Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Amen to that. Out culture is really going down the drain. I seen a study somewhere last week about 3/4 of all people before they are 18 have had sex. That saddens me.Perhaps my post about Cyrus was missed. I said it was a poor example and then gave other better examples. But in reality, even those are not enough. The article lost my interest when it started in the first paragraph saying that there is nothing morally wrong with a woman who "owns" her sexuality and sleeps around. On this forum, we are Christians. This should bother us.
There absolutely is a double standard. Women want men to take us seriously, to stop exploiting women sexually, etc. yet we flaunt our stuff in front of them on our own volition, then get mad when bikini-clad women are in a commercial about airline safety. Different people having different perspectives is not helping "feminism" as a movement when feminism is not united in their goal.
And if I, a feminist, can get confused about these issues, think how much more a man would - how are people to know what's the difference between one person's "perspective" that a certain thing is just empowerment and real exploitation? There is no distinction.
And if I, a feminist, can get confused about these issues, think how much more a man would - how are people to know what's the difference between one person's "perspective" that a certain thing is just empowerment and real exploitation?
Amen to that. Out culture is really going down the drain. I seen a study somewhere last week about 3/4 of all people before they are 18 have had sex. That saddens me.
My husband feels the same. His chief trigger is hearing, "Men are all alike." Oh, how he hates that one.
And here I am doing the same thing in reverse, but it has been my experience, a lot of women do tend to generalize men. If I talk to another woman about some minor thing my husband does that annoys me, whether it's a friend or a mental health professional, chances are great that I'm going to hear, "Oh, well, he's a guy. What do you expect?" Or, "That's men for you."
I hope you don't really hear that from mental health professionals....if so....that seems very *un* professional to demean (and seemingly toss out) men like that.
Why does that sadden you? You know in the old days when everyone was getting married at 16-17? There was sex before 18 going on there, too...
The human condition is what it is - and I would argue has remained unchanged. Trying to make our predecessors out to be somehow more pious than the current lot is a mistake, IMHO.
OK, this is getting just a touch irritating. It could be me, or it could be others too, I don't know, but I'll say this as politely as I can.
Life Stages, including Married Couples is a no-debate area. If we want debate, we are told right there in the summary of Life Stages to go to Theology or Society. Here, all points of view are valid, even if they don't agree with our own. The goal here is not to defeat others and beat them down, but simply to discuss our points of view. We don't have to keep picking at other people's words to show where they're wrong and we're right. Let's not have that, please.
There. I said it. Not as a Mod, but as a member.
I hope you don't really hear that from mental health professionals....if so....that seems very *un* professional to demean (and seemingly toss out) men like that.
Unfortunately, I'm afraid I have. Sad, isn't it?
Actually, I think it goes beyond "sad"....probably more like negligent. But....it may explain a few things.
You know in the old days when everyone was getting married at 16-17? There was sex before 18 going on there, too...
The human condition is what it is - and I would argue has remained unchanged. Trying to make our predecessors out to be somehow more pious than the current lot is a mistake, IMHO.
You and I have discussed this before, as I recall. Some people like to whitewash the past or they haven't never taken a single history class - or both. This perfect past where everyone waited for marriage and nobody even thought about sex simply never existed. There's a reason why prostitution is called the oldest profession.
This perfect past where everyone waited for marriage and nobody even thought about sex simply never existed.
Different people having different perspectives is not helping "feminism" as a movement when feminism is not united in their goal.
So you would state that social norms don't change - that the 'human condition' has been, and will be, the same (i.e. same motivations, same outcomes) across time and generations?
Social norms - as in what people "showed" other people - no. That's definitely changed. But I believe if you look at what people actually were doing behind closed doors - yep - exactly the same.As for this part:
That's a pretty sweeping generalization. You would still argue that social norms during, say, the Victorian era and the sexual revolution that followed were exactly the same?
I think, you are noting the differences that many outside of feminist circles have noted for a while. Some feminists want equal treatment and respect for women. Other feminists want women to hold power over men.
The former group thinks that it is demeaning for women to be objectified and wants respect for the female form. The latter sees the female form as a means of enticing men and getting their way.
Hence the many objections to radical feminism. Those objections are often aimed against the latter group, not against those who want respect for women.
That's a pretty sweeping generalization. You would still argue that social norms during, say, the Victorian era and the sexual revolution that followed were exactly the same?
'Homo sum, humani nil a me alienum puto. I am a human being, nothing human can be alien to me.' That's one thing I'm learning." — Dr. Maya Angelou
'Homo sum, humani nil a me alienum puto. I am a human being, nothing human can be alien to me.' That's one thing I'm learning." — Dr. Maya Angelou
I think, you are noting the differences that many outside of feminist circles have noted for a while. Some feminists want equal treatment and respect for women. Other feminists want women to hold power over men.
The former group thinks that it is demeaning for women to be objectified and wants respect for the female form. The latter sees the female form as a means of enticing men and getting their way.
Hence the many objections to radical feminism. Those objections are often aimed against the latter group, not against those who want respect for women.
You can't make respect out of objectification, and if all you're presenting as a woman, is your sexuality, then you have already set yourself up for failure.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?