Sexism and Religion

[Mountain_Girl406]

I wonder if soon we'll see a narrowing of the physical strength gap too, for two reasons. One, women have more opportunity to train and compete than they did even 50 years ago. It hasn't been long since women were barred from marathon running and now are turning in fast times. In fact, in ultra marathon racing, we've now seen women finish first overall
When I was younger I was a fan of Beverly Francis, who benched 350 lbs. I thought that was epic, as it was twice my best bench of 175. The women's bench record is now around 600 or more pounds, held by Becca Swanson, I believe. That's an amazing difference in 20 or so years. I'd be surprised if the men's record increased by the same percentage in that time. A woman has finished the American Ninja Warrior Course, something many thought was impossible. ..all this after only a few decades of being allowed to play.
Reason two follows from this, as women are doing these things, the view of a fit, muscular female as unnatural or unattractive is slowly changing (except perhaps in some forums here ) so there's a better chance to pass along these great genetics.

 

[seashale76]

I can only answer based on my personal experiences. I do not fit the typical/traditional view of being' feminine'. I hunt, I prefer being alone, I teach self defense (hand-to-hand, blade and firearms), I go for long solo trips into remote wilderness areas. My experiences at the firing range and in teaching self-defense are always interesting when a conservative religious male is there. The reactions are anywhere from as bad as outright contempt displayed toward me or sneers of chuckles that a "mere female" thinks she can shoot a gun or defend herself.

I get reactions, sometimes, from conservative religious females too. Those reactions range from being told I need to "learn to be a lady" to condemning stares.

Of course not every religious conservative is like that. Some pay no attention or are even slightly respectful.

I would hope people reading the texts understand the context and time period in which they were written.

I hear ya. I don't know if the men at the firing range I go to are religious conservatives or not, but I routinely see some men that don't have clue one what they're doing, yet there will always be at least one guy around that wants to give me advice I don't need. I'm no expert, but I could more legitimately give some of them advice than the other way around. I have had some seriously bad experiences at gun stores and gun ranges as a woman. I can load, rack, and shoot just fine (and I'm a great shot).

 

[LoAmmi]

I wonder if soon we'll see a narrowing of the physical strength gap too, for two reasons. One, women have more opportunity to train and compete than they did even 50 years ago. It hasn't been long since women were barred from marathon running and now are turning in fast times. In fact, in ultra marathon racing, we've now seen women finish first overall
When I was younger I was a fan of Beverly Francis, who benched 350 lbs. I thought that was epic, as it was twice my best bench of 175. The women's bench record is now around 600 or more pounds, held by Becca Swanson, I believe. That's an amazing difference in 20 or so years. I'd be surprised if the men's record increased by the same percentage in that time. A woman has finished the American Ninja Warrior Course, something many thought was impossible. ..all this after only a few decades of being allowed to play.
Reason two follows from this, as women are doing these things, the view of a fit, muscular female as unnatural or unattractive is slowly changing (except perhaps in some forums here ) so there's a better chance to pass along these great genetics.

Likely not. Body chemistry actually makes it so that men who don't even work out tend to be physically stronger than women who do when you factor similar size and such into it. We are looking at averages, not the exceptions.

Men's bench press has gone from less than 700 in 1985 to over 1100 today since you were using that.

 

[Mountain_Girl406]

Likely not. Body chemistry actually makes it so that men who don't even work out tend to be physically stronger than women who do when you factor similar size and such into it. We are looking at averages, not the exceptions.

Perhaps, but if the exceptions begin to pass on their genetics at a higher rate, we might see a narrowing.
I wonder if early humans had such a large gap in strength between genders and millenia of viewing strength in women as unattractive led to a widening of the gap?
I'm no expert or exception but I'm finding myself capable of many physical feats that some would say are rare for women.

 

[Winken]

Are there genderless equivalents of "his"/"hers", "him"/"her", etc? "It" seems inappropriate for a human.

Sadly, we are headed in that direction. "I now pronounced you married. You may kiss. However, the kiss must be in proportion to the height, weight, and facial charactistics of each of you. I will defer judgment until after the kiss. Each of my judgments is subject to appeal. Amen."

 

[RoyWM]

So you want

As virtually all established religions originated after the agrarian and before the industrial revolution, it does not come as much of a surprise that they reflect the moral and cultural norms of an era that revolved around land ownership, chains of succession, and the repression and controlling of female sexuality. Even Buddhism, which might look like a perfect candidate for a more egalitarian stance, was deeply enmeshed in sexual politics since day one, reflecting the mores of the society around it.

What we need to keep in mind in this context is that sexism - like racism - is first and foremost based on the assumption of a fundamental and essential difference between the postulated categories. "Jews are weak intellectuals, Africans are naive athletes." "Men cannot express feelings. Women are gushing with emotion."
This difference informs the sexists' perception of the world and their own place within it.

Now, the question is: can religions that are so deeply rooted in the past adapt to a new era - and do they even intend to do so? Since many of them regard their texts as timeless revelations, and since these texts are so fundamentally rooted in bygone ages, I wonder if a "transplant" is possible.

godchild

 

[RoyWM]

So it appears that the writer wants God to adapt to her flawed perception of mores?

 

[LivingWordUnity]

Today's feminist ideology is irrational since it calls men "sexist" no matter what we do. If men treat women badly they call it "hostile sexism," but if we treat them well they call it "benevolent sexism." So feminists will always interpret what men do as that we are trying to dominate and oppress them. And there is no limit to the craziness of this.

In India, there was the Hindu tradition of Sati when a widow immolates herself on the funeral pyre of her husband. When this would happen it was unclear if the widow is a willing participant or if she was forced into it. When India became a British colony, the British rulers were appalled to learn of this. So they banned the practice. However, a feminist historical revisionist college professor called the decision to ban it sexism and rationalized calling it this by claiming that the motive of the British men was not to protect the Indian widows but instead to exercise white male dominance on another culture. I think that someone has to have a burning hatred of men and think that men are evil to speculate such a ridiculous thing about our motives in that situation.

Feminism dominates modern culture, yet the feminists still complain. For example, there's a show in the U.S. on the channel PBSkids called Wordgirl that epitomizes the feminist hostility toward men. Literally every male on the show is portrayed as being either evil or dumb as a rock and every female is portrayed as being smart and level-headed. And there's a game show within the cartoon that always has two boys and one girl named Emily. And, without exception, Emily is the one who knows the answers and wins. I noticed this after my daughter said that she noticed it.

Bruce Jenner, who was out of the public eye for decades, is suddenly being promoted as an example everywhere in the mainstream media because he wants to be a woman. The ultimate goal of feminist ideology is to erase the differences between men and women and to do this by confusing gender roles - getting the men to believe they are women and the women to believe that they are men. There was the movie called GI Jane. In the movie there's a scene where she uses a vulgar expression to suggest that she has a male sex organ. It was a caricature of what it means to be masculine. Women are told that they need to act more like a man and do things to increase their testosterone to help them achieve this.

I had a college class where we were shown a video of a feminist giving a TED talk where she was arguing that women need to do things to increase their testosterone levels so that the women can compete with the men in a man's world. Whether she realized it or not she was arguing that masculinity is superior to femininity. I would suggest that rather than women trying to beat men at being a man in order to conform to what they believe is a male dominated world women should seek to find the strength and beauty in their natural true femininity and have the world respect them for that.

 

[Leah71]

.

 

[Job8]

So it appears that the writer wants God to adapt to her flawed perception of mores?

That is correct. The Feminist attack on the Bible began in the 60s and accused God of promoting patriarchy, with patriarchy having a negative connotation. What Christians should be fully aware of is that Feminism is essentially rebellion against God and His design for men and women. Therefore Feminists also worship the universal "Goddess Mother", which is Satan's substitute for the one true and living God. This Goddess Mother is to be found in every pagan religion since the tower of Babel. The only problem is that this Goddess Mother is pretty ugly.

A matriarchal religion is a religion that focuses on a goddess or goddesses. The term is most often used to refer to theories of prehistoric matriarchal religions that were proposed by scholars such as Johann Jakob Bachofen, Jane Ellen Harrison, and Marija Gimbutas, and later popularized by second-wave feminism. In the 20th century, a movement to revive these practices resulted in the Goddess movement.

 

[awitch]

Today's feminism is irrational since it calls men "sexist" no matter what we do. If men treat women badly they call it "hostile sexism," but if we treat them well they call it "benevolent sexism." Either way, they punish the man for being a man.

Have you tried treating each woman as an individual?

 

[Llewelyn Stevenson]

As virtually all established religions originated after the agrarian and before the industrial revolution, it does not come as much of a surprise that they reflect the moral and cultural norms of an era that revolved around land ownership, chains of succession, and the repression and controlling of female sexuality. Even Buddhism, which might look like a perfect candidate for a more egalitarian stance, was deeply enmeshed in sexual politics since day one, reflecting the mores of the society around it.

What we need to keep in mind in this context is that sexism - like racism - is first and foremost based on the assumption of a fundamental and essential difference between the postulated categories. "Jews are weak intellectuals, Africans are naive athletes." "Men cannot express feelings. Women are gushing with emotion."
This difference informs the sexists' perception of the world and their own place within it.

Now, the question is: can religions that are so deeply rooted in the past adapt to a new era - and do they even intend to do so? Since many of them regard their texts as timeless revelations, and since these texts are so fundamentally rooted in bygone ages, I wonder if a "transplant" is possible.

I went back to the original OP since the replies were getting somewhat confusing.

I'm not quite sure why you think it requires a "transplant" or what you deem this transplant is by definition. All the categories you mentioned are actually false and would never make for sound doctrine or basis for life. They are neither fundamental or essential. On the other hand, "women bare children" is true but it does not define her role as simply "barefoot in the kitchen and preferably pregnant." A woman can fulfill many other roles. If she has the knowledge she can fix a car. If she has the expertise she can run a company.

People by nature can be sexist, or racist, and sometimes that comes out in our expression of our religion [I am Christian], but I have found that it is not necessarily true to religion, though my knowledge is limited to my own.

Quite frankly one of the first women I fell in love with was Queen Elizabeth when I saw her changing a car tire in a history book. As a 13 year old I remarked, "That's my kind of woman."

Funny for someone who's supposed to think women are only for making babies.

Please explain why you feel there is a need for "transplant"?

 

[LivingWordUnity]

Have you tried treating each woman as an individual?

Yes. Have you?

 

[awitch]

Yes. Have you?

Indeed and I expect that's why I don't recall ever being accused of being sexist.

 

[LivingWordUnity]

Indeed and I expect that's why I don't recall ever being accused of being sexist.

That's what you believe. So?

 

[davedajobauk]

Are there genderless equivalents of "his"/"hers", "him"/"her", etc? "It" seems inappropriate for a human.

We could limit TITLE (ownership) ~to your's, mine and their's

as-if (right !!)

 

[awitch]

That's what you believe. So?

So nothing. Just pointing out the difference in our experiences.

 

[Llewelyn Stevenson]

This is all about using gender terms? Bah!

 

[LivingWordUnity]

So nothing. Just pointing out the difference in our experiences.

So you are providing the anecdotal example of your personal experience. Got it.

 

[awitch]

So you are providing the anecdotal example of your personal experience. Got it.

Did you?