Sexism and Religion

[John Allman]

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. ...

I dread to think how tedious this discussion has become. I haven't even been able to bring myself to read much of it.

On a lighter note, readers may enjoy my own offering ...
Masculism, Feminism and the Euro Tunnel

 

[paul becke]

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.

'"Jews are weak intellectuals.."
That is a prejudice I have never heard of, presumably since it takes racial prejudice, any kind of prejudice, to a still further level of imbecility, flying as it dies in the face of the overwhelming evidence to the contrary, both at the anecdotal level of our daily lives, and at the readily verifiable academic level. Googling 'Jews ratio Nobel' would probably be enough. True, if they were all like Ayn Rand, it would be a different story all together.

Incidentally, as a young female, pagan, you would be a prime candidate for a human sacrifice.

 

[LoAmmi]

'"Jews are weak intellectuals.."
That is a prejudice I have never heard of, presumably since it takes racial prejudice, any kind of prejudice, to a still further level of imbecility, flying as it dies in the face of the overwhelming evidence to the contrary, both at the anecdotal level of our daily lives, and at the readily verifiable academic level. Googling 'Jews ratio Nobel' would probably be enough. True, if they were all like Ayn Rand, it would be a different story all together.

I think the sentence means an intellectual with below average physical strength, not below average intellect.

 

[bhsmte]

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.

Religions have evolved, because they have had to, to keep people interested.

Now, since there is a clear trend in the overall decline the world over in religious beliefs, they either are not evolving quickly enough, or some people come to the conclusion, that their former religious beliefs were wrong.

At the end of the day, we have so many religions and denominations, because people tend to match their personal psychological needs, with the religion or denomination, which best fits their needs.

 

[redleghunter]

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.

Thanks for posting this. Can religions that are so deeply rooted in the past adapt to the 'new era'? A good question for human institutions but being a Christian one obeys YHWH (God) and His ways. You do a good job of expressing the post-modern view of what people think is faith in God. But the question you really want 'answered' here on a Christian site is: "Does God change?" No God does not change. Only the warped misuderstandings of mankind about God based on their pursuit of self change.

Now on sexism? Obviously you give some basic examples above. However, you did not point out how in the Christian worldview there is 'sexism.' Frankly, men and women are different. There are things a woman can do I as a man will never be able to do. One is conceiving a child and giving birth. Men and women have different sex organs, different bone structures the list goes on. Men and women ARE different. Men are not equal to women and women are not equal to men; as an apple is not equal to an orange. Different textures, tastes and packaging. However, both the apple and orange are fruit and compliment a proper diet. No matter how much this apple wants to be an orange, I won't be one.

But I hope I did not give the impression there is not sexism in this world. There is and I for one look at proof of such. We have proof that men and women are cruel and treat every man or women like 'things' to be used. We see that every day and that is sexism. But the biggest proof we have of sexism, specifically against females, is that the majority of elective abortions are female babies. Start there with protecting females from sexism. I don't think Martha Sanger intended for her eugenics project to abort female babies, just Blacks. So add racism to the formula as well. Elective abortions kill mostly Black and female babies. There's your sexism.

 

[moneyholster]

Scientific studies are showing that women are averaging with higher IQs than men for the last 100 years.

The reason female intelligence as gone up is because our modern society encourages woman to become educated more than they do to men. For example, schools have become far more adjusted to how girls learn best, at the expense of boys. I see this all the time at my school. The only science club is for girls only, because it's supporting women ins science. Also, they had a contest for scholarships to a meteorology program, but it was for girls only. There was nothing like this for the guys. This is to undo some of the sexism against women in the past. There could be some genetic differences, I guess, because females would pass on their genes by getting to the top of the social order, which require lots of intelligence. But men also were the ones who planned hunts and wars, so I don't know. The point is, women are not inherently better than men.

 

[bhsmte]

The reason female intelligence as gone up is because our modern society encourages woman to become educated more than they do to men. For example, schools have become far more adjusted to how girls learn best, at the expense of boys. I see this all the time at my school. The only science club is for girls only, because it's supporting women ins science. Also, they had a contest for scholarships to a meteorology program, but it was for girls only. There was nothing like this for the guys. This is to undo some of the sexism against women in the past. There could be some genetic differences, I guess, because females would pass on their genes by getting to the top of the social order, which require lots of intelligence. But men also were the ones who planned hunts and wars, so I don't know. The point is, women are not inherently better than men.

How exactly do females learn best?

 

[LoAmmi]

Now on sexism? Obviously you give some basic examples above. However, you did not point out how in the Christian worldview there is 'sexism.' Frankly, men and women are different. There are things a woman can do I as a man will never be able to do. One is conceiving a child and giving birth. Men and women have different sex organs, different bone structures the list goes on. Men and women ARE different. Men are not equal to women and women are not equal to men; as an apple is not equal to an orange. Different textures, tastes and packaging. However, both the apple and orange are fruit and compliment a proper diet. No matter how much this apple wants to be an orange, I won't be one.

No two people are equal in ability and other attributes. Sexism does not come from inequality of those characteristics, but from a lack of equal opportunity or rights. In places where women are not allowed to perform tasks that men can do, that is sexism. Granted, much of that takes place in non-Westernized nations such as Saudi Arabia, but we have to be careful to ensure that all people have equal opportunity to live the life they wish to lead. Note I didn't say equal success, as success is not guaranteed.

 

[Ruth Amy]

I think this simplifies things beautifully:
Galatians 3:28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.

Even before I came to Christ, I thought, "Can't we just all respect each other equally as human beings?"

The elite seek to divide and rule, as they always have. Turn women against men, black against white, disabled against able-bodied. Christianity itself is a religion of division itself, but in a quite different way - between those who are still in the World, and those in the body of Christ, as lively stones, as Peter in the KJV puts it so delightfully.

 

[Dionne005]

You guys are not thinking deep enough into the situation. It's not a man vs woman thing. It's a man vs devil thing. I really do believe that the devil is and always have been trying to get to the heart of man. Think of it since day one. When Eve ate of the apple, nothing happened. But when she convinced Adam to do it, the world went under. His father and son relationship changed. He hid himself and distance himself from god even though he couldn't really hide. Same thing goes for today. Men make up so many excuses on why they don't need to go and if you listen to them it was something that had to do with there father. Look into this yourselves and tell me how many men that have fathers that went to church regularly and still go today? I'm 100% sure that if a father went to church regularly ALL his children will go most likely. Now if a father does not go but the mother does every single Sunday and takes her kids every Sunday, when her children become grown, they will most likely not go to church. Ladies as much as you want to complain about equality, man will ALWAYS be the head. It's just the way it is since day one. The fastest way for the devil to destroy the church is to destroy the head of the house. Your children will most likely be saved if you have a husband that loves the Lord. And yes I am a woman in my 20s. Ladies it's a blessing to have a man that leads. Now Im not saying submit but I am saying to really look into what I said and analyze to draw in a deeper meaning of what's going on with this world and why we lack men in the church. As a black woman, I see it so much with boys that have fathers in jail or dead or being defeated by the system. The children turn out gay, in jail, or dead. Nothing the mother could do about it. When the head is gone the house is too.

 

[Andrew B.]

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."

Blacks don't support anti-black racism. Blacks might be conditioned to see themselves as less capable to of certain things and even go along with it, but they also fight against this. For example, I've never met a black who says "whites should make more money than blacks." But I've met many women who insist that their husbands (or boyfriends) make more money.

So it is all well and good to say sexism is no different than racism. But it doesn't play out that way in the real world. When you oppose discrimination against blacks, you don't get a backlash from blacks who insist in keeping double standards. But when you oppose gender discrimination you get opposition from both sexes.

 

[moneyholster]

I don't know how men ruling is so much better than if things are made equal.

There's undeniable statistics that in USA prisons for example, 90% of the total incarcerated population are males, and it has so consistently since record-keeping began in the early 1900's.

Therefore, men has greater propensity for lawlessness. And yet we find it better to keep such walking time bombs in charge through stereotypes or whatever. I think that's very stupid. And isn't lawlessness badly frowned upon in the Bible??

Is "the man of lawlessness" simply the collective nature of man?? The basic instinct of men which makes them more likely to violate the law, and end up in prison 9 times out of 10 when compared to women.

Or is that because of the sexism that men are more likely to commit crimes? Women are less likely to be sentenced as harshly as men. You could use your same argument to say that African Americans are "lawless time bombs." There are disproportionately more minorities in prison. This is a combination of racism and disproportional poverty. Testosterone does play a role in aggression, but that's not the whole picture. Should we judge women based on the effect that estrogen has on their body? No, of course not. However, I do agree that there should be more female politicians.

 

[LoAmmi]

However, I do agree that there should be more female politicians.

I see this said a lot and I've often wondered what's stopping women who want to run for office from running for office. If people don't vote for you, well, you don't win. Might be sexist people voting, but women are half the population (in some places more than half).

In some places it just might be there are no women who want to step up into that career. I'm a man and I'd never want to run for office.

 

[CRUCISDECRISTO]

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.

Sounds like you've bit into the Women's Lib garbage, or you've listed your major as "women's Studies". First and foremost, you need to get the idea out of your head that equal is a good thing.

None of us are even close to being equal with the Almighty Creator who created us perfect with a free will and everything that goes with it. He created the Man first and then the woman. He created woman only after Man could not find a suitable mate from the other beasts God had created. When he created Man, he created him out of the earth and breathed life in him. He did not create woman from the earth, but from Man's rib. She was bone of his bones and flesh of his flesh. By created order, Man was given the headship of the family.

Now our free will gets us in trouble when we allowed the truth of God's word to be twisted by the serpent/Devil and take his word over God's. When we believed the lie over the truth and acted upon it, we showed that we were no longer righteous in God's eyes. We sinned and therefore were no longer deserving of God's grace. He had the right to destroy us then and there, but chose not to. Instead God chose to send someone who would one day destroy the serpent by crushing his head.

All the while that Eve was listening to the serpent lie about God's word, Adam remains present, but silent. Not once did he speak up and correct Eve so that she would not fall into temptation. He took a bite from the fruit Eve gave him and both were instantly condemned for breaking God's command against forbidden fruit consumption. He did forgive them by covering their shame with the sacrifice of animals' skins to give them clothes.

God's created order was righteous, but our sinful ways have marred that role model. Only through Christ is it restored.

 

[paulm50]

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.

Most religions are sexist and racist. The idea we can change parts and adhere like glue to others, is misreading what religions preach. They preach this is the law.

And that's it. To break away from one part, because it no longer fits. Needs a direct order from god, and he's saying nothing.

The problem is the rules they made for women are based on ignorance of how the body works (created if you wish). Men or god, depending on your belief, wrote the rules to suit men. If one believes god wrote them, they're set in stone. If one believes men wrote them, they can all be changed.

As for racism, religions are designed to keep one group of people together, and other groups out. That was the reason for the writing of the Torah while the Israelites were in Babylon. The ultimate disaster for this type of separation is genocide, one religion or sector of a religion. Trying to kill another.

Traditional female socialization tends to emphasize conformity and submission, avoiding conflicts and following rules.
Accordingly, they are less likely to break the mold.

Don't say that to my wife. She will soon give you a piece of her mind. LOL

 

[dlamberth]

I see this said a lot and I've often wondered what's stopping women who want to run for office from running for office. If people don't vote for you, well, you don't win. Might be sexist people voting, but women are half the population (in some places more than half).

In some places it just might be there are no women who want to step up into that career. I'm a man and I'd never want to run for office.

My own personal belief...we are screwed as a species unless women step up into leadership roles. I'm in a political position as an elected official and with some success (very little actually) try to get women involved. It's not an easy thing to do. When I ask why, I'm told it's a cultural thing, that women aren't raised to be leaders. They are raised to be mothers. It may be that basic, but I do think there's more going on than that and as a man, I don't yet have a full understanding.

 

[D. A. Taylor]

Isn't it interesting how Mary Magdalene had more courage than the 12 apostles? And we could go on-and-on about how males and females are "superior" to each other in various circumstances such as this. But such an endeavor is nothing more than a Satanic desire for competition and superiority.

I suggest that instead of worldly competitiveness, both men and women should embrace the self-effacing humility that comes with genuine Godly love, which comes through a personal relationship with Christ.

The greatest Being in the universe humbled Himself for our salvation. This is what both men and women should be doing.

 

[LoAmmi]

My own personal belief...we are screwed as a species unless women step up into leadership roles. I'm in a political position as an elected official and with some success (very little actually) try to get women involved. It's not an easy thing to do. When I ask why, I'm told it's a cultural thing, that women aren't raised to be leaders. They are raised to be mothers. It may be that basic, but I do think there's more going on than that and as a man, I don't yet have a full understanding.

We are screwed how? Not arguing against them being in leadership roles, but I don't buy into the idea that if women were in charge of more things everything would be better. They are ultimately people.

 

[awitch]

So Jane, are you at all surprised by the answers provided by our Christian hosts?

I'm not.

 

[redleghunter]

I wouldn't bet on it.

And I predict "Men and women are equal, but have different roles..." in the next few posts

That would only be a logical response. If you are a man can you conceive and bear a child? Provide it milk from your own body? No, a man cannot. So there is clearly some roles even an atheist can observe from nature.