more “pro-sex” writers and psychological research. One of the more profound insights Kevin experienced as a single person was “how much creativity and vitality and life is contained in the erotic in general,” along with a newfound understanding that “everyone has a sexual side.” There were still boundaries within this new awareness of sexuality, in that he still held the value that he was “a very monogamous person.” He desired to find “one woman,” and that she would be the “first woman that [he slept] with… on [their] wedding night.” Similar to Derrick, while vaginal penetration was set aside for marriage, Kevin was “also was open to having a sexual experience of life, just in general.” The main difference between the two was that, while Derrick would occasionally retreat from sexual 59 experiences when feeling guilty, Kevin continued to hold that he would “find things sexually interesting and stimulating and that that was okay.” Resources Many participants noted the importance of specific resources in their journey of questioning religious sexual messages. In particular, Martin and Craig both shared how Loveology: God. Love. Marriage. Sex. And the Never-Ending Story of Male and Female (2014) by John Mark Comer was helpful in answering some of the questions around the importance of premarital abstinence. Both participants felt it important to wait until marriage to have sex, and this book provided “a better ‘why’” (Craig) to continue to do so. Kevin also mentioned how psychology research was imperative to his process of broadening and accepting sexuality as an integral part of himself as a person. Landing in the Same Place The journey of questioning religious sexual messages and taking stock of personal values led to different outcomes prior to marriage. Both Martin and Gabriel went through a period of feeling disconnected from Christianity and subsequently disregarded many proscriptive religious sexual messages. In coming to a more personal Christian faith, both needed to reconcile their previous beliefs about sexuality (e.g. that there should be “no guilt” [Gabriel] having premarital sex) with the reintroduction of the expectation of premarital abstinence in church contexts. Martin found that upon being reintroduced to the expectation of premarital abstinence, and upon further reflection reading the Bible and Loveology (Comer, 2014), he “ended up landing in the same place” as what he had been told growing up in terms of “a more conservative but robust view on [sexuality].” He shared that: 60 I don’t believe in sex before marriage… but I actually know why I believe it instead of just following along. And I actually feel like it’s important to me and what it means for me to be a disciple [of Jesus]. It was important for Martin to critically engage with religious sexual messages, rather than passively accept them, as he was not able to ask questions about sex growing up. Gabriel, too, ended up holding a value around premarital abstinence as he became a Christian in his 30s. In the process of becoming a Christian, Gabriel felt immense shame for his previous sexual life, and felt that he “didn’t think that [he] could be redeemed” for “all [he had] done in the past.” It was through reading the Bible, particularly the stories of profound forgiveness, that Gabriel’s experience of shame began to shift: Once I went and I started reading the Bible and started praying, I [saw] stories of David. I [saw] stories of Peter, even though he denied Jesus, he still was redeemed. [I saw] stories from Saul to Paul. Once Gabriel became a Christian again, he developed a newfound understanding of why it was best for him to wait until marriage to have sex: [W]hen you wait, it’s like you’re respecting the other person too. You’re showing respect for your wife or your spouse. Because you can have sex before marriage and then what happens if you say, ‘hey, you know what, I want to break things up’ or ‘I don’t like this person?’ You might… you never know, besides yourself, you might have an emotional impact on that person as well. Out of respect for his future spouse, and to protect himself and others from the emotional impact of premarital sex, Gabriel chose to refrain from sex until he married his wife. 61 For Craig, the emotional impact of sex was also a key component for why it was important to wait until marriage. There was an understanding from his parents that sex was a “holistic” act, one that “does things in your spirit, does things in your soul. It does things in places that you can’t even see.” While Craig did go through a process of recognizing sexuality was not as “black and white” as what he had be told, it remained important for him to refrain from premarital sex due to its holistic implications. Greater Openness While some participants remained firm in their belief in complete premarital abstinence in their journey of questioning religious sexual messages, others began to experience greater openness “to having a sexual experience of life” (Kevin). There was movement from a rigid understanding of sexuality in general, and premarital sexuality in particular, to one with more room for grey. For Craig and Kevin, it was important to work through their imbedded sense of sexual shame before getting married. Both found it necessary to acknowledge their sexuality in general, and their sexual attraction to their partner in particular, in order to begin to undo the experience of sexual shame. Part of what reified the sense of shame was the perceived badness of naturally arising sexual desire in the context of needing to maintain complete sexual abstinence, and so there was a need to not “deny how [each partner felt] about each other” (Kevin). While Craig and his future wife did not engage in sex at all before marriage, Kevin and his partner felt it important to engage in different kinds of sex, even if vaginal penetration was still reserved for marriage. Kevin mentioned how he and his future wife “were very sexual together for the duration of [their] dating period,” but that it was an experience which they “often talked about” and felt “no regrets or shame about.” For both Kevin and Craig, the freedom to acknowledge 62 their sexual desire for their partner provided space to “undo” (Craig) their experience of sexual shame. While they still maintaining some boundaries around what behaviours were acceptable before marriage, there was greater acceptance of the nuanced nature of sexuality. Derrick and his future wife both started on a process of “deconstructing” their entire Christian faith before getting married, and one facet was questioning religious sexual messages. As this deconstruction process continued, there was a sense of freedom to engage in more physical touch, while still maintaining that vaginal penetration would be saved for marriage. It felt less and less important to strictly adhere to the demand for total premarital sexual abstinence for both partners. Although Derrick’s partner was willing to have sex, there was “this pride of ‘I’ve never done this’” which made it difficult for him to feel a more complete sense of sexual freedom. Theme 4: Changing Understandings of Sex in Marriage While participants began the journey of re-evaluating their understandings of religious sexual messages before marriage, there were still many changes to come. By the time they were married, all participants maintained that at least vaginal penetration with their future wife would be saved for their wedding night. With the religious message that sex was permissible in marriage, that it was acceptable to “turn on the faucet” (Kevin), came many new insights. There were five subthemes in which beliefs and perspective about sex changed in marriage: (a) working through sexual shame within the safety of marriage; (b) changing perspectives on masculinity; (c) moving from an egocentric to a dyadic perspective of sex; (d) increasing curiosity and grace; and (e) overhauling religious perspective of sexuality in light of sexual pain and trauma. 63 The Safety of Marriage For many, sexual shame was present in marriage, encapsulated in Craig’s question of “am I good enough?” Craig found sex to be “very exposing,” and Kevin felt “humbled” about how little he knew about it. For others, there was also disappointment in unmet expectations of sexual frequency and enjoyment. Despite these experiences, participants found great safety in the commitment of the marital relationship. It was very important for participants to be open with their spouse about the ways in which sexual shame and unmet expectations impacted them. Craig’s experience was fairly representative of the group: I think the safety of marriage let us explore those things together, let us explore these areas where we actually don’t feel like we’re good enough, and to be able to be together and stay committed and explore those… work through those things. Martin also specifically mentioned the importance of dialogue with his wife and the need to be honest in working through sexual difficulties early in marriage. Even though the conversation about sexual enjoyment and frequency was uncomfortable, his “view and relation to [their] sex life got way better because [they] had that conversation.” Knowing that one’s spouse was committed allowed for a greater ability to work through sexual issues collaboratively and honestly in marriage. Craig came to more greatly appreciate why it was important to wait until marriage in experiencing the vulnerability of sex: [M]y view has been transformed to start seeing, ‘oh that’s why God wanted sex to be within marriage.’ [It] is because it’s incredibly exposing. It tells you there’s these places of you that have opened up that if you didn’t have the commitment of marriage it would be incredibly vulnerable and scary. And knowing that person is going to stay with you 64 through thick and thin, you can work through those issues freely. And my wife and I have been receiving the fruit of that, so it’s been a joy. Many participants had a deep appreciation for the ability to be vulnerable with their wives and felt a greater ability to work through sexual shame in the context of marital commitment. Masculinity Within marriage came new understandings of masculinity and new expectations of manhood. This was sometimes related to sexual shame, but at other times simply an expansion of what it meant to be a man in marriage. Craig shared quite vulnerably about how his experience of masculinity was challenged early on in marriage. He was told by his pastor in premarital counselling that men always want sex more than women, and he received messages from watching pornography that men were to be “domineering” and “aggressive” in bed. However, his wife was the one who wanted sex more often, and this led to a sense of shame out of an internalized messages that “the more you want to have sex, the more of a man you are.” This led to feeling that “there’s something wrong with [him] if [he does not] want sex as much.” There was also an experience of pressure, as one of the religious messages Craig received was that his “body is not [his] own. It’s for [his] wife and to please her.” At the time of the interview, Craig was still exploring these questions around masculinity, but with greater acceptance of who he is as a man: [I am] just wrestling with my own ‘who I am as a man’ and ‘what makes me a man.’ I’m definitely more tender and emotionally driven than I am physically driven. And so that’s been interesting. But it was hard and I think I’m still working through it and just realising that it’s actually okay. It’s actually very okay. 65 Again, for Craig, the experience of safety and commitment within marriage was seen as integral to his ability to wrestle with his perceptions and expectations around masculinity. Others, too, shared how their understandings of masculinity shifted in marriage. Before getting married, Kevin believed that he should be the one in the relationship “to have all the answers when it came to sex.” On his wedding day, Kevin received some advice from his best friend: A lot of guys enter into sex expecting to feel like ‘the man’ and feel like they have it all together, and don’t expect that feeling. Just bring a lot of curiosity and grace for yourself and for her into it. This advice resonated deeply for Kevin and, as he and his wife entered into marriage, he found he was “humbled about how little [he knew]” about sexuality. With this sense of humility came greater freedom for Kevin, who realised that sexuality is “elusive” within himself and in his wife, and that he did not need to know or understand everything about sex as the man. Martin also realised that sex was not “this all-encompassing thing from [his] male perspective.” His expectation that sex would be enjoyed in a similar manner by his wife led to disappointment when this was not the case. He found he needed to shift his own expectations around how his wife enjoys sex, especially when it was different than how he did as a man. Sex is About Us Another common perspective that shifted in marriage surrounded the dyadic nature of sex. Many participants noted how they experienced and understood sex in an almost “egocentric” (Kevin) manner before getting married. In singlehood and in dating, when sex was mostly off the table, there was little possibility to have any kind of understanding about sex other than with oneself. Kevin shared how he “very much thought of sex as this thing that’s for [him],” and it 66 was not until marriage that he became aware of this perspective. Gabriel echoed this sentiment, that before marriage sex was more about how he could “please [himself] in this moment,” rather than how he could “be intimate and please [his partner].” For Craig, “getting into marriage, sex was seen as a lot more erotic,” and he believed that sex was going to be all about “passion, passion, passion.” The more individual-focussed understandings of sex began to shift relatively early on in marriage. Kevin shared a realization that, “oh, [sex] is for us. This is about us.” In the shift to a more dyadic focus, there was further learning about the purpose of sex. Gabriel shared that, in marriage, sex was more about “emotional intimacy now with [his wife] and how [they are] connected.” Craig found that “sex isn’t about performance, it’s about connection, it’s about being present.” He also described how sex became something to almost bask in; he and his wife “just enjoyed each other’s presence and company and connection.” From these experiences, sexuality seemed to shift from a focus on eros, or passionate love, to philia, or intimate love. One of the most important shifts in Martin’s understanding of sex was that “the actual enjoyment of the act for everyone is actually very different.” This led to a realisation that he “can’t put standards or expectations on to what that needs to be or look like.” There was an understanding for Martin that he and his wife needed to come up with a more collaborative measure to know how their sex life was going, and that it could not remain guided solely by his own perceptions and expectations. Curiosity and Grace Within the safety of marriage, and with the shift to a more dyadic understanding of sex, participants spoke of a new ability to explore sexuality with curiosity and grace. Many found that sexuality was not an easy-to-understand aspect of themselves and, even within marriage, there 67 was much to explore. As mentioned, Kevin shared how his own expectation that he would know everything about sex changed early on in marriage. Kevin realised: Oh! There’s a lot of mystery around sex and… even just about ourselves. Sex really touches a deep part of you and it’s wonderful, but it’s also very scary and it’s not something that you can just, I don’t know, have a good journal session about and ‘oh, great now I know this part of myself.’ It’s very elusive. And it’s elusive in your partner too, I think. The advice Kevin received from his friend to “bring a lot of curiosity and grace for yourself and for her into [sex]” was helpful in recalibrating his role within sex to one of an explorer, rather than professor. Similarly, Craig shared how there was room within marriage to explore what it means to be a sexual person with his wife. There was a process of “self-discovery” for him, especially regarding roles and expectations for sex. Martin’s experience of redefining sexual expectations seemed to also prioritize curiosity and collaboration, rather than him being the only one to define these expectations. Overhauling Sexual Expectations While all participants experienced some degree of upending in their perspectives on sex after marriage, none seemed to experience as much upheaval as Derrick. On their wedding night, sex “was a complete catastrophe” and this experience was “tremendously painful and traumatic.” This was especially the case for his wife, who experienced physical pain with vaginal intercourse. This created a barrier preventing both from enjoy sex after marriage. While other participants experienced marriage as a safe place to work through sexual shame, marital sex became the source of shame for Derrick and his wife. They had both received the religious 68 message that sex within marriage was a beautiful thing, and there was profound disappointment and shame associated with sexual difficulties. Derrick shared: [Sex] was put on such a pedestal. It was this expectation of it being so wonderful and so amazing. And then when it’s not, it’s like ‘what’s wrong with us?’ All the pastors told us it was the best thing, especially if you wait. But now it just is super painful and it hurts and no one tells you about that. In some ways, Kevin’s metaphor of the faucet helps shed light on Derrick’s experience. There was an understanding that once married, the tap could be turned on and good sex would simply flow out of the faucet. There was little, if any, discussion about navigating marital sexual difficulties in Derrick’s upbringing. Derrick attributed his experience of shame and disappointment to how vaginal intercourse in marriage was portrayed as the ultimate, paramount sexual experience by pastors and religious leaders: When we talk about sex and intimacy, we attribute it only with vaginal penetration. Where, if we leave from an intimate evening and we haven’t had penetration, it feels like we’ve failed in some way, even though we’ve done oral or something else. It feels like we didn’t accomplish everything we should’ve because that’s not what sex is, right? And so, it’s this bastardization of what the word is and where it applies and what physical intimacy actually represents. There was tremendous hurt and anger for Derrick as he described how it felt like he and his wife had been indoctrinated into an understanding of vaginal penetration as the ultimate sexual act to the detriment of experiencing sexuality in a more nuanced manner. As he reflected, Derrick 69 wished that sex had not been something that was so forbidden. He and his wife had “withheld [sex] for so long” that they experienced a need “to overcome this guilt… even after marriage.” The disappointment and shame associated with marital sex propelled further deconstruction of Derrick’s understanding of sexuality, especially as it related to religious sexual messages. After discussions with his wife, there was greater permission to masturbate, with the understanding that each could “take care of [their] needs and [their] own body.” This was experienced as a “positive” shift, for it gave them “freedom within boundaries.” The ability to masturbate “without guilt” was profound, since Derrick had been told in religious circles that masturbation was completely inappropriate in and out of marriage. The religious message that sexual desires were unnatural was also problematized. Over time, there was more acceptance of sex as a natural part of himself, and Derrick felt it was “important to be super honest about what [sexuality] is and how it affects you.” In light of the disappointment and pain that Derrick and his wife experienced, especially from unmet religious expectations for sex, he shared about his desire for greater honesty and openness within religious circles regarding sex. This is the final theme that will be explored next. Theme 5: Changing the Conversation In light of their experiences, participants had the chance to reflect on what would have been helpful messages for them to receive about sex while growing up. Shame was the most prominent emotional experience for all participants in relation to sexuality, and there was a strong desire to “bring the shame out of the equation when it comes to sex” (Kevin), “just get rid of the shame” (Craig), and create an environment where “there’s no shame-base” (Gabriel) around sexuality. All participants longed for greater honesty, openness, and compassion around sexuality, especially in religious and family circles. Upon reflecting on what would have been 70 helpful growing up, participants shared how they hoped to have conversation with their children more pre-emptively around sexuality. Past – Openness, Honesty, and Compassion Many participants wished they had received more compassionate mentorship growing up. Gabriel noted how he did not have anyone in his life whom he could turn to and ask questions about sex. He wished he had a good mentor, one where he could “have an open, honest relationship with,” and who could “really tell [him] how sex is [and] why you want to wait.” Craig also shared how it would have been helpful to have mentors closer to his relational stage of life: I think the issue with having mentors that are way older than you is that they’ve gone through this figuring-out-in-their-mind process so much that they… don’t really remember how it felt and don’t feel it so acutely as someone, say, that was just in it and [can say], ‘oh ya that really sucked!’ Craig, Derrick, and Kevin all wished they had known that “there [was] nothing wrong with them for feeling the [sexual] things that they [were] feeling” (Craig). Kevin specifically mentioned how “repressing sex has gone so wrong in so many religious circles, [including] ones that [he had] been a part of too.” These three mentioned how helpful it would have been to know that sexuality was more than just sex and that it includes many nuanced areas of grey. There was a strong desire from many participants to have more information about how to navigate sex in relationships in contrast to the underlying assumption in religious circles that they would simply know what to do when they got married. As mentioned, Kevin only received messages about the dangers of sex, rather than information about “how sex is” in a relationship. Martin shared that he never “learned what it meant to be in a relationship or learned what it 71 meant to love someone or… the fuller picture of what [intimacy means].” Craig, too, in his premarital mentorship experiences, did not receive any information on how sex would be as a married couple, only that he and his girlfriend needed to protect their physical boundaries until then. When Craig did receive some pastoral counselling before getting married and marital sexuality was spoken about more candidly, inaccurate assumptions about sexual desire were shared, leading to sexual shame in marriage. Derrick’s experience of traumatic sexual difficulties in marriage provided a stark example of the desire for more honest conversation in religious contexts about sexuality, rather than concealing potential difficulties. In trying to persuade young adults to remain abstinent, marital sex was painted to be an amazing thing by pastors, and yet this only told half the story. The experience of sexual hypocrisy within different church contexts only served to reinforce Derrick’s desire for greater honesty: I care about consistency. And I care about honesty. And I feel like, especially in church context, there’s a lot of bullshit that’s said about this stuff. And I even look back at my own self and the shit that I would say to other young guys was so inconsistent with what I was actually doing and what I was actually living. Kevin also experienced the dangers of sexual hypocrisy in church. Sex was not spoken about at all, and yet the youth pastor at was grooming and distributing pornography to kids. Sexuality was seen in his church as something “out there,” and yet it was also “in the basement in it’s most inappropriate form.” Kevin saw the consequences of repressing sexuality, in that inappropriate behaviours were allowed to fester in secrecy. This led to a desire for “honesty and authenticity and finding some way to take shame out of the equation” in church. Both of these traumatic 72 experiences served to bolster the need for honest and open conversations around sexuality, especially in religious contexts. Future – Pre-emptive Conversations In light of the desire for more openness, honesty, and compassion around sexuality, all participants shared how they hoped to bring these qualities into their conversations with their future kids. Each participant mentioned the need to be pre-emptive, knowing that sexuality is a challenging topic to broach, especially as an adolescent. It was important to normalize sexuality and sexual desires for all participants. Derrick shared how he wanted to use more “sex-positive” language with his children, and Kevin hoped to “to instill that sex is a really beautiful thing… that pleasure is a good thing” and that “God created pleasure for a reason.” In his own work mentoring other couples, Craig hoped to share that “what [they are] experiencing is completely valid” when it comes to sexual desires, and to normalize now “messy” it can be. Alongside the desire to use more positive language when discussing sex also came a need to teach appropriate boundaries. Even for Derrick, who arguably had the most liberal views on sexuality, it was important to instill boundaries around only having sex in loving, committed relationships. Kevin also specifically mentioned the importance of sexual boundaries for self and others. With pornography and masturbation, Martin shared how he would have the “assumption that [his] kids are probably watching porn or probably masturbating.” He hoped to bring “grace and love” into these conversations, as well as ask questions rather than simply provide information. Along with Martin, Kevin also shared how he understood there to be a deeper need 73 behind the use of pornography, and he wanted to be able to “take the authentic piece out of whatever desire might be there” and ask questions such as: What are you actually trying to do for yourself? Is it about comforting? Well, what’s going on, what’s wrong? Is it about excitement? … Just to not shut it down immediately with, ‘oh that’s not good, we don’t go there,’ but to actually try to understand what’s going on deep down. Because there’s a place for what’s going on deep down, for sure, and pornography’s probably not even the best way to go about it. If kids were having sex or using pornography, Gabriel wanted to show “forgiveness and compassion because we’re all human,” and yet still try to direct them as to why it is important to wait until marriage to have sex. Common Story In the previous section, the general themes from this study were presented, along with specifics about how each participant experienced each theme. The following is the composite textural-structural description, or common story, of how newlywed participants experienced religious sexual messages. Growing up, participants were all exposed to religious sexual messages from church, family, or in religious schools. These messages were often proscriptive, outlining what was sexually unacceptable, and were offered without full understanding of the reasons why it was important to avoid sex. The most common message received was the general pronouncement “don’t have sex before marriage.” While these messages were not always explicit or openly discussed, they included total avoidance of masturbation and pornography use, all forms of sexual contact, and same-sex sexuality. 74 There was often an air of danger around sexuality, with words like “temptation,” “sin,” and “unnatural” used to describe sexuality. Pornography, in particular, was described as something that would “ruin your life” and cause “irreversible damage.” From this sense of danger emerged a “call to action” to “eliminate this temptation” for some participants, and others were given books about how to avoid the temptation of sexual sin. There was often a perceived need for accountability to other Christians, both peers and leaders, in order to avoid the “pitfalls” of premarital sexuality. These religious messages were often in direct opposition to sexual messages received from non-Christian peers. There was a sense that there should be “no guilt” in having casual, consensual sex with women, and that using pornography was acceptable as a means to “selfgratification.” For some participants with stronger roots in Christianity, religious messages around sexual abstinence became entrenched in their identity as a means to oppose permissive sexual attitudes. Others felt the need to be accountable to fellow Christian men to counteract the influence of permissive messages. Still others, who did not feel connected to the Christian influences in their life, felt “relief” in more permissive sexual messages and greater freedom to engage in sexuality unhindered by religious constraints. The conflicting sexual messages received in adolescence created an internal turmoil of sexual shame and fear within participants. Often, religious sexual messages included an unspoken rule that “if you’re thinking about sex, if you’re wanting to know more about sex, that’s not okay, that’s not good.” Sexuality was simply a “faucet that you didn’t touch until you got married.” There was little direction on how to explore sexuality as a bourgeoning young man, and few opportunities to ask questions. With the reality of sexual maturity, combined with strict religious proscriptions against any form of premarital sexuality, came a sense of shame. 75 There was a feeling of “wrongness” around being a sexual person, often leading to attempts to “repress” this part of them. On occasion, participants heard messages that, “sex is beautiful. It’s really good. It’s amazing. It’s exactly what God created. God loves sex.” Further, there were rare, but memorable, times when questions could be asked about sexuality in a religious context. These moments, however, appeared unable to prevail over internalize sexual shame. This was largely due to the more prominent caveat at the end of message: “sex is good, but there’s really bad things that could happen if you have it outside of marriage.” The black and white nature of religious sexual messages could only be held for so long and, at some point, all participants began to question “why” it was important to wait until marriage to have sex. There was a strong desire for many to remain true to their Christian faith, asking questions such as “what does God actually think [about sex]?” For many, the impetus for this season of questioning was the reality of sexual desire and attraction in dating relationships. It seemed that sexual proscriptions were relatively abstract beforehand, but became much more tangible when faced with sexual attraction to their girlfriends. There was an experience of internal tension for participants between holding on to rigid sexual messages and longing to have physical and sexual intimacy. For others, the questions began in singlehood when they were around other people who held less rigid views of sexuality, again leading to an awareness of internal tension between being a sexual person and feeling the need to “repress” this part of them. Some began to understand sexuality as a source of “creativity and vitality and life,” and that even in singlehood, they could be a “full person” in their sexuality. 76 For some, needing a better “why” for premarital abstinence led to testing religious sexual messages in light of sexual desires and a longing to be obedient to God. This was experienced as a “journey,” and one that continued into marriage. Some created a list of “dos and don’ts” that seemed to align with their longing to remain faithful to God in sex. Others found ways to “justify” engaging in some level of sexual intimacy with their girlfriends in order to reduce the level of internal dissonance. For those not in relationships, there was still the ability to take “inventory” of what sexual beliefs were important to them. While some participants had periods of more sexual liberty when their Christian faith was not as important, all eventually came to the conclusion, or remained steadfast in their conviction, that the act of vaginal penetration should saved for marriage. An important aspect of dating for many was maintaining physical boundaries. This was sometimes a precarious process, leading to further guilt and shame. Bargaining around premarital sexuality gave greater permission for some to be intimate with their girlfriends, but only until guilt emerged and the reins were pulled back. Others found the focus on physical boundaries, especially when talking to Christian mentors, overshadowed other important aspects of the relationship, such as communication. Further, the sole focus on physical boundaries led to a sense of shame when boundaries were not maintained, as well as fear that they would be forced to “take [a certain] amount of weeks apart” to “figure out their boundaries” by these mentors. Yet, there were still some participants who found it important and freeing to have some level of sexual intimacy before getting married, and they experienced “no regrets or shame about it.” Moving into marriage, participants experienced further changes to their perspectives around sex. Sex was found to be “incredibly vulnerable and scary” to some, and shame emerged out of unmet expectations. These included expectations that men always want sex more than 77 women, which led to questioning their masculinity when this expectation was not met. The expectation that sex in marriage would be the “best thing” was also unmet for some, which led to questioning “what’s wrong with us” for not being able to enjoy sex. A few participants experienced disappointment around unmet expectations for sexual frequency and enjoyment. Some participants expressed feeling angry over these unmet expectations, and spoke of needing to process this anger and disappointment and find new ways to be sexual as a couple. Another perspective that shifted for many participants was from an almost “egocentric” view of sex, with an emphasis on “physical gratification,” to a more dyadic understanding. For many, there was a shift from a focus on the “erotic” aspect of sex, which was about “passion, passion, passion,” to “intimacy” and “connection” with their wife. There was a new understanding that sex “is about us,” as well as a newfound appreciation for the “mystery around sex.” In all of the changes that occurred within marriage, many participants shared how the “safety of marriage” let them explore their expectations of self and the relationship, knowing that their wives would “stay committed” throughout the process. One participant mentioned the need to bring “curiosity and grace” into marriage, not expecting to have all the answers about himself and his partner. The ability to be open and honest with their spouse led to greater room to reorient and work through unmet expectations. When participants were asked to reflect on the messages they received about sex early on, they expressed a deep longing for more “open[ness],” “honesty,” and “compassion” around sex in religious circles. Many shared how they were only told how to avoid sex, but not taught how sex should be in a relationship. There was a desire for a greater ability to ask questions growing up, to know “why” it is important to wait until marriage instead of simply obeying. 78 Others were angry that they did not have accurate information around how sex within marriage can potentially be “painful” and “traumatic.” Participants also highlighted the need to “get rid of the shame” around sexuality. There was an understanding that greater openness and “authenticity” in speaking about sexuality in church would have helped reduce their experience of sexual shame. In part, compassionate mentorship, without fear of repercussions for not living up to certain standards, would have been helpful in both singlehood and in dating relationship, especially with a “holistic” focus instead of merely a sexual one. When asked how they hope to communicate about sexuality with their children in the future, participants all shared the desire to have pre-emptive conversation around sex and pornography, rather than waiting for their kids to bring it up. Many wanted to bring in more “sex-positive” language to instill in their kids that “sex is a really beautiful thing” that “God created.” Compassion towards their kids was also important in order to help them navigate the turmoil of adolescent sexuality without shame. Further, sexual boundaries were important to talk about, especially in light of sexual trauma some participants had witnessed. CHAPTER 5: DISCUSSION Summary of Purpose and Results This study explored how five newlywed Christian men experienced religious sexual messages through in-depth, semi-structured interviews. The first chapter outlined the nature of the study and provided a general overview of the structure. The second chapter explored the literature around the ways messages can impact people, the relationship between sexuality and Christianity, Christian sexual messages, sexual shame and guilt, and sexual sanctification. Additionally, chapter two outlined the gaps in the research and how this study hoped to address 79 this. The purpose of the study was to contribute rigorous, qualitative evidence to an area that, for the most part, has only clinical evidence available. The work of Sellers (2017) and McClintock (2001) provided a rich clinical and theoretical base from which to explore the impact of religious sexual messages on newlywed Christian men, however, considering the historical dominance of this group within society, it was surprising to find little formal research on their experiences. Chapter 3 discussed phenomenology as an appropriate qualitative research method for this study, as well as the nature of the study participants, the data analysis process, and ethical considerations. Chapter 4 presented the five overarching themes and 19 subthemes that participants experienced, concluding with a composite textural-structural description, or common story, of what and how the participants experienced religious sexual messages. These themes were (1) conflicting messages about sex growing up; (2) the need for accountability; (3) premarital sexuality as a journey; (4) changing understandings of sex within marriage; and (5) changing the conversation. This final chapter will explore the ways in which the findings are consistent with previous research, as well as novel contributions to the literature. Additionally, this chapter presents implications for clinical and pastoral work. Lastly, this chapter offers limitations and potential directions for future research. Relation to Existing Research Consistent Themes Many of the themes and participant experiences that emerged from the study were unsurprising, especially given the clinical work of Sellers (2017). In particular, the kinds of proscriptive sexual messages received and the impact of these messages were relatively consistent with the current literature. 80 Proscriptive Sexual Messages Consistent with Sellers’ (2017) findings, participants were rarely offered messages about the beauty of sexuality as a part of being human, only that they needed to refrain “from any expression of sexual desire: no masturbation, longing, touching, fantasizing, and so on” (p. 10, emphasis in original). The need for total sexual abstinence before marriage was mentioned by all participants, and Derrick specifically referenced a lengthy list of behaviours he was told to avoid. The proscriptive sexual messages disseminated in church contexts were unsurprising. All participants received the message in religious contexts to abstain from sex before marriage and to avoid masturbation and pornography. Messages of, “if you’re thinking about sex, if you’re wanting to know more about sex, that’s not okay, that’s not good” (Kevin) were consistent with the theme found in Sellers’ (2017) clinical research that “sex is for marriage, and that’s all you need to know” (p. 7). Sellers shares that for many who grew up in conservative Christian homes, “there were no conversations to help youth to understand how to honor sexual desire as a gift from God, both before marriage and during marriage” (p. 7). None of the participants in the study shared that they “learned what it meant to be in a relationship or learned what it meant to love someone or… the fuller picture of what [intimacy means]” (Martin). Instead, they were expected to simply know how to have healthy sex and intimacy once married. Sellers (2017) also describes how sexuality can be a “loaded topic” (p. 6) in many Christian families. She notes there are often unhelpful responses to questions of sexuality in Christian homes: Even though the child’s question or comment may have been made in complete innocence and curiosity, the parent’s response communicated that the young person had 81 done something wrong by bringing it up (embarrassment), that they should have known better (shame), and that this was very bad, or secret, or inappropriate for conversation (humiliation) (p. 6). Participants in this study specifically mentioned feeling embarrassment, shame, and humiliation at times when discussing sexuality growing up, whether from family or church contexts. Gabriel shared how questions about sex were met with embarrassment, and Martin believed he could not bring up certain sexual topics at home for fear of reprimand. Participant experience regarding lust and the dangers of sin were also consistent with the literature describing purity culture. Edger (2012) explains how lust is the “primary problem” (p. 164) within many conservative Christian circles regarding sexual purity, and Stanley (2020) remarks how lust is often viewed as a “ceaseless battle” (p. 117). In this study, participants spoke of lust as the enemy, and battlefield imagery (e.g. “a call to action” [Derrick]) permeated some participants’ experiences. Specific resources such as Every Man’s Battle (Arterburn, et al., 2009) further underscored this war mentality. Edger (2012) and Stanley’s (2020) research also describe how sexual impurity is often believed to cause permanent damage to the self. Messages around the dangers of lust and sexual temptation were confirmed in the study, such that masturbation and pornography use would “ruin your life” and cause “irreversible damage” (Kevin). Further, the message that if participants had premarital sex they would be “damaged goods” (Derrick) was also consistent with the messages and beliefs reported by Edger (2012) and Stanley (2020). Sexual Shame The experience of shame by participants was also unsurprising given the literature. Sellers (2017) asserts that, often, proscriptive sexual messages fail to distinguish between “feelings (which naturally occur outside of our control) and thoughts and actions (which we can 82 control)” (p. 11, emphasis in original), which sets people up to fail. In this study, the expectation of total premarital abstinence led to shame when participants felt they could not always keep their sexuality under complete control. Participants experienced little freedom to explore or inhabit their sexuality in both singlehood and when dating, and instead needed to repress this part. Further, Sellers (2017) found that many married Christian couples she encountered were not well acquainted with sex and felt shame around their sexual difficulties. Many in her work were not permitted to ask questions about sex, but lived under the assumption that they would know what to do once they married. Consistent with these findings, there were expectations from participants’ religious circles that sex would be easy and natural in marriage, but very little education on “how sex is” (Kevin) in marriage. They made sense of these difficulties together by attributing them to the rigid, shame-based messages they had received, as well as expectations that sex would be immediately pleasurable when married. Messages that sex would be automatically enjoyable within marriage were met with tremendous disappointment when expectations were not met. Unique Themes A number of themes emerged that provided novel insights into the experiences of newlywed Christian men. These themes include: the emotional work participants had done to process sexual shame; participants’ deconstruction of religious sexual messages; participants’ reflections on what would have been helpful for them to hear when growing up; and lastly, the ways they want to impact their future children’s understanding of sex. 83 Working Through Sexual Shame Before Marriage While participants’ experiences of shame were unsurprising, their processes of working through religious sexual messages and sexual shame emerged as a unique theme. Sellers (2017) spoke primarily with couples who began to explore these aspects after getting married. However, in this study, all participants started their “journey” of questioning religious sexual messages before marriage. Some began this process in singlehood when they were around people who were more open about sexuality, while others started questioning in the midst of dating relationships. There was agreement among most participants that the manner in which sex had been described in church and/or family before their experience in marriage presented only part of the story. This led to a search for greater nuance in their understanding of sexuality, even as all held firm to certain values and boundaries around reserving sex for marriage. The level of questioning evident in this study’s participants differed from the couples Sellers (2017) and Slowinski (2001) studied. While participants held on to a desire to honour God in their sexuality, there was greater openness to experiencing the nuances of sexuality. This contrasts to the inflexibility that Slowinski (2001) noted in many of his religious couples. Even within marriage, study participants shared a much greater openness to discuss sexuality and shame with their spouses, as opposed to feeling the need to keep silent. The importance of the “safety of marriage” (Craig) is a unique contribution to the literature, as it illustrates that shame can be undone when there is commitment, security, and compassion in the relationship. Sellers (2017) notes that sexual shame often continues into marriage, and some men may be more hesitant to speak to such a vulnerable emotional state if it is still an acute experience. Only Derrick had a particularly difficult and “traumatic” experience of marital sex, which was surprising given the clinical literature. Sellers (2017) likely had greater access to couples in 84 distress, as she based her research on her clinical work as a therapist. That being said, because Sellers (2017) based her findings on clinical experience, and since that is likely to be overwhelmingly couples in distress, the fact that this study was able to capture how potentially more secure marriages operate is a great strength, thus adding a different perspective to the literature. Sexual Sanctification Sex as a sanctified act was not as prominent of a theme as expected when compared to the current literature. While there were messages that sex was a “holistic” act (Craig), coinciding with a more embodied theology of sex (Nelson, 1992), this message was not commonly reported by participants. Participants occasionally heard messages that sex within marriage was beautiful and that sexuality was God-given, but these seemed to be overshadowed by experiences of sexual shame. In light of MacKnee’s (2002) work on profound spiritual and sexual experiences, it makes some sense that in the early stages of marriage, sexual sanctification may not be a common perspective or experience. Participants in MacKnee’s study were married for an average of 17.3 years, whereas participants in this study needed to be married for less than two years. Many participants in MacKnee’s work reported that time was necessary to work through sexual issues prior to experiencing the sanctity of marital sexuality. Therefore, there may be greater awareness or an increase in priority given to sexual sanctification in more established relationships. While participants in this study did not refer directly to the traditional definition of sacredness and sanctification in marriage, they did share that the commitment of marriage provided a safe environment for exploring vulnerable aspects of themselves, especially pertaining to sexuality and masculinity. This sense of safety within marriage illustrates that many 85 participants experience marriage as a unique, special context within which they can explore their vulnerabilities differently than in other contexts. Further, some participants shared that there is “a lot of mystery around sex,” and that it is “very elusive” (Kevin), which speaks to how participants experience sex with their spouse as something special. Reflection on Past Experience and Looking to the Future Additionally, a unique feature of this study was how participants shared what would have been helpful in their experience, as well as how they might speak with their own children differently about sexuality. Participants voiced that being mentored in a compassionate way on how to be a sexual person, even in singlehood, would have been tremendously helpful. Participants recalled the shame they experienced from many Christians when they asked questions about sex, and they longed to better understand sexuality, including why it was important to wait until marriage. There was a desire for greater “sex-positive” (Derrick) language that includes the “creativity and vitality and life” (Kevin) that is encased in one’s sexual side. Some participants also shared that as they mentor premarital couples in the future, they hope to bring openness for the messiness of sex, along with acceptance that there are not always “easy answers” (Craig) to questions about sexuality. Participants also spoke of how they will approach sexuality differently with their children. Instead of the silence they largely experienced at home growing up, participants planned on being more pre-emptive in talking with their future children. Participants hoped to bring compassion and openness to these conversations, to be able to explain in greater depth why it is important to wait until marriage to have sex, and to allow room for questions. The chance for participants to reflect on how they would talk about sex differently provided unique insights into how newlywed Christian men experience religious sexual messages. 86 Clinical and Pastoral Implications Important implications for both clinical counselling and pastoral work emerged based on participant responses and the study’s main themes. This study specifically provides insight into the experience of Christian men in pre-marital and newly married stages, and sheds light on the experiences of shame, dissonance, and confusion that can arise from religious sexual messages. Clinical Implications In terms of assessment, it is vitally important to understand the impact of religious beliefs on clients’ presenting problems, both as contributing factors and as potential resources (Plante, 2009). For individual clients who come from Christian backgrounds, it is important to assess the impact of sexual messages, even if their presenting problems do not appear to be related to sexuality. Since sexuality is often repressed in those from various Christian backgrounds, and, if a meta-goal of many therapies is greater congruence within the self (e.g. Satir et al., 1991; Schwartz & Sweezy, 2020), it may be important to the client’s overall well-being to explore the interplay between religious messages and their experiences of sexuality. Further, it may be clinically significant for client outcomes to understand in greater depth their expectations of sex based on sexual messages received earlier in life. Participants described internal dissonance and incongruence between sexual parts of themselves and parts that desired to remain abstinent before marriage. Using the language of Internal Family Systems Therapy (IFS) (Schwartz & Sweezy, 2020), it seems sexual parts were often polarized with moral/religious parts, leading to internal dissonance. Some participants shared how they repressed their sexual parts, which, in IFS terms, indicates these parts were exiled. However, after greater integration occurred, some participants expressed how their sexual parts contained elements of creativity and playfulness that were also repressed. IFS holds that a 87 meta-goal of therapy is greater integration of all parts of the person. When working with Christian clients where compartmentalization and repression has occurred, it is imperative for the counsellor to explore how all parts of the client, including sexual parts, interact in their internal world. There is potential to miss integration of different parts if a thorough assessment is not conducted. The exploration of religious sexual messages is even more pressing when working with couples where one or both members come from conservative Christian backgrounds. Sellers (2017) and Slowinski (2001) outline the ways strict religious sexual messages can interfere with marital and sexual satisfaction. As such, there is a profound need for clinicians to be well-versed in assessment and treatment of proscriptive and shame-based religious sexual messages in couple work. If sexual messages and their impacts are not fully explored, this may lead to a lack of understanding of various relational and sexual dysfunctions. For example, Emotionally Focused Couple Therapy (Johnson, 2019) would assess how sexual messages influence the couple’s dance, map what emotions are tied to these messages, and explore how these messages mutually influence each partner. Further, many sexual dysfunctions relating to low sex drive or erectile dysfunction can be rooted in repressing one’s sexuality over time (Sellers, 2017). It is important to make religious sexual messages and subsequent confusion and shame explicit, as they are often implicitly internalized and can influence perspectives, beliefs, and emotions. This study can also offer valuable insight for non-Christian counsellors. Clinicians with little exposure to people from conservative religious backgrounds or training on how to best support them may benefit from the study’s findings regarding sexual messaging and their impacts. It is imperative for the culturally competent counsellor to be aware of Christian values, especially as more liberal and permissive sexual values dominate many Western countries. It 88 may be surprising for non-Christian counsellors to discover how strict the expectation for premarital abstinence is for many Christians, as well as the lack of opportunity to ask questions and learn about sexuality in a more robust manner. Further, the results of this research point to a need for clinicians to learn how to best support conservative Christians; resources such as Sellers (2017) and Slowinski (2001) are likely to be helpful. For many of the participants, it was not safe to ask questions about sex. Counsellors should also be able to provide appropriate sexual psychoeducation in order to shed light on the intricacies of human sexuality. In particular, the ability to distinguish between sexual feelings and sexual thoughts/actions may be helpful in reducing shame, especially for adolescents in their bourgeoning sexual development. As well, the need for more a more holistic understanding of sexuality, both in and out of marriage, is important, and clinicians can turn to Sellers (2017) and the work of Gregoire and colleagues (2021) for robust and helpful descriptions of how to work to bring greater acceptance and enjoyment of sexuality in Christian couples. Pastoral Implications Sexuality is perhaps the most contested and emotionally driven topic in Western Christianity, and has been so for centuries. This study illustrates that there is a profound need for more holistic, compassionate, and honest religious discussions around sexuality. Pastors have an important role to play in disseminating religious beliefs around sexuality, and therefore need to be aware of the implications for how these beliefs are internalized by congregants. Considering that Christianity speaks against shame (e.g. Romans 8:1; Romans 10:11), the fact that all participants experienced shame when navigating their sexuality must be taken into serious consideration. Research has shown that many messages induce emotions that were not intended by the source (Dillard & Nabi, 2006). Therefore, even if there is no intention of causing 89 shame when discussing sexuality, the fact that shame was so often experienced by participants illustrates that the way sexuality is discussed must be re-evaluated. Additionally, some participants experienced profound silence around the topic of sexuality within church, and were shamed for raising questions. Silence often indicates that it is inappropriate to discuss a certain topic, and if someone has questions, they can feel shame for being curious (Sellers, 2017). It is important to have space in church contexts where people can ask question about sexuality and receive accurate, thorough answers. Some participants expressed anger at the lack of transparency and honesty around sexuality in church, whether from messages that sex within marriage was guaranteed to be amazing, or secret sexual issues (and crimes) among clergy and leaders. There was a sense among some participants that the reason pastors and leaders talked about how great marital sex would be was to convince young people to remain abstinent. However, almost all participants reported issues in their experiences of marital sexuality, and for some, this led to increased mistrust in Christian leaders. Therefore, it does congregants a great disservice to promise perfect sex in order to persuade them to remaining abstinent before marriage, as this is far from a guarantee. Further, pastors and leaders need to be able to provide a robust justification for why it is important to wait until marriage to have sex. In the postmodern age, calls to rote biblical obedience are falling more and more on skeptical ears. That being said, many participants appreciated that they reserved sex for marriage. Books such as Loveology (Comer, 2014) were noted by a few participants as helpful resources that offered deeper understanding of why waiting for marriage matters. This resource may provide further theological guidance for sermons, as well as authentic and honest pastoral mentorship. 90 Participants found it weighty to bear the message that they needed to simply repress their sexuality until marriage, and there was little information around how to be a sexual person in singlehood apart from complete sexual abstinence. Pastors may also look to theological work on sexuality in singlehood, especially given the trend in Western nations towards marriage later in life. Work by Kwee and Hoover (2008) provide specific, theologically informed guidance on masturbation, which may be helpful in light of individuals delaying marriage. Finally, it is important that pastors conducting premarital counselling provide accurate information. While general statements about how things may go are helpful, there should be ample qualification around these statements, considering the range and diversity in sexual drives, desires, and enjoyment. Hall and Adams (2011) advocate for knowledge around what expectations are commonly held in order to incorporate them into premarital programing, and this study illuminates many expectations and experiences of Christian men that can be added. This study adds to the current literature of how religious sexual messages impact Christian men, and points to the need for increased knowledge for both counsellors and pastors. While each theme could be explored in greater depth (see “Recommendations for Future Research” section below), this study aims to provide useful information for counsellors and pastors in order to inform and ameliorate clinical and pastoral practices. Strengths and Limitations Strengths There are a number of strengths to this study. As mentioned, there is a dearth of research on the experience of married heterosexual Christians and the interplay between sexuality and religion (Hernandez, et al., 2014). This study helps address this gap by giving voice to newly married Christian men and allowing them to share the impacts of religious sexual messages. The 91 study’s use of qualitative phenomenological methods allows for greater depth of understanding. This is particularly important with topics as nuanced as religion and sexuality, as there are numerous potential factors mediating the relationship between the two (Leonhardt, Busby, & Willoughby, 2020). Further, the study presents valuable insight into how Christian men experience and process sexual shame and dissonance related to religious sexual messages. As mentioned, these findings can help inform counselling work with Christian men and their spouses, and can also benefit pastoral work. The use of in-depth interviews offered participants a rare and helpful opportunity to reflect on the impact of religious sexual messages. Participants had the chance to reflect on various points in their lives, while also looking to the future and discussing what they hope to be different moving forward. This, in turn, may have opened up dialogue with their spouses about these impacts, as well as the ways in which they can work towards greater openness and compassion regarding marital sexuality. Additionally, these reflections may encourage intentionality with participants’ future children and mentoring relationships. Limitations The following limitations are noted: possible participant bias, small sample size, complex relationships between variables, and interview length. A common limitation to qualitative research is that it relies on participants’ memory, which may or may not accurately reflect their experiences from the past. Another limitation is self-selection bias of participants. Sexuality and religion are sensitive topics, and many may find it difficult to speak about their experience to researchers. In the study, most participants had already worked through elements of sexual shame, and all seemed to have stable, secure marriages. This may have underrepresented those who may be in less stable marriages or who still experience intense sexual shame, therefore 92 missing potential horizons of experience. However, this may also be a strength of the study, in that it presents a different portrait of how some men process through sexual shame in contrast to Sellers (2017) work. Social desirability bias, the “tendency on behalf of the subjects to deny socially undesirable traits and to claim socially desirable ones” (Nederhof, 1985, p. 264), is particularly pertinent to this study because sex and religion are sensitive topics and can be challenging to talk about. Some participants may not have felt comfortable sharing the full extent of their experience, and therefore some of the potential horizons with which to more fully understand the phenomenon may have been missed. As well, participants may have omitted information that seemed contradictory to their general experience in order to present a more coherent or desirable narrative. Perhaps the greatest limitation was the small number of participants, especially considering all contributed unique perspectives on religious sexual messages. Full saturation was not achieved due to low levels of recruitment, although participant responses allowed for consistent themes to emerge. Additionally, it makes sense that recruiting newlywed men to talk about sex, especially when shame is such a typical component of the experience, would be challenging. All participants had worked through sexual shame to some degree before marriage, and this certainly does not represent the full range of experiences for newlywed Christian men. Had there been more time and greater recruitment efforts, especially in building more ongoing relationships with church leaders in the community, the results likely would have been bolstered and expanded. Lastly, the length of the interviews may have presented another limitation. Longer interviews and follow-up interviews may have provided greater depth to participant responses. 93 Recommendations for Further Research With a broad topic such as messages about sex and their impacts, this was a very ambitious project for a master’s thesis. Any one of the study’s emerging themes or stages could be explored in greater depth. While this study offers insights for clinicians and couple therapists, theological research on how sexual messages are received and internalized by all genders, as well as how religious contexts can harm or resource young adults and their emerging sexual selves, would also be worth studying. Theological research may prove to hold preventative merit in guiding pastors and leaders in new ways of discussing human sexuality and God’s design for it that do not imbue a sense of shame. Further counselling research would bolster treatment efforts for those who do experience religious sexual shame, whether in singlehood, premarital dating relationship, within marriage, and even in divorce. As Leonhardt, Busby, and Willoughby (2020) note, there are numerous factors which influence the interplay between religious and sexuality, and further qualitative work would help elucidate some of these factors. With greater knowledge of the various factors which influence religion and sexuality, quantitative research could help separate these variables and provide insight into which factors are most influential. Potential factors that could be researched include: the impact of specific religious sexual messages; similarities and differences between the experience of members of various religious denominations; and factors that may mitigate sexual shame (e.g. compassionate mentors, comprehensive sex education). Research on couples is another potential source of valuable understanding around the impact of religious sexual messages. Some participants in this study briefly mentioned how different messages impacted their wives; however, this was not the focus of the study and firsthand information was not obtained from wives. The ability to compare how sexual messages 94 impact members of a couple similarly and differently, as well as how these messages mutually influence the experience of sex for both partners, could lead to valuable insights for couple counsellors and those that offer pastoral supports. Further, a longitudinal study design could be used to see how sexuality has changed for participants, including perceptions and experiences of sexuality as sacred. There is also potential to research individuals and couples who seek out counselling services to process the impact of religious sexual messages. This may provide greater understanding around what therapeutic factors and modalities are most beneficial to this process. Further, there remains opportunity to expand Telfer’s (2015) research on the perceptions and experiences of couple therapists who work with Christian couples. Finally, research on premarital counselling interventions may prove to hold the best of both preventative and reparative goals, as many Christian couples do seek premarital counselling. Future research could explore premarital topics regarding couple sexuality. In working with Christian couples before marriage, there is greater chance to offer guidance about sexuality, sexual relationships, and process sexual shame before the doors of marital sexuality are opened. Summary This study sought to explore how newlywed Christian men experience religious sexual messages along with the impact of these messages. This was done through an exploration of what religious messages were received growing up, how these messages were experienced before and after marriage, and how these messages conflicted with others they received. Further, this study sought to provide space for participants to reflect on what would have been helpful for them and how they desire to communicate about sex with their future families. This study is 95 important, as there is very little formal research on experiences of Christian men. This study sought to add to the existing research on the experience of religious sexual shame, as well as provide new insights into how religious sexual messages are processed by men. All participants shared messages about sexuality that were received from faith communities and families. All participants had experienced some level of internalized sexual shame, largely due to the rigid and authoritarian nature of religious sexual decrees, which provided little room for participants to explore sexuality as adolescents and young adults. Yet, all participants experienced a profound shift in their need to have a more robust understanding of religious sexual expectations, such as why it was important to wait until marriage to have sex. Many also began to work through their experience of sexual shame before marriage: this was a unique theme in comparison to the existing literature. Sexual shame did still exist within marriage, and participants needed to re-evaluate their expectations and beliefs around sexuality. There was an ability to renegotiate these beliefs and expectations within the safety and commitment of the participants’ marriages, signifying that these were largely stable and healthy relationships in comparison to relationships often studied in the literature. Participants were given the opportunity to look back on what would have been helpful growing up, and all reported a longing to have more compassionate and open mentorship around sexuality as a bourgeoning sexual person and in dating relationships. Further, all reported a desire to be more compassionate and speak of sex more openly and positively with their children, in comparison to how many of them experienced conversations around sex in their families. 96 REFERENCES Allport, G., & Ross, J. (1967). Personal religious orientation and prejudice. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 5(4), 432-443. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0021212 Ariela, E., & Ariela, J. (2020). Forecasting relationship quality of Indonesian newlywed individuals: A quantitative study on the role of attachment. Asia Pacific Journal of Counselling and Psychotherapy. https://doi.org/10.1080/21507686.2020.1781668 Armstrong, J. (2010). Naturalistic inquiry. In N. J. Salkind (Ed.), Encyclopedia of research design. Sage Publications, Inc. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781412961288 Arterburn, S, Stoeker, F, & Yorkey, M. (2009). Every man’s battle: Strategies for victory in the real world of sexual temptation. Waterbrook Press. Ashdown, B. K., Hackathorn, J., & Clark, E. M. (2011). In and out of the bedroom: Sexual satisfaction in the marital relationship. Journal of Integrated Social Sciences, 2, 40–57. Baucom, D. H., Epstein, N., Rankin, L. A., & Burnett, C. K. (1996). Assessing relationship standards: The inventory of specific relationship standards. Journal of Family Psychology, 10(1), 72–88. https://doi.org/10.1037/0893-3200.10.1.72 Baumeister, R. F., Vohs, K. D., DeWall, C. N., & Zhang, L. (2007). How emotion shapes behavior: Feedback, anticipation, and reflection, rather than direct causation. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 11(2), 167–203. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868307301033 Beckwith, H. D., & Morrow, J. A. (2005). Sexual attitudes of college students: The impact of religiosity and spirituality. College Student Journal, 39(2), 357–366. 97 Bennett, R. (1998). Shame, guilt & responses to non profit and public sector ads. International Journal of Advertising, 17(4), 483–499. https://doi.org/10.1080/02650487.1998.11104734 Boiger, M., Ceulemans, E., De Leersnyder, J., Uchida, Y., Norasakkunkit, V., & Mesquita, B. (2018). Beyond essentialism: Cultural differences in emotions revisited. Emotion, 18(8), 1142–1162. https://doi.org/10.1037/emo0000390.supp Bordini, G. S., & Sperb, T. M. (2013). Sexual double standard: A review of the literature between 2001 and 2010. Sexuality and Culture, 17, 686–704. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12119-012-163-0 Brotto, L. A., Woo, J. S. T., & Gorzalka, B. B. (2012). Differences in sexual guilt and desire in East Asian and Euro-Canadian men. Journal of Sex Research, 49(6), 594–602. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224499.2011.618956 Brown, P. (1988). Body and society: Men, women, and sexual renunciation in early Christianity. Columbia University Press. Canadian Institutes of Health Research, Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada, and Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada, Tri-Council Policy Statement: Ethical Conduct for Research Involving Humans, December 2018. http://www.pre.ethics.gc.ca/eng/documents/tcps2-2018-en-interactive-final.pdf, Retrieved on July 10, 2021. Carboneau, R. A. (2018). Religiosity, moral disapproval, shame and pornography use: Assessing the relationship between shame and sexual behaviors. Doctoral dissertation. Retrieved from: Liberty University. 98 Carr, D. M. (1998). Rethinking sex and spirituality: The Song of Songs and its readings. Soundings: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 81(3–4), 413–435. Cialdini, R. B. (2001). The science of persuasion. Scientific American, 284(2), 76–81. Cialdini, R. B., & Goldstein, N. J. (2004). Social influence: Compliance and conformity. Annual Review of Psychology, 55, 591–621. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.55.090902.142015 Comer, J. M. (2014). Loveology: God. Love. Marriage. Sex. And the never-ending story of male and female. Zondervan. Cornelissen, L. (2021, October 28). Religiosity in Canada [Infographic]. Statistics Canada. https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/pub/11-627-m/11-627-m2021079-eng.htm Creswell, J. W. (2013). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (3rd ed.). Sage. Daly, K. J. (2007). Qualitative methods for family studies and human development. Sage Publications, Inc. Davidson, J. K., Moore, N. B., & Ullstrup, K. M. (2004). Religiosity and sexual responsibility: Relationships of choice. American Journal of Health Behavior, 28(4), 335–346. https://doi.org/10.5993/ajhb.28.4.5 Deguara, A. (2019). Sexual morality and shame among Catholics whose lifestyle does not conform to church teaching. Sexuality & Culture, 23, 793-810. http://doi.org/10.1007/s12119-019-09591-w Descartes, R. (1977). The essential writings. (J. Blom, Ed.). Harper & Row. 99 Dillard, J. P., & Nabi, R. L. (2006). The persuasive influence of emotion in cancer prevention and detection messages. Journal of Communication, 56(Suppl 1), S123–S139. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2006.00286.x Dillard, J. P., Plotnick, C. A., Godbold, L. C., Freimuth, V. S., & Edgar, T. (1996). The multiple affective outcomes of AIDS PSAs: Fear appeals do more than scare people. Communication Research, 23(1), 44–72. https://doi.org/10.1177/009365096023001002 Driscoll, M., & Driscoll, G. (2012). Real marriage: The truth about sex, friendship, and life together. Thomas Nelson. Durkin, S., Bayly, M., Brennan, E., Biener, L., & Wakefield, M. (2018). Fear, sadness and hope: Which emotions maximize impact of anti-tobacco mass media advertisements among lower and higher SES groups? Journal of Health Communication, 23(5), 445–461. https://doi.org/10.1080/10810730.2018.1463320 Edger, K. (2012). Evangelicalism, sexual morality, and sexual addiction: Opposing views and continued conflicts. Journal of Religion and Health, 51(1), 162–178. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10943-010-9338-7 Edwards, J. N., & Booth, A. (1994). Sexuality, marriage, and well-being: The middle years. In A. S. Rossi (Ed.), Sexuality across the life course (pp. 233–259). University of Chicago Press. Elliott, S., & Umberson, D. (2008). The performance of desire: Gender and sexual negotiation in long-term marriages. Journal of Marriage and Family, 70(2), 391–406. http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3737.2008.00489.x Farley, M. A. (2006). Just love: A framework for Christian sexual ethics. Continuum. 100 Finlay, L. (2009). Debating phenomenological research methods. Phenomenology & Practice, 3(1), 6-25. https://doi.org/10.29173/pandpr19818 Frijda, N. H. (2010). Impulsive action and motivation. Biological Psychology, 84(3), 570–579. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biopsycho.2010.01.005 Furukawa, E., Tangney, J., & Higashibara, F. (2012). Cross-cultural continuities and discontinuities in shame, guilt, and pride: A study of children residing in Japan, Korea and the USA. Self and Identity, 11(1), 90–113. https://doi.org/10.1080/15298868.2010.512748 Gardner, T. A. (2002). Sacred sex: A spiritual celebration of oneness in marriage. Waterbrook Press. Glock, C. Y., & Stark, R. (1965). Religion and society in tension. Rand McNally Giorgi, A. (1989). One type of analysis of descriptive data: Procedures involved in following a phenomenological method. Methods, 1, 39-61. Gollwitzer, P. M. (1999). Implementation intentions: Strong effects of simple plans. American Psychologist, 54(7), 493-503. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.54.7.493 Gravel, E. E., Young, M., Olavarria-Turner, M., & Lee, A. M. S. (2011). Ethnic differences in sexual guilt between Anglo-Canadians and Franco-Québécois emerging adults: The mediating roles of family and religion. Canadian Journal of Human Sexuality, 20(4), 129–142. Gregoire, S. W., Gregoire Lindenburg, R., & Sawatsky, J. (2021) The great sex rescue: The lies you’ve been taught and how to recover what God intended. Baker Books. 101 Guba, E. G., & Lincoln, Y. S. (1994). Competing paradigms in qualitative research. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research. (pp. 105–117). Sage Publications, Inc. Hackathorn, J. M., Ashdown, B. K., & Rife, S. C. (2016). The sacred bed: Sex guilt mediates religiosity and satisfaction for unmarried people. Sexuality & Culture: An Interdisciplinary Quarterly, 20(1), 153–172. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12119-015-9315-0 Hall, S. S., & Adams, R. (2011). Newlyweds’ unexpected adjustments to marriage. Family and Consumer Sciences Research Journal, 39(4), 375–387. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.15523934.2011.02076.x Hardy, S. A., & Willoughby, B. J. (2017). Religiosity and chastity among single young adults and married adults. Psychology of Religion and Spirituality, 9(3), 285–295. https://doi.org/10.1037/rel0000112 Harris, J. (2003). I kissed dating goodbye (Updated ed). Multnomah Books. Harris, J. (2003). Sex is not the problem (lust is): Sexual purity in a lust-saturated world: Study guide for men. Multnomah Publishers, Inc. Hassell, D. (2008). A comparison of Christian Denominations on sexual attitudes [ProQuest Information & Learning]. In Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The Sciences and Engineering (Vol. 69, Issue 7–B, p. 4483). Hernandez, K. M., Mahoney, A., & Pargament, K. I. (2011). Sanctification of sexuality: Implications for newlyweds’ marital and sexual quality. Journal of Family Psychology, 25(5), 775–780. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0025103 Hernandez, K. M., Mahoney, A., & Pargament, K. I. (2014). Sexuality and religion. In D. L. Tolman, L. M. Diamond, J. A. Bauermeister, W. H. George, J. G. Pfaus, & L. M. Ward 102 (Eds.), APA handbook of sexuality and psychology, Vol. 2: Contextual approaches. (pp. 425–447). American Psychological Association. http://doi.org/10.1037/14194-013 Huff, A. S. (2009). Designing research for publication. Sage Publications, Inc. Husserl, E. (1977). Cartesian meditations: An introduction to metaphysics. (D. Cairns, Trans.) Martinus Nijhoff. Johnson, R. C., Danko, G. P., Huang, Y.-H., Park, J. Y., Johnson, S. B., & Nagoshi, C. T. (1987). Guilt, shame, and adjustment in three cultures. Personality and Individual Differences, 8(3), 357–364. https://doi.org/10.1016/0191-8869(87)90036-5 Johnson, S. M. (2019). Attachment theory in practice: Emotionally Focussed Therapy (EFT) with individuals, couples, and families. Guilford Press. Jost, J. T., Hawkins, C. B., Nosek, B. A., Hennes, E. P., Stern, C., Gosling, S. D., & Graham, J. (2014). Belief in a just God (and a just society): A system justification perspective on religious ideology. Journal of Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology, 34(1), 56–81. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0033220 Kelly, D. F. (1983). Sexuality and concupiscence in Augustine. The Annual of the Society of Christian Ethics, 3, 81–116. Kinsey, A. C., Pomeroy, W. B., & Martin, C. E. (1948). Sexual behavior in the human male. W.B. Saunders Co. Kinsey, A. C., Pomeroy, W. B., Martin, C. E., & Gebhard, P. H. (1953). Sexual behavior in the human female. W.B. Saunders Co. Klein, V., Savaş, Ö., & Conley, T. D. (2021). How WEIRD and androcentric is sex research? Global inequities in study populations. The Journal of Sex Research. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224499.2021.1918050 103 Klement, K. R., & Sagarin, B. J. (2017). Nobody wants to date a whore: Rape-supportive messages in women-directed Christian dating books. Sexuality & Culture: An Interdisciplinary Quarterly, 21(1), 205–223. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12119-016-9390-x Koelsch, L. E. (2013). Reconceptualizing the member check interview. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 12(1), 168-179. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F160940691301200105 Kwee, A. W., & Hoover, D. C. (2008). Theologically-informed education about masturbation: A male sexual health perspective. Journal of Psychology and Theology, 36(4), 258–269. https://doi.org/10.1177/009164710803600402 Kyle, S. (2013). Identification and treatment of sexual shame: Development of a measurement tool and group therapy protocol. Doctoral Dissertation. Retrieved from Liberty University Digital Commons. Leonhardt, N. D., Busby, D. M., Hanna-Walker, V. R., & Leavitt, C. E. (2020). Sanctification or inhibition? Religious dualities and sexual satisfaction. Journal of Family Psychology. http://doi.org/10.1037/fam0000796 Leonhardt, N. D., Busby, D. M., & Willoughby, B. J. (2020). Sex guilt or sanctification? The indirect role of religiosity on sexual satisfaction. Psychology of Religion and Spirituality, 12(2), 213–222. https://doi.org/10.1037/rel0000245 Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. A. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Sage. Lorenzo, J. M., Barry, R. A., & Khalifian, C. E. (2018). More or less: Newlyweds’ preferred and received social support, affect, and relationship satisfaction. Journal of Family Psychology, 32(7), 860–872. https://doi.org/10.1037/fam0000440 Marcinechová, D., & Záhorcová, L. (2020). Sexual satisfaction, sexual attitudes, and shame in relation to religiosity. Sexuality & Culture, 24(6), 1913–1928. 104 https://doi.org/10.1007/s12119-020-09727-3 Masters, W. H., & Johnson, V. E. (1970). Human sexual inadequacy. Little, Brown. McClintock, K. A. (2001). Sexual shame: An urgent call to healing. Fortress Press. McFarland, M. J., Uecker, J. E., & Regnerus, M. D. (2011). The role of religion in shaping sexual frequency and satisfaction: Evidence from married and unmarried older adults. Journal of Sex Research, 48, 297–308. http://doi.org/10.1080/00224491003739993 Mertens, D. M. (2020). Research and evaluation in education and psychology: Integrating diversity with quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods (5th ed.). Sage Publication, Inc. Milgram S. (1974). Obedience to authority. Harper & Row Moon, S. & Reger, J. (2014). “You are not your own”: Rape, sexual assault, and consent in Evangelical Christian dating books. Journal of Integrated Social Sciences, 4(1), 55-74. Mosher, D. L., & Cross, H. (1971). Sex guilt and premarital sexual experiences of college students. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 36, 27-32. Moustakas, C. (1994). Phenomenological research methods. Sage Publications, Inc. Murray, K. M., Ciarrocchi, J. W., & Murray-Swank, N. A. (2007). Spirituality, religiosity, shame and guilt as predictors of sexual attitudes and experiences. Journal of Psychology and Theology, 35(3), 222–234. https://doi.org/10.1177/00916471070350030 Murray-Swank, N. A., Pargament, K. I., & Mahoney, A. (2005). At the crossroads of sexuality and spirituality: The sanctification of sex by college students. International Journal for the Psychology of Religion, 15(3), 199–219. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327582ijpr1503_2 105 Nederhof, A. J. (1985). Methods of coping with social desirability bias: a review. European Journal of Social Psychology, 15(3), 263–280. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2420150303 Nelson, J. Β. (1992). Body theology. Westminster/John Knox Press. Pargament, K. I. (2007). Spiritually integrated psychotherapy: Understanding and addressing the sacred. Guilford Press. Pargament, K. I., & Mahoney, A. (2009). Spirituality: The search for the sacred. In S. J. Lopez & C. R. Snyder (Eds.), Oxford handbook of positive psychology (2nd ed., pp. 611–620). Oxford University Press. Plante, T. G. (2009). Assessment issues. In T. G. Plante, Spiritual practices in psychotherapy: Thirteen tools for enhancing psychological health (pp. 47–64). American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/11872-003 Polkinghorne, D. E. (1989). Phenomenological research methods. In R. S. Valle & S. Halling (Eds.), Existential-phenomenological perspectives in psychology (pp. 41-60). Plenum Press. Reason, P. (1981). Methodological approached to social science. In P. Reason & J. Rowan (Eds.), Human inquiry (pp. 43-51). Wiley. Rodriguez, E. M. (2009) At the intersection of church and gay: A review of the psychological research on gay and lesbian Christians. Journal of Homosexuality, 57(1), 5-38. https://doi.org/10.1080/00918360903445806 Sanford, K. (1994). Toward a masturbation ethic. Journal of Psychology and Theology, 22(1), 21–28. Satir, V., Banmen, J., Gerber, J., & Gomori, M. (1991). The Satir model: Family therapy and beyond. Science and Behaviour Books, Inc. 106 Scherer, K. R., Schorr, A., & Johnstone, T. (Eds.). (2001). Appraisal processes in emotion. Oxford University Press. Schoenfeld, E. A., Loving, T. J., Pope, M. T., Huston, T. L., & Štulhofer, A. (2017). Does sex really matter? Examining the connections between spouses’ nonsexual behaviors, sexual frequency, sexual satisfaction, and marital satisfaction. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 46(2), 489–501. http://doi.org/0.1007/s10508-015-0672-4 Schwartz, R. C., & Sweezy, M. (2020). Internal family systems therapy (2nd ed.). The Guilford Press. Seidman, I. (2006). Interviewing as qualitative research: A guide for researchers in education and the social sciences (3rd ed.). Teacher College Press. Sellers, T. S. (2017). Sex, God, and the conservative church: Erasing shame from sexual intimacy. Routledge. Slowinski, J. W. (2001). Therapeutic dilemmas: Solving sexual difficulties in the context of religion. Journal of Sex Education and Therapy, 26(4), 272-280. https://doi.org/10.1080/01614576.2001.11074433 Sokol, D. (1986). Spirituality and sexuality: A phenomenological exploration of transcendental states in sexuality. Dissertation Abstracts International, 47(7-A) 2615. Sprecher, S. (2002). Sexual satisfaction in premarital relationships: Associations with satisfaction, love, commitment, and stability. Journal of Sex Research, 39(3), 190–196. http://doi.org/10.1080/00224490209552141 Stanley, O. (2020). A personal encounter with purity culture: Evangelical Christian schooling in Aotearoa/New Zealand. Women’s Studies Journal, 34(1/2), 116–129. 107 Tangney, J. P., & Dearing, R. (2002). Shame and guilt in interpersonal relationships. Guilford Press. Taylor, G. A. & Mudge, M. (Hosts). (2021, January 5). Unholy trinity: Purity part 1 (No. 3) [Audio podcast episode]. The Sophia Society. Telfer, T. A. (2015). Sexual health and religion: Counselors’ perceptions of religious influences in treatment efficacy. In Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The Sciences and Engineering (Vol. 76, Issue 12–B(E)). The Anglican Communion Office (1998). Section I.10 - Human sexuality. https://www.anglicancommunion.org/resources/document-library/lambethconference/1998/section-i-called-to-full-humanity/section-i10-human-sexuality The United Church of Canada. (2021). Gender, sexuality, and orientation. https://unitedchurch.ca/community-and-faith/being-community/gender-sexuality-and-orientation Thornton, A., & Camburn, D. (1989). Religious participation and adolescent sexual behavior and attitudes. Journal of Marriage and Family, 51(3), 641-653. https://doi.org/10.2307/352164 van Manen, M. (1990). Researching lived experience. State University of New York Press. Volk, F., Thomas, J., Sosin, L., Jacob, V., & Moen, C. (2016). Religiosity, developmental context, and sexual shame in pornography users: A serial mediation model. Sexual Addiction & Compulsivity, 23(2–3), 244–259. https://doi.org/10.1080/10720162.2016.1151391 Wertz, F. J., Charmaz, K., McMullen, L. M., Josselson, R., Anderson, R., & McSpadden, E. (2011). Five ways of doing qualitative analysis: Phenomenological psychology, grounded theory, discourse analysis, narrative research, and intuitive inquiry. The Guilford Press. 108 Wiesner-Hanks, M. (2001). Christianity and sexuality in the early modern world: Regulating desire, reforming practice. Routledge. Williamson, H. C. (2021). The development of communication behavior over the newlywed years. Journal of Family Psychology, 35(1), 11–21. https://doi.org/10.1037/fam0000780 Woo, J. S. T., Morshedian, N., Brotto, L. A., & Gorzalka, B. B. (2012). Sex guilt mediates the relationship between religiosity and sexual desire in East Asian and Euro-Canadian college-aged women. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 41(6), 1485–1495. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-012-9918-6 Yoder, P. (1990). Guilt, the feeling and the force: A phenomenological study of the experience of feeling guilty. (Doctoral dissertation, The Union Institute, 1989). Dissertation Abstracts International, 50, 5341B. 109 APPENDIX A: CHARACTERISTICS OF THE RESEARCHER As part of the Epoche process outlined by Moustakas (1994), it is important for the researcher to describe their own experience with the phenomenon in question in order to bring to light and bracket off presuppositions (Creswell, 2013). This is a continual process, one which must be engaged with over and over again as the researcher interviews participants and analyzes the data (Finlay, 2009). Moustakas (1994) notes that the Epoche is: a preparation for the deriving of new knowledge but also as an experience in itself, a process of setting aside predilections, prejudices, predispositions, and allowing things, events, and people to enter anew into consciousness, and to look and see them again, as if for the first time (p. 85). In Creswell’s (2013) adaptation of Moustakas’ (1994) phenomenological method, the first step is a thorough description of how the researcher has experience the phenomenon in order to be purposeful in exposing and setting aside potential predispositions. In contrast to Husserl (1977), who believed in the possibility of a completely pure state of consciousness, both Moustakas (1994) and Creswell (2013) note that this cannot be done entirely. That being said, “the value of the epoche principle is that it inspires one to examine biases and enhances one’s openness even if a perfect and pure state is not achieved” (Moustakas, 1994, p. 61). I will start off by noting the ways in which I have experienced the phenomenon of inquiry, followed by the manners in which I have not and cannot experience what I am investigating. To begin, I am a man who grew up in a conservative Evangelical home from the mid-1990s to the early 2010s. As such, I grew up on the heels of the Purity Culture movement of the latter 20th century which occurred within the broader North American Evangelical community (Stanley, 2020). As previously mentioned, this was a movement that was 110 characterized by strict adherence to notions of sexual purity and virginity, with messages directed at adolescents and premarital young adults (Stanley, 2020). My father was a pastor in a small Evangelical church from the time I was 5 through to age 12. I was taught in church and at youth group that to look at a woman and feel any sort of attraction was lustful, with common reference to Matthew 5:28-29 (NIV): But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart. If your right eye causes you to stumble, gouge it out and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to be thrown into hell. This passage instilled immense fear in me as an adolescent boy. There was tremendous worry that a mere glance at someone could trigger my damnation unless drastic steps were taken. Therefore, my experience of messages regarding sex was primarily fueled by fear regarding my potential perishing in hell. I was given books to read regarding how to stay sexually pure by focusing on Jesus. I was not permitted to watch MTV, with its sexual music videos, and any television show with more than a hint of sexuality was prohibited. My parents were overt in communicating that any exposure to sexuality as a young adolescent would make me lustful towards women and increase my desire to have premarital sex. These messages were extremely distressing as I emerged into adolescence. As a young person with hormones coursing throughout my body, I was aware that I had sexual impulses. There were questions around masturbation (since everyone was talking about it and doing it): was it bad if I did not think about anyone lustfully and did not use pornography? Was that even possible? There was a deep sense of shame whenever I was overcome by my sexual desires; I felt that I was at my core a bad person because of my actions. 111 And then came the bigger question: what did it mean if I was not sexually attracted to women, but instead found myself “lusting” over men? This latter question both added to and relieved some of my anxieties. I was told that my homosexuality was just a phase, and that if I focussed on loving and knowing Jesus, eventually he would bring about a woman into my life with whom I was sexually and romantically attracted to and whom I could marry. Yet, the more I became aware of my sole attraction to men, the less I was able to reconcile and hold the Evangelical Christian notions of sexuality I had been taught. The irreconcilable nature allowed me to begin a process of questioning the messages I received about sex from church. Another message that was prevalent at the time was that if you were sexually impure, you devalued your future sexual relationship with your spouse, and this could never be recovered. I did not experience this message as profoundly as others may have, likely because my father had been married twice before he met my mother. I, therefore, had an example of a fulfilling marriage which existed despite my father’s previous missteps, and the message of grace and forgiveness was more pronounced that one of irredeemable defilement. The message I received instead from my father was that sex outside of marriage had the potential to cause a lot of hurt and pain, and this was his primary motivation in discouraging me from engaging in any premarital sex. I have, therefore, been exposed to many religious messages about sex, and my experience has been one of fear and shame. However, because of my queerness, I cannot know what it is like to be attracted to women and to be in a situation where sex is religiously sanctioned (i.e. heterosexual marriage). I find myself in a unique position as the primary researcher in being able to relate to much of the experiences of men who have received religious messages regarding sex, but unable to know how it is for them to be in a relationship where sex is religiously sanctioned. 112 From this, I know I will need to be more purposeful in bracketing my own experiences of religious sexual messages in order to come to the participants’ experiences with a fresh consciousness. Despite not having direct experience of marital sex, I still hold presuppositions of what may occur, and so there is still a need to be purposeful in engaging in the epoche process. 113 APPENDIX B: SCREENING SCRIPT Hello, Thank you for your interest in this study looking at perspectives of Christian sexual messages on newlywed Christian men. This study will require one 45-minute interview. As well, you may be asked to participate in a follow up interview to confirm and/or modify the interpretations of the researcher in order to ensure these are valid to your experience (qualifier that they can opt out). I am going to ask you a few questions to make sure you are eligible before setting up the first interview. 1. Do you identify as male? 2. Do you currently identify as Christian? a. If no: thank you for your interest in this study. This study is looking specifically at the perspectives of men who identify as Christian, and so unfortunately you will not be able to participate in this study. 3. Do you identify as heterosexual? a. If no: thank you for your interest in this study. At this point, we are only recruiting for heterosexual participants. This is because there has been much more research on the perspectives of Christian men who do identify as nonheterosexual. 4. Are you in your first marriage, and have you been married for 2 years or less? a. If no: thank you for your interest in this study. We are looking specifically at first time newlywed perspectives on sex, and as such, you will not be eligible to participate in the study. 5. Can you commit to one 45-minute interview? 114 a. If no: we will be running the study through the spring of 2022. Is there a time where you would be able to commit to the two interviews? b. If no to a.: thank you for your interest in this study. Unfortunately because you are unable to partake in both interviews, you will not be eligible for the study. If yes to all question: Wonderful! 115 APPENDIX C: INFORMED CONSENT FORM Study Title: Perspectives on Sex in Newlywed Christian Men Daniel Doerksen, MA Candidate, ACTS Seminaries, 604-781-4964, daniel.doerksen@mytwu.ca Danielle Vriend Fluit, PhD, Thesis Supervisor, 604-888-7511 ext. 3806, danielle.fluit@twu.ca Invitation to Participate: You are invited to participate in the abovementioned research study conducted by Daniel Doerksen. The purpose of the study is to explore how religious sexual messages impact and influence marital sexuality in newlywed men. Your participation will consist of one interview lasting approximately 45-minutes. You may also be asked to participate in a brief follow-up interview should clarification be needed by the researcher regarding what was shared in the interview and/or to confirm the researcher’s analysis of the interview data. The interview will ask demographic questions, explore the religious messages you received about sex growing up, inquire about your current perspectives on marital sexuality, and provide an opportunity to share what you would have liked to be different. Risks: Your participation in this study will entail that you volunteer personal information regarding your experiences of sex, which may cause some personal discomfort. The researcher offers assurance that every effort will be made to minimize these risks. Therapist referrals are included as part of this form, should you experience emotional distress either during or after the interviews. Benefits: Your participation in this study may allow for personal reflection on you experiences which may, in turn, be personally beneficial. However, there are no direct benefits to your participation in this study. Confidentiality and Anonymity: Any information that is obtained in connection with this study and that can be identified with you will remain confidential and will be disclosed only with your permission or as required by law. The material from the interviews will be used only for the researcher’s thesis and subsequent journal articles. While short quotes may be used in the research presentation, your confidentiality will be protected through coding of data (no names, places, or specific identifiers will be used). The interview data will be kept on a password encrypted external hard drive wherein only the researcher will have access to the material. Conservation of Data: Video files and transcripts will be kept on a password protected external hard drive. Only the researcher and his supervisor will have access to this. Interview videos will be destroyed after the study has been completed, and transcripts will be kept for five years after study completion. After this time, the data will be securely destroyed. 116 Compensation: There is no compensation for participating in this study. Voluntary Participation: You are under no obligation to participate and if you choose to participate, you can withdraw from the study at any time, both during the interview process and following it, without suffering any negative consequences. If you choose to withdraw, all recordings and transcriptions of the interviews will be destroyed. You will no longer have the option to withdraw from the study after September 1, 2022, as this is when the research will be submitted for approval. Acceptance: If you have any questions or desire further information with respect to this study, you may contact Daniel Doerksen at 604-781-4964 or daniel.doerksen@mytwu.ca. If you have any concerns about your treatment or rights as a participant, you may contact the Ethics Compliance Officer in the Office of Research, Trinity Western University at 604-5132167 or HERB@twu.ca. Your signature below indicates that you have had your questions about the study answered to your satisfaction and have received a copy of this consent form for your own records. Your signature indicates that you consent to participate in this study and that your responses may be put in anonymous form and kept for further use after the completion of the study. Participant printed name: _________________________________________________ Participant signature: _____________________________________________________ Date: ___________________________________________________________________ Should you be interested in receiving a summary of the results of this study, please write your email below. Email: ________________________________________________________________ 117 Referral List of Counsellors Experience Change Counselling Address: Unit 210 - 9547 152nd Street, Surrey, BC Phone: 778-668-8602 Website: https://experiencechange.ca/ Burnaby Counselling Group Address: Unit 230 - 3701 Hastings Street, Burnaby, BC Phone: 604-430-1303 Website: https://counsellinggroup.org Resonance Counselling Address: Unit 301 - 2190 West Railway Street, Abbotsford, BC Phone: 604-343-8120 Website: https://www.resonancecounselling.ca/ 118 APPENDIX D: ADVERTISEMENT Christianity and Sex: Experiences of Newlywed Men Primary Researcher: Daniel Doerksen Thesis Supervisor: Dr. Danielle Vriend Fluit Newlywed men (married less than two years) are invited to participate in a research study exploring how Christian messages about sex influence marital sexuality. Participants will meet with the researcher for two 90minute interviews to share their experiences of Christian sexual messages and how they have impacted their experience of sex. Christianity and Sex daniel.doerksen@mytwu.ca Christianity and Sex daniel.doerksen@mytwu.ca Christianity and Sex daniel.doerksen@mytwu.ca Christianity and Sex daniel.doerksen@mytwu.ca Christianity and Sex daniel.doerksen@mytwu.ca Christianity and Sex daniel.doerksen@mytwu.ca Christianity and Sex daniel.doerksen@mytwu.ca Christianity and Sex daniel.doerksen@mytwu.ca Christianity and Sex daniel.doerksen@mytwu.ca Christianity and Sex daniel.doerksen@mytwu.ca If you are interested in participating or have questions, please contact: Daniel Doerksen, MA Candidate, daniel.doerksen@mytwu.ca 119 APPENDIX E: DEBRIEFING SCRIPT As we come to a close for this interview, I know we have discussed some sensitive topics. I am wondering how this experience has been for you. Is there anything that is not sitting well with you or that you need to debrief? If there is anything that comes to mind that you want to add or modify about your experience, please feel free to reach out.