Women Liberating Themselves from Liberation

[Heneni]

I get the idea that some people have the idea, that for a christian women to submit to her husband is setting her up to be abused. Now logically the husband would not even be a christian if he is going to abuse her, because the model of husband/wife is found in christ as the husband of the church ( bride) and he wont abuse her. So.....i dont see any danger in submitting to a perfectly respectable man!

I dont see how being a homemaker would constitue abuse.

And if she doenst stay at home, i dont see how working is abuse in the marriage either.

If you marry a christian man, and he is worth his weight, there really is little opportunity for abuse and submitting to him wont be degrading to the female, in fact it will honour her husband. Because as a christian wife, she will want to honour, esteem, revere, respect, submit, listen, support, encourage her husband because god supports her husband in that role, and for her to support him, she is keeping the marriage safe from harm and by letting him be the leader, she is letting god lead through him. Thats pretty awesome! And the husband supports the wife as well, the only difference is that he is the one that god uses the direct the family spiritually and god works through the husband to help him make important descisions for the family.

This does not mean that the wife is cut out of making ANY decisions, but rather she knows that if her husband is the leader in the family, he will naturally seek god's answers and leadership and therefore when a descision has to be made regarding the marriage or the family, and she knows he has been praying about it and asking god for guidance, then she can relax and support his descision knowing that she is doing the will of god.

Her husband doesnt have to pray about which laundry soap to use....so...lets keep it real.

Heneni

 

[Kurt31416]

Yes, you could be right, it could be general population control, not being explict about the method. After all, it's all shades of gray.

 

[Amill]

Waiting to have sex for a guy means that sperm shuffles, and the same sperm will not hit the same egg. My dad waiting a day or so to have sex, would have reduced my chance of being born to nearly zero.

Every time a guy masturbates or has a wet dream thousands upon thousands of possible lives, just like that little girl, are never born.

Surely you jest.

One sperm or one egg does not a child make.

What he/she said was right. Not to get too insensitive but had your or my father had sex with our mothers at a different time during the day, you and I probably wouldn't exist due to the fact that a sperm with a different set of blueprints would have fertilized the egg. So male masturbation does waste millions of possible existences, that are really no less relevant than the existence of an aborted fetus.(I do dislike abortions later in the pregnancy)

I'm not sure if the story of the 19 year old is an example from your life, but whoever convinced the 19 year old daughter to give birth to the beautiful girl caused her path to change, and actually denied the existence of another possible child had the mother given birth at a different time in her life. All choices affect this.

Every second I waste not having sex is a life not getting a chance to exist. Should I be filled with guilt or regret? Should a woman who gets an abortion feel more regret than I do? Ok abortion is a bit more personal but the value of the life that is denied due to an abortion is no different than the life that could have been started had I been having sex instead of making this post. I'm sorry but I also feel the example of the 19 year old daughter to be irrelevant.

 

[MissAlice]

If they prefer to be their husband's property, rather than an individual, then so be it :sad:

As long as they don't start telling other women that they need to do the same.

Indeed which is precisely what I'm saying.

 

[Kurt31416]

There are always difficult choices. The perfect isn't the enemy of the good.

 

[MissAlice]

Just don't tell me what to do guys...

Nothing has ever worked for me not even for the mainstream dumass media...

 

[Duck]

I DO believe that the feminist movement has done harm as well as good to women.

I'll just speak from personal experience: I've been a stay at home mom,and I've been a career woman. I've "had it all." I can tell you that my years as a stay at home mom were by far the most satisfying, even though I've enjoyed great success in my professional life.

My experience has been that it's difficult - not impossible, but very, very difficult - to be very successful at a full time career, and also be a very diligent wife and mother. In the standard 8 hour work day, 40 hours a week, there is little time and energy left over to be an above average wife and mom. Throw in overtime, business travel, or a very demanding profession, and it's even more difficult.

I think that part of the problem is that despite strides toward full equality (legally, and monetarily) between the sexes, there has not been a corresponding adjustment of perceived roles in domestic or family life. In order for women to have a career outside of the house (if that is what they wish) men have to accept a larger role in domestic affairs and child rearing. It is unrealistic and indeed sexist for a man to expect his partner to work outside the home, bear the brunt of responsibility for child rearing, and maintain the house at a white-glove inspection level, all in exchange for mowing the lawn and changing the oil in the car. It is ALSO unrealistic and quite possibly sexist for a woman to expect to be able to do all of those things without help from her partner (at best) or having a psychotic break (at worst).

 

[Smoke]

I'm not sure if the story of the 19 year old is an example from your life, but whoever convinced the 19 year old daughter to give birth to the beautiful girl caused her path to change, and actually denied the existence of another possible child had the mother given birth at a different time in her life. All choices affect this.

That reminds me of an old family friend, though her story had nothing to do with choices. She has three daughters, and one time she told me that she'd also had four miscarriages. "So you would have had seven children if you'd carried them to term," I mused.

"No," she replied. "My pregnancies were all close together. If I'd carried those four to term, I wouldn't have had the children I have."

I thought that must be kind of a weird thing to know about your life.

 

[Kerr]

I get the idea that some people have the idea, that for a christian women to submit to her husband is setting her up to be abused. Now logically the husband would not even be a christian if he is going to abuse her, because the model of husband/wife is found in christ as the husband of the church ( bride) and he wont abuse her. So.....i dont see any danger in submitting to a perfectly respectable man!

I dont see how being a homemaker would constitue abuse.

And if she doenst stay at home, i dont see how working is abuse in the marriage either.

If you marry a christian man, and he is worth his weight, there really is little opportunity for abuse and submitting to him wont be degrading to the female, in fact it will honour her husband. Because as a christian wife, she will want to honour, esteem, revere, respect, submit, listen, support, encourage her husband because god supports her husband in that role, and for her to support him, she is keeping the marriage safe from harm and by letting him be the leader, she is letting god lead through him. Thats pretty awesome! And the husband supports the wife as well, the only difference is that he is the one that god uses the direct the family spiritually and god works through the husband to help him make important descisions for the family.

This does not mean that the wife is cut out of making ANY decisions, but rather she knows that if her husband is the leader in the family, he will naturally seek god's answers and leadership and therefore when a descision has to be made regarding the marriage or the family, and she knows he has been praying about it and asking god for guidance, then she can relax and support his descision knowing that she is doing the will of god.

Her husband doesnt have to pray about which laundry soap to use....so...lets keep it real.

Heneni

It is not that I think you are laying the grounds of getting abused, I just don´t like the kind of social order in a relationship where one of the partners is submitting to the other. I don´t think it prevents harm to the family or anything like that either.

And what does it means that he is the leader in the family? That he has ultimate authority? What is she really wants to do something, something big, but he refuses?

 

[Willamena]

Sounds sensible to me.

But it's as much "indoctrination." Every parent does that.

 

[Willamena]

Plus, it strikes me that feminist moms are probably going to teach their daughters about contraception, thereby drastically minimizing the likelihood of having to make such difficult choices.

There's another thing I find disturbing about these women. Studies have shown kids who are treated to a religious education about sex (i.e. "abstinence" education) are no less sexually active than kids who have secular sex ed, but they engage in riskier behavior (sex without condoms) and get themselves knocked up and infected with STDs at a far higher rate.

Every parent will impart their values to their children, whether as a shining example of what to do, or an equally shining example of what not to do. These women have included a statement in the manifesto of the values they will impart to their girls, and they will do this anyway regardless that it's stated. It's there in the manifesto to be part of what those who sign the petition know they are agreeing to.

 

[Willamena]

What he/she said was right. Not to get too insensitive but had your or my father had sex with our mothers at a different time during the day, you and I probably wouldn't exist due to the fact that a sperm with a different set of blueprints would have fertilized the egg.

That's totally unscientific. Perhaps a good topic for another thread.

 

[Willamena]

I think that part of the problem is that despite strides toward full equality (legally, and monetarily) between the sexes, there has not been a corresponding adjustment of perceived roles in domestic or family life. In order for women to have a career outside of the house (if that is what they wish) men have to accept a larger role in domestic affairs and child rearing. It is unrealistic and indeed sexist for a man to expect his partner to work outside the home, bear the brunt of responsibility for child rearing, and maintain the house at a white-glove inspection level, all in exchange for mowing the lawn and changing the oil in the car. It is ALSO unrealistic and quite possibly sexist for a woman to expect to be able to do all of those things without help from her partner (at best) or having a psychotic break (at worst).

I agree that it's unrealistic for both partners not to work, in this world where an average-income family needs two incomes just to survive. But the whole idea that "sexist is bad" is again pointing directly back at feminisim --attitudes that were impressed upon us by a movement. Sexism exists everywhere, and it's not going anywhere. That we have to downplay it and think badly of it is part of the "mold" that feminism defines for our gender roles.

 

[Kathryn]

On a closer look at the studies that are available, it seems I was correct about abstinence having no impact on sexual activity, but there does not appear to be any evidence that increases sexual risk-taking (i.e. unprotected sex) either, so I'll withdraw that claim. I suppose my only evidence for that opinion is the relatively huge number of teen pregnancies and STIs in the states, where the abstinence education thing is so popular.

Fair enough - though I don't see how teaching kids that abstinence is a viable option - along with the facts about sex and birth control - could possibly be harmful.

The best way to avoid pregnancy and STDs is to avoid having sex.

 

[Kathryn]

By the way, massive frubals to Willemena, Duck, and Heneni for the wisdom contained in your posts on this thread. DA MAN won't let me give you any more frubals today, so I just had to let you know how refreshing your logic is!

 

[Amill]

That's totally unscientific. Perhaps a good topic for another thread.

I don't think there can be a scientific paper on the idea that our existences are not bound by the sperm and egg that combined to make us. Are you suggesting that I may still have existed, just had different genes? I agree to the possibility, and I wish it were the case, but I don't believe it's true and i don't think it's possible to study it scientifically. Conception is a massive roll of the dice, and there are millions of possible existences that get denied every time an egg gets fertilized. Had the sperm in my particular case not been the one to reach the egg, I do not believe I would exist.

 

[Alceste]

Fair enough - though I don't see how teaching kids that abstinence is a viable option - along with the facts about sex and birth control - could possibly be harmful.

The best way to avoid pregnancy and STDs is to avoid having sex.

That's how conventional sex ed works. That's how mine worked, anyway. First off, point out that the only sure-fire way of avoiding pregnancy and STIs is abstinence. That takes about 5 minutes. After that, we had several weeks of answering questions about sex and learning about basic biology and reproduction and detailed descriptions of various STDs as well as contraceptives (their effectiveness rates, and what they can and can't protect you from). "Abstinence education" is a different thing. They teach that contraception is completely ineffective, and teach religious values such as "sex outside marriage will be psychologically damaging".

 

[Willamena]

I don't think there can be a scientific paper on the idea that our existences are not bound by the sperm and egg that combined to make us.

Nor that they are.

Bu as I said, a topic for another thread.

 

[Nanda]

The speakers at the conference were the A-list of complementarian celebrities: Pastor John Piper, Christian radio personality Nancy Leigh DeMoss, Southern Baptist Theological Seminary professor and antifeminist author Mary Kassian, J. Ligon Duncan III, chairman of the board for the Council for Biblical Manhood & Womanhood (CBMW), Susan Hunt, an author and consultant to the Presbyterian Church in America’s Women in the Church Ministry, and others.

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

 

[Smoke]

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

Well, they're not True Women. They just want you to be.