Women Liberating Themselves from Liberation

[Perfect Circle]

well no, they are fundamentalists

In their mind, they are following God's laws...and the bible

Remember:

"When the Christian majority takes over this country, there will be no satanic churches, no more free distribution of pornography, no more talk of rights for homosexuals. After the Christian majority takes control, pluralism will be seen as immoral and evil and the state will not permit anybody the right to practice evil."​

"We're fighting against humanism, we're fighting against liberalism...we are fighting against all the systems of Satan that are destroying our nation today...our battle is with Satan himself."​

"I'm an old-fashioned woman. Men should take care of women, and if men were taking care of women today, we wouldn't have to vote."​

"The feminist agenda is not about equal rights for women. It is about a socialist, anti-family political movement that encourages women to leave their husbands, kill their children, practice witchcraft, destroy capitalism, and become lesbians."​

"I know this is painful for the ladies to hear, but if you get married, you have accepted the headship of a man, your husband. Christ is the head of the household and the husband is the head of the wife, and that's the way it is, period."

"Feminism was established to allow unattractive women easier access to the mainstream of society."

"The demise of our community and culture is the fault of sissified men who have been overly influenced by women."​

The American Taliban

Hahaha.. these quotes are great.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

That's the opposite of hypocritical. A hypocrite is someone who promotes ideas they don't believe in

Fine, then they're simply being inconsistent.

I really don't understand how the rest of your response applies to my post.

, which they would be if they meekly accepted the popular notion/feministic idea that their gender roles are self-defined. They live in a society that provides them that freedom, but society is composed of people's notions about themselves. They only have the freedom to choose their gender roles, and are exercising that freedom, from one perspective. . . and (guess what?) it's not theirs.

What's not theirs?

 

[Mr Cheese]

What is the glass ceiling, if I may ask?

oh geez

the glass ceiling is the "label"

for the fact that women are less able to be promoted in the work place, for example there are very few female CEOs.....

Related to this women often get paid less for doing the same job as a man....

Which gives rise to a glass (as in transparent) ceiling...
looking up but restricted

 

[Willamena]

Right, in each case, they would be espousing one view, which is shown false by their objection to the like.

I really don't understand how the rest of your response applies to my post.

Is your assertion, then, that the collective notions that are society are bought into by some sort of social contract? Otherwise, I don't understand how their view is shown "false" by being a part of society, or by someone else's definition.

What's not theirs?

The perspective put forth.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

Is your assertion, then, that the collective notions that are society are bought into by some sort of social contract? Otherwise, I don't understand how their view is shown "false" by being a part of society, or by someone else's definition.

I modified my post to state they're simply being inconsistent.

The perspective put forth.

What perspective?

 

[Willamena]

What perspective?

The freedom to choose gender roles.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

The freedom to choose gender roles.

No one is forcing them to exercise that freedom though.

 

[Alceste]

well no, they are fundamentalists

In their mind, they are following God's laws...and the bible

Remember:

"When the Christian majority takes over this country, there will be no satanic churches, no more free distribution of pornography, no more talk of rights for homosexuals. After the Christian majority takes control, pluralism will be seen as immoral and evil and the state will not permit anybody the right to practice evil."​

"We're fighting against humanism, we're fighting against liberalism...we are fighting against all the systems of Satan that are destroying our nation today...our battle is with Satan himself."​

"I'm an old-fashioned woman. Men should take care of women, and if men were taking care of women today, we wouldn't have to vote."​

"The feminist agenda is not about equal rights for women. It is about a socialist, anti-family political movement that encourages women to leave their husbands, kill their children, practice witchcraft, destroy capitalism, and become lesbians."​

"I know this is painful for the ladies to hear, but if you get married, you have accepted the headship of a man, your husband. Christ is the head of the household and the husband is the head of the wife, and that's the way it is, period."

"Feminism was established to allow unattractive women easier access to the mainstream of society."

"The demise of our community and culture is the fault of sissified men who have been overly influenced by women."​

The American Taliban

Good link. I think this one is particularly apt, in the context of what these women want to accomplish:

"We are engaged in a social, political, and cultural war. There's a lot of talk in America about pluralism. But the bottom line is somebody's values will prevail. And the winner gets the right to teach our children what to believe."

 

[Willamena]

No one is forcing them to exercise that freedom though.

That's not the point. As I said earlier, it's not about forcing anything. They are essentially just standing up in the hope that some people will listen when they say that they don't have or want that "freedom" (right). They want it know that their gender roles are not self-defined.

Now, from the perspective that they already have that freedom, they are exercising it. But there is another perspective at play . . . theirs. That is a perspective that, apparently, is hard to grasp. . . hence the need to gather, petition, and make manifest their beliefs.

 

[blackout]

That's the opposite of hypocritical. A hypocrite is someone who promotes ideas they don't believe in, which they would be if they meekly accepted the popular notion/feministic idea that their gender roles are self-defined. They live in a society that provides them that freedom, but society is composed of people's notions about themselves. They only have the freedom to choose their gender roles, and are exercising that freedom, from one perspective. . . and (guess what?) it's not theirs.

If they don't believe women should vote,
then they... AS women... SHOULDN'T vote.

Usually I get you honey.. but... ??

Do I not understand the meaning of the word hypocracy?

By voting as women... they are in fact "promoting" the usefulness and validity of women voting. no?
Otherwise, they wouldn't do it? right?

 

[Willamena]

If they don't believe women should vote,
then they... AS women... SHOULDN'T vote.

Usually I get you honey.. but... ??

Do I not understand the meaning of the word hypocracy?

By voting as women... they are in fact "promoting" the usefulness and validity of women voting. no?
Otherwise, they wouldn't do it? right?

It's not about vote, it's about gender roles.

 

[blackout]

It's not about vote, it's about gender roles.

But "women voters" is a "gender roles".

 

[Alceste]

That's the opposite of hypocritical. A hypocrite is someone who promotes ideas they don't believe in, which they would be if they meekly accepted the popular notion/feministic idea that their gender roles are self-defined. They live in a society that provides them that freedom, but society is composed of people's notions about themselves. They only have the freedom to choose their gender roles, and are exercising that freedom, from one perspective. . . and (guess what?) it's not theirs.

If they are sitting around writing manifestos about what "real women" are like and how they should behave, then they are promoting ideas they don't believe in. They are promoting the idea that God defines what a woman is, while at the same time banging off lectures, lesson plans, petitions and manifestos to impose their own definition on women instead. They don't deny they wrote that stuff. They don't deny they're delivering those speeches. Then don't claim God is writing these things. They don't claim to BE gods. They've taken complete responsibility for their "movement". Therefore it is hypocritical of them to argue that the "imposition" on society of of a human interpretation of what womanhood means is wrong.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

That's not the point. As I said earlier, it's not about forcing anything. They are essentially just standing up in the hope that some people will listen when they say that they don't have or want that "freedom" (right). They want it know that their gender roles are not self-defined.

Now, from the perspective that they already have that freedom, they are exercising it. But there is another perspective at play . . . theirs. That a perspective that, apparently, it hard to grasp. . . hence the need to gather, petition, and make manifest their beliefs.

I think your probably seeing lofty philosophical ideals where none exist.

 

[Willamena]

But "women voters" is a "gender roles".

 

[Willamena]

I think your probably seeing lofty philosophical ideals where none exist.

No doubt --but I started this thead because I saw another side. I seriously expected it to die a quick, painless death, as most of them do.

 

[blackout]

women = gender
voters = roles.

*and UV thought she was speaking Willamenease*

 

[Willamena]

If they are sitting around writing manifestos about what "real women" are like and how they should behave, then they are promoting ideas they don't believe in. They are promoting the idea that God defines what a woman is, while at the same time banging off lectures, lesson plans, petitions and manifestos to impose their own definition on women instead. They don't deny they wrote that stuff. They don't deny they're delivering those speeches. Then don't claim God is writing these things. They don't claim to BE gods. They've taken complete responsibility for their "movement". Therefore it is hypocritical of them to argue that the "imposition" on society of of a human interpretation of what womanhood means is wrong.

The manifesto is to make manifest (known) their beliefs. That's what they're for. It's for them, though all are welcome to read it.

 

[Alceste]

It's not about vote, it's about gender roles.

You're trying to make it about gender roles, but it isn't. They're against feminism. That's what I find intolerable, unless they're willing to give up the benefits of feminism. Looking at their website, I couldn't help noticing one of them is on her third marriage, and she's turning her nose up at feminism and feminists, telling women to obey their husbands and that feminism is wrong. In what world isn't that hypocrisy? I think you'll find we're all in favour of lovely home-made pies and being tidied up after, regardless of whether they want to do such things because God said so or because they enjoy it themselves. But the unthinking nonsense about feminism doing harm to society has got to go if they want to be taken seriously by anyone outside their nutty little cult.

 

[Kurt31416]

women = gender
voters = roles.

*and UV thought she was speaking Willamenease*

I don't think anyone's talking about women not being able to vote.