Misogyny Stemming from the Abrahamic Religions Today?

[VoidCat]

thank you for sharing.

Victim blaming. That's horrible.

"That if a man reaches a certain level of arousal they cant control themselves." - that's a messed up view on man's sexuality, I think. It all comes down to excuses for rape, I suppose.
They cannot provide but one scientific source to back their claim up that men in general can't help but rape women in certain instances.
It's presumption passed off as factual. Their presumption. I don't buy into it!

This^^^ Agree wholeheartedly.

 

[wellwisher]

Sex and sex appeal is the female trump card earn it comes to manipulating men. Men use money, merchandise, dates and a line of bull to negotiated for sex. Sex can also be use by a women, as a tool to get her way, and open doors. Some women do not even develop empathy, because the game profits inflate her ego.

If a women gets pregnant, but wants to stay in the game, pregnancy can become a disadvantage. She can loose an entire season of fun, games, dates and merchandise. Often these payments for sex, and the game itself, becomes so important, there is little concern for the rights of the unborn. Men, like the game, and many don't want the best players on the injured roster, so they to ignore the rights of the unborn.

The unborn is a victim of circumstances, who is simply renting space in a woman's womb until birth. Eviction, for lack of payment, is one thing; adoption, but lamenting the potential loss of the death penalty, for the right to party, is different.

It is not like there are no precautions a women could take to avoid renting space and the need for the death penalty option, all for a tenet who is behind on the rent for a few months. The Church does not recognize the right to party, as a God given right, that allow women powers over life and death.

 

[thomas t]

If a women gets pregnant, but wants to stay in the game, pregnancy can become a disadvantage.

back it up by using real studies please. Scientific studies that prove your point with regard to the reasons of why women have an abortion.
I'll take it as presumption otherwise.
I think in these kind of subject, presumption htat's passed off as factual merely pushes emotions where clarity and a clear line of thought are needed.
There is definitely no need for stirring up emotions here.

So thank you for doing without unsupported allegations in this thread in the future.

 

[rational experiences]

Men have to be aroused for sex. Can be aroused as a man body without the presence of any female. Proven by his owned body.

Anger historic female was a fake science zero space maths womb thesis that attacked irradiated life and changed original mutual spiritual love.

Our human parents whose all religious teachings state honour and respect.

Blaspheming my mother's spirit is an age old brother lie. The reason spiritual love and a holy mind psyche changed for everyone.

 

[Pete in Panama]

It is more complicated than that. Anti-men bias is a reaction to something. But it also isn't the fault of all men...

Please note that you changed the word order from "all the man's fault" to "the fault of all men". To me that makes a severe change in meaning, an easy strawman to blow away.

Then again, the word change may be along the lines of a clarification of your original "anti-men bias wouldn't have occurred if women weren't oppressed by male dominated societies." If you now want to change that to say, "there have been situations where anti-men bias wouldn't have occurred if women weren't oppressed by male dominated societies", then I'd agree w/ u.

...This point is off topic...

Actually, it's foundational to the topic of the tread but given the left-wing bias of the RF staff they may end up going along w/ u & censor me on this.

 

[Samael_Khan]

Please note that you changed the word order from "all the man's fault" to "the fault of all men". To me that makes a severe change in meaning, an easy strawman to blow away.

Then again, the word change may be along the lines of a clarification of your original "anti-men bias wouldn't have occurred if women weren't oppressed by male dominated societies." If you now want to change that to say, "there have been situations where anti-men bias wouldn't have occurred if women weren't oppressed by male dominated societies", then I'd agree w/ u.

It was indeed a clarification of my original point. I think that the change that you suggest is more accurate as it isn't a blanket statement.

Actually, it's foundational to the topic of the tread but given the left-wing bias of the RF staff they may end up going along w/ u & censor me on this.

Considering that the discussion is about misogyny in Abrahamic religions, I don't think that it is foundational, as societies anti-men bias doesn't address the point.

You were the one who originally asked "Do we want to get into anti-men bias or should that be in another thread?" So the poster who replied to you was addressing that. You shouldn't say that people here are trying to censor you when you were the one who asked whether it should be another thread or not.

I certainly am not against the topic, as I have seen quite a few instances in the media where there are irrational attitudes toward men. We have even had discussions on the forum about the whole gender issue which got a bit heated. So the thread would be welcome.

Don't worry about people being left wing or right. Just do your thing. If people don't like your political opinion they can either make a logical argument against it which you can engage them with or they can make an irrational argument and you can bury them for all to see. Simple.

 

[1213]

...Sounds like you think women are having an abortion because they don't like the child?
...

What other reason there could be for killing another person? Would anyone kill a person who they like?

 

[thomas t]

What other reason there could be for killing another person? Would anyone kill a person who they like?

you post your claims first and ask questions last. Why not proceed the other way round to avoid prejudice?

A question cannot count as substanciation for what you just said in your previous post.

It's like saying "he stole my money" - "can you please substanciate your claim?" - " why do I have little money?"

No court in the world would take this as proof. Questions are not proof.


Your mind seemed to have been set before you even asked that question so I won't answer this now. I like open debates.

 

[GardenLady]

Still, she had that right, ie, to unilaterally
give up that responsibility/liability.

It was rather more than that. She had a alcoholic father who committed suicide because he could not cope with the responsibilities of family and parenthood. It scarred her for life, sad to say.

I'm not big on container gardening.

 

[Revoltingest]

It was rather more than that. She had a alcoholic father who committed suicide because he could not cope with the responsibilities of family and parenthood. It scarred her for life, sad to say.

I'm not big on container gardening.

FWIW, I'm pro-abortion.

 

[Skywalker]

Lets start with the biggest sect of Christianity, the RCC. Women have no opportunity to get even to the lowest level of any decision making, they can't become priests. They can't even have indirect influence because priests aren't allowed to marry.
Afaik it's the same for the Orthodox Church.
And we can't blame that on culture as they have a scriptural reference in one of Paul's letters, so it's definitely religion based.

The Bible never says that clergy aren't allowed to marry. It's a manmade tradition. I have concerns about the Catholic church's teachings on celibacy for priests, women's status in the church, and the condemnation of homosexuality.

Celibacy of Priests
The separation of Christians into two camps: one of a priesthood and the other of laity did not start until the second century. It is not found in the Bible. Even the Catholic church admits this. "The priesthood evolved" [Catholic Encyclopedia, Vol. XII, p. 406, 415]. "The Apostolic Fathers abstain from any mention of a Christian priesthood" [Catholic Dictionary, Addis and Arnold, p. 693]. In the Bible, all Christians are priests because we have direct access to the Father.

"Coming to Him as to a living stone, rejected indeed by men, but chosen by God and precious, you also, as living stones, are being built up a spiritual house, a holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ" (I Peter 2:4-5).

"But you are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, His own special people, that you may proclaim the praises of Him who called you out of darkness into His marvelous light; who once were not a people but are now the people of God, who had not obtained mercy but now have obtained mercy" (I Peter 2:9-10).

If you understand this, then clearly there is a problem with teaching that priests are to be celibate when all Christians are priests in God's sight. Celibacy was an innovation added late by the Roman Catholic church. "In 1079 AD celibacy was first enforced for priests and bishops by Pope Gregory VII. Before this time, they were permitted to marry" [bible.ca]. "After the Lateran Council (A.D. 1123), "... henceforth all conjugal relations on the part of the clergy ... were reduced in the eyes of Canon Law to mere concubinage"" [Catholic Encyclopedia, Vol. III, p. 486]. "The Council of Trent (about A.D. 1550) affirmed as a matter of faith that it [celibacy] is holier than marriage" [Externals of the Catholic Church, Sullivan, p. 305].

In the Bible, you will find that the majority of the disciples were married. Paul was a noted exception to the general rule. "Do we have no right to take along a believing wife, as do also the other apostles, the brothers of the Lord, and Cephas?" (I Corinthians 9:5). Even though Paul did not choose to marry, he argued that he did have the right to marry just like all the other leaders in the church who were already married. In fact, Paul listed forbidding of marriage as a symptom of people falling away into apostasy. "Now the Spirit expressly says that in latter times some will depart from the faith, giving heed to deceiving spirits and doctrines of demons, speaking lies in hypocrisy, having their own conscience seared with a hot iron, forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from foods which God created to be received with thanksgiving by those who believe and know the truth" (I Timothy 4:1-3).

 

[crossfire]

The Bible never says that clergy aren't allowed to marry. It's a manmade tradition. I have concerns about the Catholic church's teachings on celibacy for priests, women's status in the church, and the condemnation of homosexuality.

I'm glad that the Christian church took up the monastic tradition so there would be an option open for widows and other women who did not wish to marry or remarry. The apostle Paul only left that option open for widows over age 60.

 

[Riders]

In the last thread two women agreed that Abrahamic Religions inspired anti-women bias.
I'm interested as to know what cases of anti-women bias you came across in the Christian churches in todays world?
I'm also interested in knowing which are the cases you see in which Christianity inspired misogyny?

------------------------
As a Christian I must admit that, sadly, I see misogyny occurring in Christianity.

Prime example for me is this: many Christians want to outlaw abortion. The price would have to be paid solely by women and not men.

This is a measure that noone knows will have any beneficial effect for the unborn life. And yet it will make life more difficult for those wanting to obtain an abortion: they would have to travel or even resort to an unsafe backstreet abortion. There are tens of thousands of women dying every year from unsafe backstreet abortions. https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/75173/WHO_RHR_12.01_eng.pdf

Don't get me wrong: I am against abortion of course (I'm a Christian).
However, I am also against all sorts of measures, such as criminalizing abortion, that cannot be documented to have any positive effect on abortion numbers at all.

To me, any demands for abortion to be punishable comes down to a lack of education. Those who want abortions to be banned should know first that there are no studies available that document a decrease in the overall abortion numbers after abortion is outlawed somewhere. This is at least my point of view.

------------
This thread is about today - lets say the last ten years or so. Looks into the more distant past like the Middle Ages or even 100 years ago will be considered off topic here (cause the thread gets too long in this case, I'm afraid).

Well if you go by dress code churches like I use to be in then the woman takes responsibility for men's sexuality by having to make herself look ugly and unattractive so men won't lust after her. Some Christian and Jewish men will sleep with secular and unreligious women but not date them, I know because they did that to me.
By expecting women to b submissive slaves in the home they are mysogynist.

 

[rational experiences]

Honour our human parents.

First parents a human man and a human woman. Not married as marriage is a human ceremony and is origin to a ceremony.

The status just two humans who had sex.

Any legal implied status was enforced in civilization.

Why the word no for a female means no.

Males who own historic group takeover as civilization owned an overlord status imposed by male thought only in the past as life law choice.

Claiming by his status a man that the female enticed him.

In a medical equal human life a man can say even without a female being present my penis reacts by itself.

To use human reasoning based on past known human behaviours and human thinking conditions.

 

[Sand Dancer]

"Purity" culture and evangelical masculinity are problematic. See the book "Jesus and John Wayne" for a full explanation.

I am reading that now. Good book so far.

 

[Sand Dancer]

The pregnancy (if normal) would be the woman's (not the man's). But, a man could love the unborn child as much as a woman could, and it is his baby, too. A man could agree to finance the woman and the baby (so, at least the finances are shared).

Since the United States is evenly split over the abortion issue (women deciding not to stretch their bodies with a baby and bring up a baby, vs. objections to murdering babies, some of which might still live if aborted in the third month, though blind and retarded). So, if we decide one way, half the nation would lose. If we decide the opposite way, half the nation would lose.

Trump suggested passing the issue to the states. Still, the states are almost 50-50 on the abortion issue. Yet, slightly more people will get their way. So, I think that abortion should be decided by states.

Then we would have issues of people going across state borders, defying the laws of their own state, and having illegal abortions. There could be laws to prosecute them, but that might be harsh (death penalty, 20 years in prison).

By passing the abortion issue to states, anti-abortion states would finally be able to show the world what it would be like. They could show that babies are in great demand to be adopted. They could show that some adopted babies would grow up to be good and smart (maybe cure a disease). They could make their state's laws shining examples to the rest of the world, and convince the world.

Unfortunately, adopted children have more behavioral problems than biological children, even when they are adopted at birth.

 

[rational experiences]

Two humans have sex. Some have sex motivated to want a baby conceived.

Consciousness.

Human.

I want sex without conceiving a child the same humans. The same thoughts. The same sex act yet don't want a Baby conceived.

I believe in rights of life and personal choice of a self. Any other self not mine or my experience. What occurs in life is because we are living a life.

 

[GardenLady]

I’m not. I don’t think it’s “okay” or morally neutral. But I think it is sometimes one among several sad choices and should be a legal choice. I refuse to be a theocrat.

 

[GardenLady]

Hmm. I seem to be missing a quote above from Revoltingest in which he claims to be pro-abortion.