Feminism is not compatible with Christianity?

[RedPonyDriver]

@ImaginaryDay did you tell @ValleyGal that you're liking on my posts???

 

[RedPonyDriver]

I played with hot wheels, legos and other "boy toys" growing up (might have been my parents were a bit clueless on what to do with a girl after the first 3 boys)...and...well...ummm...I STILL like boys...like a lot (especially my husband)...but I also still like getting my nails done (gels stand up to wrench turning) and occasionally wearing girlie clothes.

 

[Lulav]

​

 

[Jesus' Follower]

Mod Hat On

Please remember that this is a married forum and people who are not married are not permitted to post here. The SOP can be found here.
This thread has reopened; please keep the SOP and rules in mind.

Mod Hat Off
​

 

[mkgal1]

This is a quote from another thread, but we thought maybe this discussion would fit better in this thread:

I've hesitated to say anything, especially due to the recent debate, but I'd like to point out that there is a healthy and an unhealthy way to follow the model of the husband being the head of the house. Often, there are multiple views that can both produce healthy marriages - if it is approached in the proper way. Unfortunately, many who follow the husband being the head of the house model approach it in an unhealthy manner, giving it the problems that are often seen.

I completely agree with this---it's not so much the labels, it's more about the dynamics.

This made me think of this article I saw a long time ago---contrasting coaching styles (I'd think "coaching" is a good comparison to us--as Christians--encouraging one another....or even "leading" each other). I believe Christ's teaching encourages us to be more like Dorothy (which, IMO, is what feminism represents---people being able to reach their full potential without limits on them):

Flipping the channels around on Thanksgiving and seeing 'The Wizard of Oz' brought me back to a story from Joe Ehrmann's outstanding book 'InSideOut Coaching ? How Sports Can Transform Lives.' The premise is that most coaches fall under two categories ? transactional coaches, who look for what they can get out of coaching and not what they can give; and transitional coaches, who use coaching as a platform to teach valuable life lessons.

Ehrmann once was asked for his coaching role models and at the top of his list was Dorothy from 'the Wizard of Oz.' Dorothy's character was full of empathy and encouraged those around her to reach their full potential.

Her trip down the Yellow Brick Road was not used as a terrible burden, but rather a tremendous opportunity to achieve. She showed grit and resiliency, and had the ability to take on all challenges as her 'team' traveled their road together. She set a positive example, inspired and provided confidence. There was a sense of team.

The Wizard, though, was a transactional coach.

He defined himself by power, with a sense of ultimate authority making decisions that clearly didn't take into account how it would affect others. His intimidating voice and disappearance behind the curtain was used as a scare tactic, opposed to getting to know those around him people and find out their motivations. Rather than inspiring his charges, his leadership was built on intimidation. His final abandonment of his team when things got tough left them feeling alone.

There is a traditional image of a coach being like the Wizard, building a power structure where the leader is alone at the top.

Dorothy's image as a coach is much different, as she built her team through developing relationships and creating a level of buy-in toward common goals. The foundation she created with the Scarecrow, Tin Man, and Cowardly Lion was based on developing self-esteem, mutual support, and helping reach their full potential.~http://www.courierpress.com/news/in...z--mike-jacobs-column-ep-44486-326248221.html

 

[ValleyGal]

This still starts with the assumption that someone needs "coaching" - and in a marriage where there is "head of house" the assumption is that the wife is the one who needs coaching - as though she is missing courage, heart, or wisdom (or some other deficit that she requires a husband to build up for her. It's better than the patriarchal rule, but still imbalanced. Often, husbands are not in the position to coach or the wife needing that kind of coaching. I think these kinds of relationships might work if they maintain those positions throughout life, but I don't think most do, which is why mutual influence and shared power is, imo, the best way by far.

 

[mkgal1]

I'm okay with it as long as the "coaching" flows in both directions (considering we are first all parts of the Body of Christ).

My daughter's high school Bible teacher is one example I can think of that believed in a complementarian marriage--except he routinely told the class of instances where his wife had sound wisdom to share with him (and he was grateful he listened to her). He stressed the importance of never dismissing a spouse's opinion--and to always give their words consideration (IOW---don't get proud and hard-headed). That would still be mutual influence---same dynamic, maybe a different name is all.

 

[Kristen Johnson]

If you are talking about equal opportunity for all, then it's pretty obvious that Christianity is compatible with feminism. Jesus communed with women, in spite of the norms of the ancient world almost forbidding it. Paul called upon women ministers all the time - Prisca, Aquila, and Lydia. And, it's really simple - God so love the WHOLE WORLD.......

Twitter: @tugoffaith

 

[Wolf_Says]

I guess what wave of feminism are you talking about? 1st and 2nd? Of course! 3rd? NO! You stay away from 3rd wave like it is the plague!

It has become so twisted into believing that everything is sexist (not kidding, they call AC sexist) and it is perfectly fine for woman to basically walk all over men. It is an over-correction that does not focus at all on the problems in the middle east in regards to women.

Thank God my wife sees through the crap of 3rd wave feminism.

 

[Dave-W]

what wave of feminism are you talking about? 1st and 2nd? Of course! 3rd?

Which wave was it that wanted to kill off all males?

 

[Wolf_Says]

Which wave was it that wanted to kill off all males?

3rd wave.

 

[Dave-W]

I fail to see how calling for the elimination of half of the human population is in any way compatible with Christianity.

 

[Wolf_Says]

I fail to see how calling for the elimination of half of the human population is in any way compatible with Christianity.

No I said 3rd wave feminism is NOT compatible with Christianity. I think you misread my initial post.

 

[HannahT]

I fail to see how calling for the elimination of half of the human population is in any way compatible with Christianity.

It isn't. There are nutty men's groups out there calling for the opposite too. What is strange to me is people wish to use worse case individuals, and use them to label entire groups of people. I mean you can find evil everywhere.

It kind of reminds me of politics in a way. All Dems are this, and all GOP are that. All Dems believe this, and all GOP believe that.

People that tend to do that to me are lazy, and sadly very closed minded. They are incapable of debate or discussion. Snark and sarcasm are there only forms they are capable of using.

You have to wonder how many of the 3rd wave people got caught up in things, because of the environment or their circumstances, etc. That's one group - and then you have those that love to marinate in everything negative. I feel especially sorry for the second group - the first one can possibly be capable of a discussion. lol the second group also reminds me of the stanch 'anti' feminist types. Both are way to eager to believe anything negative about the other side, and fall for every stand hook, line and sinker. People that choose to marinate in that much contempt? They need our prayers and not our defensive nature. It's a sad way of looking at life with so much hate in their hearts.