Women Liberating Themselves from Liberation

[Autodidact]

I agree. Women should not be subsirvient to men and I don't believe that anyone in this thread has suggested that (other than the women in the OP).


Oh. Yes. I still mean that men and women are different in almost every single way. They have similarities, but they also have plenty of differences. I think the differences outnumber the similarities.

You're mistaken. Men and women are MUCH more alike than they are different. Both are bilaterally symetrical, have 3 principle lobes of their brains, share a circulatory system with a central pump, have the same sensory perception modes, and share a million other similarities that are too trivial to notice. They differ primarily in their role in reproduction, and less so in some other areas. Most of these differences are actually overlapping bell curves. That is, for example, men are taller than women on average, but tall women are taller than short men. That's how most sex differences (other than reproduction itself) work.

Also men tend toward extremes, and women toward the mean. For example, men and women have about the same average intelligence, but men tend toward the brilliant and the retarded, and women tend more toward the average.

 

[Kathryn]

These women shouldn't be speaking in public, they should be at home baking pies.

Here is an example of the type of woman that the Bible portrays as a role model:

10An (M)excellent wife, who can find?
For her worth is far (N)above jewels.
11The heart of her husband trusts in her,
And he will have no lack of gain.
12She does him good and not evil
All the days of her life.
13She looks for wool and flax
And works with her hands in delight.
14She is like (O)merchant ships;
She brings her food from afar.
15She (P)rises also while it is still night
And (Q)gives food to her household
And portions to her maidens.
16She considers a field and buys it;
From her earnings she plants a vineyard.
17She (R)girds herself with strength
And makes her arms strong.
18She senses that her gain is good;
Her lamp does not go out at night.
19She stretches out her hands to the distaff,
And her hands grasp the spindle.
20She (S)extends her hand to the poor,
And she stretches out her hands to the needy.
21She is not afraid of the snow for her household,
For all her household are (T)clothed with scarlet.
22She makes (U)coverings for herself;
Her clothing is (V)fine linen and (W)purple.
23Her husband is known (X)in the gates,
When he sits among the elders of the land.
24She makes (Y)linen garments and sells them,
And supplies belts to the tradesmen.
25Strength and (Z)dignity are her clothing,
And she smiles at the future.
26She (AA)opens her mouth in wisdom,
And the teaching of kindness is on her tongue.
27She looks well to the ways of her household,
And does not eat the (AB)bread of idleness.
28Her children rise up and bless her;
Her husband also, and he praises her, saying:
29"Many daughters have done nobly,
But you excel them all."
30Charm is deceitful and beauty is vain,
But a woman who (AC)fears the LORD, she shall be praised.
31Give her the product of her hands,
And let her works praise her in the gates.

Proverbs 31, New American Standard

This woman doesn't sound weak, subservient, and disrespected to me. She sounds powerful, wise, strong, productive, and honorable. What an ideal to strive toward!

 

[Mr Cheese]

This woman doesn't sound weak, subservient, and disrespected to me. She sounds powerful, wise, strong, productive, and honorable. What an ideal to strive toward!

what do you think of the biblical women that:

refuse to have sex, then get upset when the mistress gets preganant (Abraham's wife Sarah is it?)

saves her people by surrending her vagina to their captor...(I'm thinking Esther here...)

Are these good role models?
Just wondering:sarcastic

 

[Nanda]

This woman doesn't sound weak, subservient, and disrespected to me. She sounds powerful, wise, strong, productive, and honorable. What an ideal to strive toward!

And you can strive for it all you want. I've seen where this road leads first hand, however, and I think I'll pass.

 

[Kerr]

This woman doesn't sound weak, subservient, and disrespected to me. She sounds powerful, wise, strong, productive, and honorable. What an ideal to strive toward!

I did not understand those verses (seriously, what is it with people and putting things in verse form... it is almost impossible to understand, lol), but I can say this. There is no one ideal, there are many. They cover from one side of the spectrum to the other. What you describe, such as strength, wisdom and honor, can be found in many places and not just the traditional way.

And as a note, housewives as a group are not lazy or weak, they stay at home. Some may be lazy, some may not be, they are individuals and as individuals they are different and have different reasons for being housewives. The ideal you describe is not an ideal of being lazy or weak, however I do not like the social order this traditional relationship has where she is submitting to the man. It is not the ideal I believe in. But that does not mean I disrespect or look down upon housewives.

 

[gnomon]

I just want to know where these people get their idea of tradition and that the feminist movement restricted women's freedom.

It's one thing for people to just say it but the creators of the manifesto have not shown their argument against feminism to be worthy of anything nor has anyone else.

I beginning to believe that many people on this forum follow the concept of "say it often enough and it's true".

 

[Alceste]

I just want to know where these people get their idea of tradition and that the feminist movement restricted women's freedom.

It's one thing for people to just say it but the creators of the manifesto have not shown their argument against feminism to be worthy of anything nor has anyone else.

I beginning to believe that many people on this forum follow the concept of "say it often enough and it's true".

Agreed. I think the argument against feminism is not that it forces women out of "traditional" roles, but that it allows women to escape "traditional roles". But they can't say that out loud, of course - it would tip their hand with respect to their "mission" to convert all women everywhere to their (IMO) ridiculous point of view: that a person should embrace a particular occupation and pretend to have a particular personality because of their genitals. Not that they bother to conceal that - it's the last paragraph in their manifesto, but a global "movement" presented as something to "pray for", rather than something to "paricipate in".

 

[Kilgore Trout]

I'm still confused as to how having freedom to choose restricts your choices.

 

[Alceste]

I'm still confused as to how having freedom to choose restricts your choices.

It restricts their choice to have ME sit around the house, be meek and make babies.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

It restricts their choice to have ME sit around the house, be meek and make babies.

Ah, the real core of the matter.

 

[Nanda]

Ah, the real core of the matter.

Well, if you give women alernatives, they might actually choose them!

 

[Alceste]

Well, if you give women alernatives, they might actually choose them!

Can't have that! If women are allowed to choose something for themselves outside of God's plan, proper Godly women may become envious and falter in their dogmatic beliefs.

 

[Willamena]

I just want to know where these people get their idea of tradition and that the feminist movement restricted women's freedom.

It's one thing for people to just say it but the creators of the manifesto have not shown their argument against feminism to be worthy of anything nor has anyone else.

I beginning to believe that many people on this forum follow the concept of "say it often enough and it's true".

There are two slants to the idea that allowing the religion to define gender roles amounts to/stands in contrast to self-defined gender roles: one looks at from the standpoint of personal power and suggests that the empowered person has freely given over authority to the religion to define their role; and the other looks at it from the standpoint of submission to authority, and says that that person never had that power to begin with. The two views can (and do) both exist simultaneously, though they may be reconcilable only by downplaying one or the other.

The second view above is more monist, or a view of oneness. Any "power" the person "has" is a product of self-delusion or ego --the only "power" that the universe holds, even in us, is "God". This is, to me, what it means to be selfless in God's service.

 

[Autodidact]

I'm still confused as to how having freedom to choose restricts your choices.

Perhaps you weren't aware that peace means war and love means hate. In addition, up means down and night means day. Glad to help.

 

[Nanda]

Perhaps you weren't aware that peace means war and love means hate. In addition, up means down and night means day. Glad to help.

Doubleplusgood!

 

[Mr Cheese]

Doubleplusgood!

well actgually dichotomies, duality, dialetic conciousness...

are often contradictory and problematic.

For example, if we travel far enough down, we are going up...

“For every human there is a
quest to find the answer to why
am I here, who am I, where did I
come from, where am I going.
For me that became the most
important thing in my life,
everything else is secondary.”

– George Harrison (1943-2001)

 

[Kathryn]

I did not understand those verses (seriously, what is it with people and putting things in verse form... it is almost impossible to understand, lol), but I can say this. There is no one ideal, there are many. They cover from one side of the spectrum to the other. What you describe, such as strength, wisdom and honor, can be found in many places and not just the traditional way.

And as a note, housewives as a group are not lazy or weak, they stay at home. Some may be lazy, some may not be, they are individuals and as individuals they are different and have different reasons for being housewives. The ideal you describe is not an ideal of being lazy or weak, however I do not like the social order this traditional relationship has where she is submitting to the man. It is not the ideal I believe in. But that does not mean I disrespect or look down upon housewives.

That's good.

However, if you read the passage, you will see that this woman is not simply a housewife. She earns money - she makes investments - she manages finances and she trades and sells.

In other words, I think a lot is packed into this passage, to give room for many different expressions of an honorable, godly woman.

 

[Father Heathen]

And somewhere, some 19 year old is being encouraged by her mother to abort the baby she's carrying so that she can continue college and get her career up and running.

Which would indeed be the wiser choice.

 

[Humanistheart]

Women's 'Liberation' Through Submission: An Evangelical Anti-Feminism Is Born | Reproductive Justice and Gender | AlterNet

Thoughts?

Well, strange as the article was, I soppose something like this was inevitable. Whenever you have a strong movement forcing their will on other's there's bound to be a counter-movement.

 

[gnomon]

Well, strange as the article was, I soppose something like this was inevitable. Whenever you have a strong movement forcing their will on other's there's bound to be a counter-movement.

That's just it.

No one can show that feminism has forced it's will on anyone.