Any thoughts on how this plays out in the marriage relationship?

[chaz345]

The way my mind is wrapping around it..there ARENT any different "traits" between males and females to start with..All we are is how we BEHAVE in response to our enviroment..

And the differences in "typical behavior" between the genders in response to the enviroment..is learned..

Males may be taught certain things in a certain enviroment and females alike as in how to behave in response to the enviroment based on physical differences.

Most of how I behave Chaz is not 'instinctual"..and any of my typical "female behavior" is learned..I believe any of my "instinctual " behavior would be a HUMAN instinct shared by both genders.Such as sourcing out food and eating it as an example...How though I go about sourcing it out is LEARNED..in my current enviroment and how I've been taught and conditioned to do so.In my case is find a way to aquire an American $ and go to Tom Thumb or Kroger and buy it.(food)...Because thats the way the society I live in operates..

If I lived in a differnt society..I may have to alter my behavior..and litterally go out and "hunt" for food in nature..

But neither one of those behaviors is a "male or female trait" that I posses inherently because Im a specific gender.

Dallas

Ok that's an opinion you are certainly entitled to. One that ignores litterally mountains of scientific study into the differences in brain structure and function between man and women but that's your choice.

 

[mkgal1]

I never said that we don't both possess these virtues. My "assignment" was merely to show which ones I think come more easily to men or women and which ones seem to be equally inherent.

Yes, it is only through Christ that we are free of our sinful nature. BUT... that doesn't mean that we aren't born with some level of inclination towards these virtuous behaviors. If that were the case, why would we ever seek out a higher power at all?

We are all born with a sinful nature......we all sin (Rom 3:23) and just ONE sin separates us from God (Isaiah 59:2)...that is why we seek God. Possessing some good (which God placed in us) won't get us to heaven....we cannot be good enough (I know you know that.....just clarifying).

I agree with Dallas. Watching children....I see both genders nurturing and sharing....having hope......not giving up....understanding fairness....etc. I believe that is what Jesus meant by "child-like" faith.

 

[FaithPrevails]

I agree with Dallas. Watching children....I see both genders nurturing and sharing....having hope......not giving up....understanding fairness....etc. I believe that is what Jesus meant by "child-like" faith.

So, you don't think there are any things that boys/men excel at versus girls and vice versa? It's not a matter of both genders not possessing or being capable of something. But, there are reasons why boys are drawn to guns/weapons and fight-related play and girls are drawn to things more docile. Those same traits that create these differences can and do play out in our virtues, as well, IMO.

Yes, girls can wield a gun and boys can play house. That's not what I'm talking about here, though.

 

[dallasapple]

Ok that's an opinion you are certainly entitled to. One that ignores litterally mountains of scientific study into the differences in brain structure and function between man and women but that's your choice.

Go argue with the experts who study human anatomy/biology/behavior who have all the data before them and are leaning by propoderence agression in the first place isnt an "instinct" ..let alone a more inherently male trait.

I noted this...

Hostility is a disease of development and has its chief source within the
personality. The distortions which cause it may be in the excessive demands or
hostile images insofar as an individual’s whole way of thinking and outlook are
warped by the persisting emotional effects of unwholesome childhood influences.
Similar to Bandura’s social learning theory is the attachment theory by Ainsworth (1979)
and Sroufe (1983). According to this theory, children who experience insensitive care in
their early years develop insecure attachments and come to believe that others will treat
them badly. These beliefs and feelings help to “develop dispositions to initiate conflicts,​

oppose actions of others, and behave aggressively” (Perry et. al., 1995: 303). David

And this was interesting as well to go with it.

The Seville Statement from 1989, drafted by an international group of scientists from the
fields of genetics, anthropology, psychology, biochemistry, and others have concluded
that aggressive behavior and violence are not “genetically programmed into human
nature” (Kriesberg, 1998: 35). In his book​

​

​

​

The Anatomy of Human Destructiveness,
Erich Fromm (1973: 22) says that those who are unable or afraid to change destruction
around them are the people who support the theory of inborn violence and aggression in
humans. “This theory of an innate aggressiveness easily becomes an ideology that helps
to soothe the fear of what is to happen and to rationalize the sense of impotence,” writes
Fromm.​

Dallas

 

[Conservativation]

Many the ingredients of feminism, even the most radical kind, have been expressed here by several members now, while they would deny vehemently that they are feminists.

I would agree, they are not feminists, in the radical sense.

(That male and female are learned not inherant is one of feminism's "First Principles" )

They are what is loosed in the church, gynocentrism.

 

[dallasapple]

So, you don't think there are any things that boys/men excel at versus girls and vice versa? It's not a matter of both genders not possessing or being capable of something. But, there are reasons why boys are drawn to guns/weapons and fight-related play and girls are drawn to things more docile. Those same traits that create these differences can and do play out in our virtues, as well, IMO.

Yes, girls can wield a gun and boys can play house. That's not what I'm talking about here, though.

The point would be ..why do we have guns/weapons in the first place Faith?

What are we "fighting for"..and how did we "inherently know" that violence is a human trait #1 ..and then how did we "figure out" that boys are inherently more agressive"?

Its not about who can "excel" or not "excel" in a differnt area..not that Im talkign about..Im talkign about what is "inerently" a male or female TRAIT that only exist or doesnt exist or is more "natural" to one or the other simply by our gender..(from birth)

Dallas

 

[FaithPrevails]

The point would be ..why do we have guns/weapons in the first place Faith?

Invention.

What are we "fighting for"..and how did we "inherently know" that violence is a human trait #1 ..and then how did we "figure out" that boys are inherently more agressive"?

Observation.

Its not about who can "excel" or not "excel" in a differnt area..not that Im talkign about..Im talkign about what is "inerently" a male or female TRAIT that only exist or doesnt exist or is more "natural" to one or the other simply by our gender..(from birth)

Dallas

I don't think any trait only exists in one gender or the other. But, I do think that some traits are more inherent to male or female.

You have sons, dallas. You know I'm right when I say that a boy can fashion a gun or weapon out of just about anything. It's not even really something they have to be "taught". Yes, they have to be taught the name...but even as young as a year and a half - boys can and will pick more aggressive play than girls. It can't be entirely learned at that young of an age.

 

[chaz345]

Go argue with the experts who study human anatomy/biology/behavior who have all the data before them and are leaning by propoderence agression in the first place isnt an "instinct" ..let alone a more inherently male trait.

I noted this...



And this was interesting as well to go with it.




Dallas

Why don't you go argue with the fact that there are fairly large differences in the structure of the male brain versus the female one. Differences in function when the same stimulus is applied too.

 

[mkgal1]

But that difference is not even close to same magnitude as the gender disparity in church. It's at most 2 or 3 percentage points. That' according to the data that you posted. Not only that but the gender disparity in church attendance is only an issue in the American and to degree western church. If it were due to population then we'd see it across all cultures and religions. We don't though so that simply is not the cause.

I don't think there is one answer for reasons why men aren't in church.....other than....their priority is that something else is more important. Same answer for the ones that ARE there & are disinterested.....they have something else that they feel is more interesting on their minds. Like Romans mentioned earlier....as it says in Revelations....they "turned away from their first love". (Same things can be said for women too). So...my answer to that is that it is more acceptable for women to be concerned with the character issues for the family (mainly children--and setting an example)....and it is more acceptable for the men to be more concerned with the financial health of the family.

In reference to the population gender divide. It matters on geographical location and age as to how great the divide is in percentage. After age 24....the divide begins increasing (in favor of women). By age 85....the women outnumber men 2:1. Geographical locations that provide high economic opportunities for men....the men outnumber women. My conjecture would be that in these areas.....men are more concerned with career than they are God. I live near the Silicon Valley area ( Sunnyvale)....Chip Ingram was asked to pastor a church here because it was in what reports have shown is the most "spiritually dark" areas in the nation. I think it comes down to the disect being.....things of this world ($$ and worldly pleasure--which Murrown says focusing on is "manly")......as opposed to God.

 

[chaz345]

The point would be ..why do we have guns/weapons in the first place Faith?

What are we "fighting for"..and how did we "inherently know" that violence is a human trait #1 ..and then how did we "figure out" that boys are inherently more agressive"?

Its not about who can "excel" or not "excel" in a differnt area..not that Im talkign about..Im talkign about what is "inerently" a male or female TRAIT that only exist or doesnt exist or is more "natural" to one or the other simply by our gender..(from birth)

Dallas

Way back when, violence, either against another human or against a hungry animal, was a matter of survival. Why exactly, before there was much of a civilization to do the conditioning in the first place, was it primarily the males who did the violent defending?

 

[chaz345]

I don't think there is one answer for reasons why men aren't in church.....other than....their priority is that something else is more important. Same answer for the ones that ARE there & are disinterested.....they have something else that they feel is more interesting on their minds. Like Romans mentioned earlier....as it says in Revelations....they "turned away from their first love". (Same things can be said for women too). So...my answer to that is that it is more acceptable for women to be concerned with the character issues for the family (mainly children--and setting an example)....and it is more acceptable for the men to be more concerned with the financial health of the family.

But again why are other things more important more often for men than for women? Why is church uninteresting for men, more than women? You can't say "it just is". Either it's something about men as a group or it's something about church. If you expect "it just is" to be a reasonable answer and refuse to get into why, then you have to accept "it just is" when we're talking about most divorces being filed by women. If the why is important there(which i absolutely agree that it is) then the why is important here. What you are doing here is the same as if someone, in the divorce discussion said that the reason that women file more often is that it's more common that they just don't want to be married anymore.

 

[Conservativation]

98% of the male population has never committed a violent act. I'll bet that comes as a surprise.

Cain and Able got into some violence....that should NOT come as a surprise.

 

[chaz345]

Geographical locations that provide high economic opportunities for men....the men outnumber women. My conjecture would be that in these areas.....men are more concerned with career than they are God. I live near the Silicon Valley area ( Sunnyvale)....Chip Ingram was asked to pastor a church here because it was in what reports have shown is the most "spiritually dark" areas in the nation. I think it comes down to the disect being.....things of this world ($$ and worldly pleasure--which Murrown says focusing on is "manly")......as opposed to God.

So we again come back to a statement that basically boils down to a spiritual supereriority/inferiority. Men are, in greater numbers, more interested in the worldly than women are. That's what you are saying. And I see you've picked up on Romans complete distortion of Murrow. Seems that if one can't find any good reason to object to what he proposes but fears it or it somehow just doesn't feel right, that all you have to do is make something up about what he really means. He claims to be FOR men, so why would he have that meaning in what he's saying? It makes no sense. But not making sense isn't a reason to not make something up that makes him look bad is it?

Bottom line is that dozens or hundreds of churches that have implemented Murrow's ideas are much more vibrant and stronger than they were before and members of both genders are more involved, more interested and growing more spiritually. Why do you oppose that?

 

[mkgal1]

So we again come back to a statement that basically boils down to a spiritual supereriority/inferiority. Men are, in greater numbers, more interested in the worldly than women are. That's what you are saying.

NO...that isn't what I am saying. Did you forget your punctuation? Did you mean to place a question mark there at the end? I have already said it once.....it isn't about "superiority" or "inferiority"..........it is that men (going by the stats you are using)....are less "spiritually-minded".....not that they are less inclined to being spiritual (inherently).

 

[dallasapple]

Way back when, violence, either against another human or against a hungry animal, was a matter of survival. Why exactly, before there was much of a civilization to do the conditioning in the first place, was it primarily the males who did the violent defending?

Because they were better equipped for the role physically for one..2) the females were needed in other critical areas such as caring for the small children..

And way back when ..the violence needed against another human in fact should not have been a real need if all humans had never been taught to be violent towards one another.Human to human violence would have to have been CONDONED and it would have only been out of GREED and selfishness..

Now are you going to tell me that some humans(males It would have to be ) are BORN inherently greedy and selfish and willign to take the life of another in order to conquer and aquire more?

Or could the act of violence and as a result you get a pay off had been a LEARNED attribute?That has been ever since taught and retaught that we are O.K to use violence in order to gain something for oursleves out of greed?Because the other end of those killings is self defense..So are there men born who are inherently more likely to want to kill another human for their own personal "survival" and the rest of the humans dont have that "trait" they kill only in self defense?

Is that another male trait? That males are born with?..an instinct to kill?..Or did humans "figure out" that sometimes if we kill another human being we get further ahead in our enviroment and then we started sharing that KNOWLEDGE and teaching to our own how to do it with malice of forethought and precision?

There is litterally NO instinct for one human being to kill another human being from the start .Thats something we DECIDED to do for different reasons and then learned how to do it.For greed..maybe for the betterment of the rest of society or in self defense..

Taken out of ANY threatening situation ..with ZERO competition in sight..with no knowledge of anything better to have over what we already have..we dont have an "instinct" to kill each other.

Dallas

 

[mkgal1]

Bottom line is that dozens or hundreds of churches that have implemented Murrow's ideas are much more vibrant and stronger than they were before and members of both genders are more involved, more interested and growing more spiritually. Why do you oppose that?

I don't oppose that. I think it's great that both genders are more involved....more interested....and growing more spiritually.

 

[dallasapple]

Speaking of "instinct to kill"..on a side note..Im a female by the way..I dont care if it was a man or woman or both..But Im GLAD(HAPPY) that Osama Bin Laden is DEAD..Im glad we found him and killed him..Im proud of our soldiers and our country today that his deranged mass murdering soul is where ever God is deciding right now it should be.

Dallas

 

[FaithPrevails]

NO...that isn't what I am saying. Did you forget your punctuation? Did you mean to place a question mark there at the end? I have already said it once.....it isn't about "superiority" or "inferiority"..........it is that men (going by the stats you are using)....are less "spiritually-minded".....not that they are less inclined to being spiritual (inherently).

I understand what you are saying, MK.

I don't see MK or dallas' statements as saying women are more superior spiritually than men. Making an observation that men may tend to be less focused in that area does NOT suggest inferiority, IMO.

 

[chaz345]

I don't oppose that. I think it's great that both genders are more involved....more interested....and growing more spiritually.

Then why are you so opposed to the ideas that led to it? Why do you seem to disagree with the notion that there's something wrong with the Church, something that drives some men away and keeps others disinterested?

 

[chaz345]

I understand what you are saying, MK.

I don't see MK or dallas' statements as saying women are more superior spiritually than men. Making an observation that men may tend to be less focused in that area does NOT suggest inferiority, IMO.

How does "less spritually minded" amount to anything other than less spiritual? Seriously, that's an honest question.