Gideon's Bible Is Being Replaced By Trojan's Raincoats
I have yet to see it, but Marty Klein reports that upscale hotels are yanking in-room Bibles and replacing them with condom-containing "intimacy kits." (Ugh, the name alone is hurl- not "intimacy"-inducing. Can't we just fuck?)
Personally, with the latest news about hotel drinking glasses, I'd love to have a condom to cover the hotel's remote. The fundies out there will have to forgive me if I take a wild guess that the last guy who stayed in the room wasn't jerking off to "The Song Of Solomon."
Klein writes of the American Family Association's latest hissyfit (and then lays it on a little thick in parts..."disgusting, patronizing," blah, blah, blah, but he's got a few good points):
The American Family Association, noting that the number of luxury hotels with in-room Bibles has dropped 18% since 2001, is predictably outraged: "Without action now, it is simply a matter of time before other chains remove the Bibles."And the problem with that is…what?
The AFA press release is just the latest reminder by the religious-industrial complex: organized religion deserves special privileges everywhere. Why a religious text in every hotel room? And why a Christian one? As the Sofitel chain explains, they're removing Bibles because guests are asking for other religious texts. This threatens to dwarf the whole smoking/non-smoking room thing; "will that be a Bible room, Koran room, Book of Mormon room?" Knowing the sex habits of many tired travelers, perhaps hotels should offer the Tibetan Book of the Dead.
Of course, it's exactly the AFA and their fellows (Concerned Women for America, Family Research Council, etc.) who demand that hotels eliminate pay-per-view in-room porn. They say people just can't ignore the stuff, which apparently leads viewers to rape, murder, and pillage.
Of course, many people are offended by finding an unwanted Christian Bible in their hotel room. They are supposed to just ignore it and celebrate America's religious diversity, while anti-porn crusaders can't imagine anyone just ignoring the in-room porn that a person has to pay for. What hypocrites. What a disgusting, patronizing view of human beings these "decency" groups have.
I guess atheists' ability to resist the sex and violence in the Bible (for free) is better than the sex-o-phobes' ability to resist it on-screen (for ten bucks).
Suggestion: keep the Bible (and dozens of other religious texts) in hotel rooms, but charge for them, like hotels do for porn or diet coke. And as with porn and diet coke, people can bring their own; pay for them; or do without. This would put the Good Book on a level playing field with the Good Orgasm.
In case you're interested, this week marked the 99th anniversary of Gideons International placing their first Bible in a hotel room. For all their effort, I don't notice the world becoming a better place, although hotel rooms have gotten much better.
Anyway, why regret replacing Bibles with condoms? Despite their claims, Bibles are obviously not preventing unwanted pregnancies. Condoms do. And we all want that, right?
Reprinted from Sexual Intelligence, © Marty Klein, Ph.D. (www.SexualIntelligence.org).
Klein's book: America's War on Sex: The Attack on Law, Lust and Liberty
I stopped noticing them years ago. Not sure I really care if they remove them or not. The condoms in the room may not be the best idea though. It could be worse depending on what's in the "Intimacy kits". The only problem I see is the family traveler having to hide the kit from his 5 and 6 year old.
I'd pull the bible from the room and let people pick them up at the front desk. I'd keep the intimacy kits behind the counter as well.
vlad at December 10, 2007 7:20 AM
I think probably my favorite part of this piece is "And the problem with that is...what?"
I'm thinking of maybe two weeks ago when I met up with a couple out of town friends, and we drove to another location to see a concert. We stayed in a hotel room there, of course.
Out of pure random curiosity, I pulled open the beside drawer to see if ye olde Gideon bible still resided there. It did, and one of my friends remarked to me that he didn't even know they still existed.
I think that a lot of people are on the same page as him and Vlad above me, do they even matter anymore?
Conversely, why does there need to be a bible OR an intimacy kit provided IN the room? I agree with the above post when it says "And as with porn and diet coke, people can bring their own; pay for them; or do without."
mae at December 10, 2007 7:33 AM
Provide the necessities for an overnight stay. I am not a one-night stand kind of gal and I'm irreligious. But, frankly, if I were, I wouldn't trust some condom in a kit of this sort and I imagine the bible-reading crowd probably doesn't leave home without throwing their cherished volume into their suitcase or purse as quickly as bound to make sure I have some other book to read. Shove them both. They're both unnecessary political statements and are they in the business of providing a comfortable room for the night or sermonizing/lecuturing on safe sex (either of which seems to go against their best business interests)?
Donna at December 10, 2007 8:18 AM
Perhaps, in the name of "tolerance" and interdenominalationism they should let people donate satanic worship kits.
Amy Alkon at December 10, 2007 8:32 AM
I'm...totally...shocked ;-)
Link: http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9B01EEDA1631F930A15753C1A9669C8B63
Doobie at December 10, 2007 10:33 AM
Eh! At least the "Intimacy kits" may come in handy...
Morbideus at December 10, 2007 10:48 AM
The condom proselytizer that I am, I am all about the intimacy kits, though the name leaves a lot to be desired. Not sure about "emergency fuck kit" either, but it fits better. All in all, I like it. I wouldn't even have a problem with managing it with the the kids. Not too hard to remove it, though if found by my kid, it would just be a good time to talk about it.
But, frankly, if I were, I wouldn't trust some condom in a kit of this sort...
Out of curiosity, why not? Having handed out many a condom in my day, I would have a fair certainty that they aren't expired and meet industry standards.
They're both unnecessary political statements...
Actually, the condoms/intimacy kits are there to make the stay more comfortable. I would imagine that the use of portions of the kits, would incur a charge to the room, but would be exceptionally handy for those who might have forgotten/hoped to avoid to bring their own gear. There are a lot of people who are all about the one night stands and probably really appreciate the service.
DuWayne at December 10, 2007 7:51 PM
I would not trust a condom in a hotel room. If like in Amy previous blog post about drinking glasses and the laziness of not bringing new glasses and just spit cleaning them.
Do you think they would change the (unused) condom every room change. That would just cost money. All it would take is one Asshole with a needle and a evil sense of humor and the next visitors can end up the spout.
John Paulson at December 10, 2007 8:15 PM
Exactly. Rely on one second hand like that? I don't think so. I'm not that trusting of a hotel's standards but then I'm already someone who wouldn't use their glass unless it was the disposable plastic wrapped variety.
As for it's not being a political statement, heck, it ain't. They're just giving into the safe sex troops same as they are the Gideons on the buy-bulls. Frankly, there's enough 24-hour supermarkets and pharmacies around if you are that spontaneous (and, perhaps, you should know yourself well enough to throw a couple in your suitcase).
Donna at December 11, 2007 7:07 AM
It's really not a political statement. Neither is the bible. Both can be construed as proselytizing, but I am pretty sure that the condoms are more a convenience thing than proselytizing. I think it really depends what else is in the intimacy kits. If it's French ticklers and a selection of creams (very common in sex fun kits) then I daresay at the least, the message is diluted. I will do a search when I get a chance, to see what is actually in the kits. The other thing that I would be guessing, is that if you open the kit, you bought it, thus allaying the fears of condom tampering.
Even if it is pure proselytizing, I am all for it. Safe sex is the only sex one should have. Whether that safety comes from trusting a monogamous partner, or using a condom, it's life one is gambling with. I watched an uncle die of AIDS. I occasionally volunteer my time, helping out those infected with HIV/AIDS. Even though the drugs can sustain life indefinitely, it is a misery. And there are many other diseases out there.
So even assuming it's pure proselytizing, who gives a fuck? Besides the ranting moronic fundies, who happily gamble with the lives of their children, by refusing to provide them with any education about the potential consequences of the sex, or how to avoid them, except to say; "Don't do it." Well fuck them and their idiot notions. When it comes to the sex, ignorance can be deadly.
DuWayne at December 11, 2007 6:28 PM
I do and I'm hardly a religious nut. I don't think kids in school should have to have a signed permission slip to get sex education but I do doubt very much that someone picking up a one-night stand in a strange city but can't be bothered to bring condoms or buy them at a 24 hour store is going to be convinced to stop and use them by a kit in their motel room any more than I'm gonna pick up that Gideon bible. I'm not apt to use either one (I practice safe sex but not one-night stands, realized on the preview how that sounded) and I deeply resent the proprietors hinting that I should. Having a kit in the motel room isn't going to make the irresponsible responsible.
Donna at December 12, 2007 8:26 AM
Forget all the right & wrong this & that. Why is a book peddling religion given precedence over any other product the hotel could be promoting? Why don't hotels "sell out" to Target, etc by having products available to be tried out on the "captive audience" which is a great way to product test. I'm not talking anything new here, so what is the deal?
Here is something to wonder -
Do you think someone would go to a hotel more often to be "saved" or to have sex?
kbling at December 12, 2007 11:22 AM
Leave a comment