Women Liberating Themselves from Liberation

[blackout]

Putt'ya money where ya mouth is.

ie... live out your manifesto or stuff it.

 

[blackout]

Feminism GAVE women the vote.

Without the DISTAINED feminism...
women would HAVE no vote.

You can't have it both ways.

 

[Alceste]

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

I completely agree. I think Willamena's argument is what these women are maybe grasping for in their infrequent clear-headed moments, and could even conceivably achieve if they had any brains at all, and if they were not simply being manipulated by American authoritarian political forces lobbying for a fundamentalist theocracy.

 

[Kurt31416]

You're trying to make it about gender roles, but it isn't. They're against feminism.

To me, feminism is supporting equal rights for women, equal opportunity. What does it mean to you?

 

[Kurt31416]

Feminism GAVE women the vote.

Without the DISTAINED feminism...
women would HAVE no vote.

You can't have it both ways.

Who distains the feminism that gave women the vote? Anyone here?

 

[Willamena]

*and UV thought she was speaking Willamenease*

Haha. . . I like to simplify, but that simplified right over my head.

A gender role is the role womanhood (or manhood) fills. It's a. . . cultural behavior filled by a stereotype (a represenational archetype). Wo(mb)-man fills the role of mother to children, wife to husband, sister to brother.

 

[blackout]

What on earth does women's sufferage have to do with submission?

 

[blackout]

from the OP...

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

 

[blackout]

Haha. . . I like to simplify, but that simplified right over my head.

A gender role is the role womanhood (or manhood) fills. It's a. . . cultural behavior filled by a stereotype (a represenational archetype). Wo(mb)-man fills the role of mother to children, wife to husband, sister to brother.

A woman's "role" is ANY 'part/role' a Woman plays.

 

[Kurt31416]

Kids these days have it figured out. It's a non-issue about being equal, of course they are, but they have no problem adopting traditional roles. They do it because it's comfortable and natural.

 

[Willamena]

You're trying to make it about gender roles, but it isn't. They're against feminism.

They are "against feminism" because of the gender roles. From their manifesto:

We believe that the creation of humanity as male and female was a purposeful and magnificent part of God’s wise plan, and that men and women were designed to reflect the image of God in complementary and distinct ways.

We believe that sin has separated every human being from God and made us incapable of reflecting His image as we were created to do. Our only hope for restoration and salvation is found in repenting of our sin and trusting in Christ who lived a sinless life, died in our place, and was raised from the dead.

We realize that we live in a culture that does not recognize God’s right to rule, does not accept Scripture as the pattern for life, and is experiencing the consequences of abandoning God’s design for men and women.

We believe that Christ is redeeming this sinful world and making all things new, and that His followers are called to share in His redemptive purposes as they seek, by God’s empowerment, to transform every aspect.

As Christian women, we desire to honor God by living counter-cultural lives that reflect the beauty of Christ and His gospel to our world.

To that end, we affirm . . .

Scripture is God’s authoritative means of instructing us in His ways and it reveals His holy pattern for our womanhood, our character, our priorities, and our various roles, responsibilities, and relationships.

We glorify God and experience His blessing when we accept and joyfully embrace His created design, function, and order for our lives.

As redeemed sinners, we cannot live out the beauty of biblical womanhood apart from the sanctifying work of the gospel and the power of the indwelling Holy Spirit.

Men and women are both created in the image of God and are equal in value and dignity, but they have distinct roles and functions in the home and in the church.

We are called as women to affirm and encourage men as they seek to express godly masculinity, and to honor and support God-ordained male leadership in the home and in the church.

Marriage, as created by God, is a sacred, binding, lifelong covenant between one man and one woman.

When we respond humbly to male leadership in our homes and churches, we demonstrate a noble submission to authority that reflects Christ’s submission to God His Father.

Selfish insistence on personal rights is contrary to the spirit of Christ who humbled Himself, took on the form of a servant, and laid down His life for us.

Human life is precious to God and is to be valued and protected, from the point of conception until rightful death.

Children are a blessing from God, and women are uniquely designed to be bearers and nurturers of life, whether it be their own biological or adopted children, brothers and sisters, nieces and nephews, or other children in their sphere of influence.

Note also that it is all about them.

 

[Willamena]

A woman's "role" is ANY 'part/role' a Woman plays.

Yes, but "gender role" is a particular phrase.

 

[blackout]

Kids these days have it figured out. It's a non-issue about being equal, of course they are, but they have no problem adopting traditional roles. They do it because it's comfortable and natural.

It is the traditional role of a woman to submit her vote to the single decision making vote of her husband. I detect a self serving buffett table.

 

[Alceste]

They are "against feminism" because of the gender roles. From their manifesto:

[snip]

Note also that it is all about them.

Only if you snip out these parts:

"we live in a culture that does not recognize God's right to rule, does not accept Scripture as the pattern for life, and is experiencing the consequences of abandoning God's design for men and women... Christ is redeeming this sinful world and making all things new, and that His followers are called to share in His redemptive purposes as they seek, by God's empowerment, to transform every aspect of human life that has been marred and ruined by sin.

Marriage, as created by God, is a sacred, binding, lifelong covenant between one man and one woman.

Human life is precious to God and is to be valued and protected, from the point of conception until rightful death.

13. Seek opportunities to share the gospel of Christ with unbelievers. (31)

15. Pray for a movement of revival and reformation among God's people that will result in the advancement of the Kingdom and gospel of Christ among all nations. (33)"


At first I thought you simply misunderstood what they are trying to accomplish, but your omission of these sections - which are all about committing to the fundamentalist political agenda to work towards limiting the rights and liberties of other people - makes it look more like you're intentionally misrepresenting what these women are saying just to win an argument. I hope I'm wrong about that, since you really didn't seem like the type.

 

[Alceste]

They are "against feminism" because of the gender roles.

BTW, I can also let them explain in their own words why they're against feminism:

My Liberation from Feminism

"There is a certain response from men that both feminist and Christian women desire to elicit: a masculine benevolence facepalm Secular feminists approach this desire stridently, from a position of anger. Christian women are taught to approach it gently"

"Marginalizing men through anger has had disastrous cultural effects... (including) pornography, child abuse, public murders of estranged wives, fatherless children, and sexually transmitted diseases" (OMG! feminism causes STDs, porn and murder! )

"I reached college filled to the brim with the “wisdom” of Cosmopolitan magazine, but I was to encounter something more insidious than fashion magazines—feminism and the Women’s Studies Department. Class after class promoted perpetual victimhood, disrespect toward all men, an overt embrace of lesbianism, and a broadly-directed, militant anger."

"...I remember that when I was 29 I was so confused and depressed that I entered into therapy to figure out why I was so angry ... and for that matter, why I was still single. (Not that the two could possibly be related, right?!)..." (Note: she is still single, despite being a True Woman who is ostensibly no longer "angry")

"However, God graciously intervened...

"I ... studied (fundamentalist) marriages ... to see what this Christian concept of joyful feminine submission actually looked like in real life. I saw that my married women friends...seemed free from much of the discord, sarcasm, and disappointment I usually encountered in modern marriages. "

So, to sum it up, it seems to me they're against feminism because they know feck-all about what it is and what it has accomplished, they are mired in bigoted caricatures of what feminists are like, and they think feminists make it hard for them to find and / or keep husbands.

 

[Willamena]

Only if you snip out these parts:

"we live in a culture that does not recognize God's right to rule, does not accept Scripture as the pattern for life, and is experiencing the consequences of abandoning God's design for men and women... Christ is redeeming this sinful world and making all things new, and that His followers are called to share in His redemptive purposes as they seek, by God's empowerment, to transform every aspect of human life that has been marred and ruined by sin.

Marriage, as created by God, is a sacred, binding, lifelong covenant between one man and one woman.

Human life is precious to God and is to be valued and protected, from the point of conception until rightful death.

13. Seek opportunities to share the gospel of Christ with unbelievers. (31)

15. Pray for a movement of revival and reformation among God's people that will result in the advancement of the Kingdom and gospel of Christ among all nations. (33)"


At first I thought you simply misunderstood what they are trying to accomplish, but your omission of these sections - which are all about committing to the fundamentalist political agenda to work towards limiting the rights and liberties of other people - makes it look more like you're intentionally misrepresenting what these women are saying just to win an argument. I hope I'm wrong about that, since you really didn't seem like the type.

I'm sorry that I left some parts out, but I see nothing differently. I had read the whole manifesto before I started debating.

If it's your intent to take the bolded parts out of context, that's your perogative.

 

[Willamena]

BTW, I can also let them explain in their own words why they're against feminism:

My Liberation from Feminism

"There is a certain response from men that both feminist and Christian women desire to elicit: a masculine benevolence facepalm Secular feminists approach this desire stridently, from a position of anger. Christian women are taught to approach it gently"

"Marginalizing men through anger has had disastrous cultural effects... (including) pornography, child abuse, public murders of estranged wives, fatherless children, and sexually transmitted diseases" (OMG! feminism causes STDs, porn and murder! )

"I reached college filled to the brim with the “wisdom” of Cosmopolitan magazine, but I was to encounter something more insidious than fashion magazines—feminism and the Women’s Studies Department. Class after class promoted perpetual victimhood, disrespect toward all men, an overt embrace of lesbianism, and a broadly-directed, militant anger."

"...I remember that when I was 29 I was so confused and depressed that I entered into therapy to figure out why I was so angry ... and for that matter, why I was still single. (Not that the two could possibly be related, right?!)..." (Note: she is still single, despite being a True Woman who is ostensibly no longer "angry")

"However, God graciously intervened...

"I ... studied (fundamentalist) marriages ... to see what this Christian concept of joyful feminine submission actually looked like in real life. I saw that my married women friends...seemed free from much of the discord, sarcasm, and disappointment I usually encountered in modern marriages. "

So, to sum it up, it seems to me they're against feminism because they know feck-all about what it is and what it has accomplished, they are mired in bigoted caricatures of what feminists are like, and they think feminists make it hard for them to find and / or keep husbands.

What is said at the beginning is that they are against feminism in that they support patriarchy with its fixed gender roles. Yours is another perspective.

 

[Alceste]

I'm sorry that I left some parts out, but I see nothing differently. I had read the whole manifesto before I started debating.

If it's your intent to take the bolded parts out of context, that's your perogative.

It's not out of context, it's quoted direct response to your incorrect assertion that their manifesto is "all about them". Clearly it isn't. Significant parts of it are about transforming "every aspect of human life that has been marred by sin" (i.e. equal rights for homosexuals and reproductive choice for women) and re-establishing "God's rule". Not just in their homes, but in "all nations".

The "all about them" parts are not the issue, as I've said many times and you seem to be unable to hear. By all means, they can go ahead and be as humble as they like. They simply can't say "Oooh, look how humble, compassionate and caring I am going to pretend to be while I engage in noisy and confrontational political activism aimed at forcing my religious views upon those who disagree with me". I mean, they can, but not without me saying "Well, what a pack of contemptible hypocrites".

 

[Alceste]

What is said at the beginning is that they are against feminism in that they support patriarchy with its fixed gender roles. Yours is another perspective.

What part is that? The article I quoted launches right in with "Angry feminists are responsible for pornography, murder, deadbeat dads and STDs", then moves on to "they advocate nothing but perpetual victimhood and unfocused anger". Then it goes on to talk at great length about how superior Christian fundamentalist women are in every way.

I read another lengthy lecture explaining their objection to feminism which hinged on the fact that Philip Morris used the feminist movement of the 60s to sell cigarettes. (So, obviously, feminism is EVIL!) Granted, it then moved on to discuss the worrying ideological distance between June Cleaver and Mary Tyler Moore, which is a step up, intellectually speaking, but not far enough up to bring them out of the putrescent swamp of ignorance that forms the foundation of their ideology.

I've honestly searched for what you're seeing in this movement. It's just not there. Not in anything they've said or written, anyway. Maybe you can see through what people say they think and feel to how they really think and feel when all you have to go by is disembodied text. I can't. I have to assume that people mean what they write.

 

[gnomon]

What part is that? The article I quoted launches right in with "Angry feminists are responsible for pornography, murder, deadbeat dads and STDs", then moves on to "they advocate nothing but perpetual victimhood and unfocused anger". Then it goes on to talk at great length about how superior Christian fundamentalist women are in every way.

I read another lengthy lecture explaining their objection to feminism which hinged on the fact that Philip Morris used the feminist movement of the 60s to sell cigarettes. (So, obviously, feminism is EVIL!) Granted, it then moved on to discuss the worrying ideological distance between June Cleaver and Mary Tyler Moore.

I've honestly searched for what you're seeing in this movement. It's just not there. Not in anything they've said or written, anyway. Maybe you can see through what people say they think and feel to how they really think and feel when all you have to go by is disembodied text. I can't. I have to assume that people mean what they say.

I'm listening to Mary Kassian on Youtube right now. It's rather disturbing that this professor of Women's Studies and the individual basically defining what feminism means for this movement can give such a horrible lecture. Part 1 is the whole Virginia Slims campaign, June Cleaver, Mary Tyler Moore, Murphy Brown.......are we talking about feminism or pop culture and marketing. Part 2 is filled with much of the same. Part 3 she discusses a generalized form of the history of feminist thought glossing over particular points. Part 4 immediately starts by comparing "consciousness raising" to Mao Tse Tung and communism. What's funny is that isn't staging a conference for a specific group of people and then asking them to sign a manifesto......"consciousness raising".

I'm kind of phasing out during Part 4 but just heard her invoking Wicca, goddess worship, New Age, feminism claims women possess a spark of divinity....from there and through Part 5 it is about God.

Reading through some of the supporters listed on the main website for the movement leads to reading even more vitriolic views towards homosexuals.

The people behind this movement are poorly educated, build a strawman out of feminism when their real disdain is for secularism, maintain a homophobic attitude that will unfortunately be taught to their children, lack a perspective of the various cultures, the women's movement.......

Hell, even Kassian during her lecture failed to even mention feminism and their role in 1) raising awareness of domestic violence, 2) rape, 3) voting rights and basically everything else that helped move women from a lesser role to one of equality.

The idea that they are doing something positive by standing up and affirming their ability to choose a gender role for themselves, a concept already supported by feminism, is pointless.

I've read enough, listened enough and researched enough already on this group and those who are behind it. I've just filled my BS quota for some time.

I can't read or listen to it anymore.