Feminism viewed from a Christian perspective: Good? Bad? Something else?

[Erth]

Which is exactly based on the National Organization for Women (The "NOW" gang) which has a mix of 50% lesbian and 50% ugly women who no guy in his right mind would date.

Don't believe me? Heres the evidence: For the past 10 years or so, "People" magazine has made a yearly issue of the top 50 female CEO's of business's. That's 500 women- maybe more as my data is a few years out of date- call it 750 women.

Out of that 750 women, they are 1)very professional- knowing they were physically unattractive they understood the only way to get ahead was by work ethics and merit. 2)These women are SMART- extraordinary intelligence- like the past CEO of Hewlett-Packard. 3)I'm still pretty sure that Janet Reno is Chelsea Clintons father, not Bill- but I can't prove that.

So did I get this right? Do you think that a woman has to be ugly in order to have the ambition to work and acquire merit?

 

[Joykins]

So did I get this right? Do you think that a woman has to be ugly in order to have the ambition to work and acquire merit?

What I got is that he thinks a woman must be attractive and heterosexual, OR extremely smart and hard-working to have value. But he considers the latter masculinized (portrayed as fathering children).

I disagree with that whole world view.

 

[Trailltrader]

So did I get this right? Do you think that a woman has to be ugly in order to have the ambition to work and acquire merit?

No- but everyone will work off the strengths that G-d has given them. After all why should a woman get a Masters degree in mathematics if she could work a runway in New York for more money? Everyone has a strength- mine didn't come out until my Dad had died when I was aged 40 and I overcame 22 years of the word "NO!" thanks to G-d in 2 years, and 2 weeks.

Every time I wanted to become a locksmith my dad would ridicule me. Once he died and I was able to pursue my dream I went from apprentice and completed my 5 year apprenticeship in 6 months. I became not only the shop manager in 8 months, but one of the top locksmiths in the world teaching using the net advanced locksmithing techniques in 1 year. And its all thanks to G-d for providing the drive, and the natural talent. I cannot praise G-d enough for allowing this to happen. Looking back on it I should have told my Dad "No, NO to you for killing my dream"

I am saying however that brains and ambition will overcome looks in the long run with sufficient planning and prayer.

Example: most prostitutes in Nevada have investment seminars by professional investors and money managers in their off duty hours so when they retire at a relatively young age (32ish) they have a nice egg of money laid away to retire off of.

The part about Janet Reno being Chelsea's father is simply a joke. Ms. Reno is a very smart and talented attorney- nobody gets to become the Attorney General of the United States unless they're not only a good attorney but have the ability to play hard ball politics.

 

[ValleyGal]

Back to the OP - feminism from a Christian perspective - It depends on what type of feminism you are referring to. There are radical feminists who have a different agenda than the liberal feminists, for example.

The Bible has a patriarchal context, which is primarily cultural, not a command for society. Imo, patriarchy is part of the consequences for Eve sinning - that men would "rule". And they have. But that is not how God intended it. God created woman to help man, not to be his girl-Friday, but to help him to subdue the earth, etc.

Skip forward to the Judges and meet Deborah. She was a judge in charge of all Israel. She didn't get there because a man gave her his permission. God put her there, and men were "under" her authority. In fact, she had so much power and influence that the commander of an army would not go to battle unless she escorted them! That says a lot about women in leadership.

Now skip forward to Proverbs 31, where we find the "ideal" wife. She was a hard worker, she was a landowner and entrepreneur. She was a manager of a household of servants and also had employees in her fields and selling her goods. She lived an upright life, and her husband was well respected. Actually, the implications of the husband of the ideal wife often go unnoticed. What was worthy of respect back then? It had much to do with how he conducted himself, and what his marriage was like. No one respects a man whose home and life is not in order. They would not respect him if it was soooo terrible for women to do the things that his wife did, working outside the home and doing the things that traditional patriarchy says we shouldn't do.

Skip forward to Jesus, who elevated women wherever he went, treating them like valuable gems. He even gave women the right to be the first to know his resurrection! What an honour! .... Early church. Paul went all over sharing the Gospel, equipping local churches, acknowledging women in business, women leaders of local churches and women working in missions.

Now to think a little more globally....if the church represents the Bride and Jesus the Husband, then he has honoured us and elevated us by serving us (washing his disciples' feet), by submitting to us (he humbled himself and became a man), sacrificing for us (he died for us while we were yet sinners), and selflessness (he gave his very self up for our sake). If that is not value on women, I don't know what is. And THAT is what it means to be the head of the wife.... just as Jesus is the head of the church.

Someone here said feminists want the rights but not the responsibilities. That is wrong. If women did not want the responsibilities, why do we work so hard to break the glass ceiling? Why do we escape abusive husbands and take a huge reduction in living standards just to protect our children? Why do we put ourselves through grueling years at university, amass a mountain of debt and then spend the next 20 years getting up at 6:00 every day, get the little ones ready, and faithfully head off to work to pay that mountain of debt off? Not to mention come home, and most of us have managed our homes on top of work all day. Why are more women than men now the primary bread-winner? Believe me, where there are rights there are responsibilities, and we take those responsibilities very seriously.

And not all feminists are pro-choice. I am pro-life, all my friends and other churches I know are pro-life, and yet all of us believe in equality of gender. Feminism is about being recognized as a human being, perfectly capable of doing anything a man can do, including traditionally "male" roles such as carpentry, firefighting, doctors, farmers, lawyers, business people, military, police officers, etc. Just like the ideal wife of Proverbs 31.

 

[Mairie]

At one point back in history some feminists wanted the right to vote that they did not have. But most of today's feminists want much more than equal opportunity, in my opinion. They say that they do not have what they were already given a long time ago. Women have equal opportunity. Now the front is continually moved forward. When women have equal opportunity, they have to demand that they should also BE equal. If they have equal pay for the same work, they have to demand equal pay regardless of what their job is, or how much they work. When they have equal pay, they have to demand pay for doing housework, while men will not receive anything, because "there is hidden oppression in the home". When women have the opportunity to have any career they want, they have to demand affirmative action so that at least half of the people in any position that they desire are women. This is feminism today, in my opinion. Feminists today have an insatiable hunger for more money, more "equality", more "rights", more "respect", and so on.

While this may be the view of some secular feminists IN AMERICA, you are missing quite a bit here. Look at women around the world--most in undeveloped countries absolutely do not have equal opportunity, nor are they even treated like human beings. The sex trafficking industry is a billion dollar industry around the world and has a huge presence in the United States. Rape is still a widespread issue, much more so than we realize, as most victims don't come forward. I have personally witnessed Christian organizations let male offenders off the hook for rape crimes when someone with the least bit of a sense of responsibility should have filed a police report on behalf of the victim. I could go on and on and on with the stories of abuse, misogyny, blatant disregard for female victims and complete indifference that goes on in the church and throughout the world.

Honestly, this thread irritates me because people are getting so hung up on bad experiences with women and going on and on about the workplace, etc. I'll ask again: Can we please focus on the real issues here, the truth that many women worldwide are deeply oppressed and that something needs to be done about it. I could care less about the workplace for right now. Let's address the sex trafficking industry, let's address rape. Christians need to be aware of this stuff and care about it. This is going to require people to get past their personal baggage, here. This stuff is very real, and is why egaliterianism needs to be accepted and fought for in the church. Women absolutely need and deserve equality, rights and respect, and to say otherwise is a lie straight from Satan.

If readers here aren't aware of the sex trafficking industry and its widespread presence in the states and worldwide, let me know and I would be glad to provide links to information.

 

[Joykins]

This is why we fight.

Norwegian convicted over rape report issues Gulf caution

 

[ValleyGal]

Mairie, you seem to embrace social justice more than most people, including people in the church. Generally, people speak from the experience they know - and for most Americans, that would mean equality in places like work and in the media. I think addressing those social inequalities are certainly part of the process of advancing women's liberation beyond the borders (internationally).

I know that the sex trade happens even in the Americas, and for many feminists, they support this as a legitimate means of income as well as autonomy - iow, some of them are there because they want to be. And there is a lot of denial about bigger issues like human trafficking. In fact, I think the church sees things like human trafficking as more of a sociopolitical issue, and have no problem letting law enforcement and social workers address it, while the church is more invested in spreading the Gospel.

I think matters related to human rights is for everyone, and since we can't all save the world, we each have a role in promoting biblical values - including equal rights for women, sexual purity (the sex trade and human trafficking, etc), human rights, respect and inclusion for all. Personally, I am a social worker, so issues like human rights and equality are important values for me as well. So I really do understand where you're coming from on this. Keep advancing social justice for those women and children who are being sold into slavery and/or the sex trade.

 

[Mairie]

Mairie, you seem to embrace social justice more than most people, including people in the church. Generally, people speak from the experience they know - and for most Americans, that would mean equality in places like work and in the media. I think addressing those social inequalities are certainly part of the process of advancing women's liberation beyond the borders (internationally).

I know that the sex trade happens even in the Americas, and for many feminists, they support this as a legitimate means of income as well as autonomy - iow, some of them are there because they want to be. And there is a lot of denial about bigger issues like human trafficking. In fact, I think the church sees things like human trafficking as more of a sociopolitical issue, and have no problem letting law enforcement and social workers address it, while the church is more invested in spreading the Gospel.

I think matters related to human rights is for everyone, and since we can't all save the world, we each have a role in promoting biblical values - including equal rights for women, sexual purity (the sex trade and human trafficking, etc), human rights, respect and inclusion for all. Personally, I am a social worker, so issues like human rights and equality are important values for me as well. So I really do understand where you're coming from on this. Keep advancing social justice for those women and children who are being sold into slavery and/or the sex trade.

You're right, there is importance in all these issues..... but: Christians just cannot write off serious issues like rape and sex trafficking just because they have no experience with it.

I have had men posting in this thread completely blow off the issue of rape when I brought it up in PMs, while whining about how men can't find jobs because women take them all. The general attitude and blatant disregard for women's issues I've found in this "Christian" forum is absolutely intolerable.

As always, I hate coming off as harsh but I'm sincerely astounded.

 

[ValleyGal]

I hear you, really. And I know a lot of men are angry about how feminism is finding its place in society and the church. Rape is a very serious issue,for sure. I don't recall the exact stats, but some stats I read about rape is that only about 5% of rapes are actually reported, and very few of those are ever taken to court - and very few of those result in a conviction. So why isn't it reported more? It's not worth the risk to most women - facing legal issues for such a slim chance of prosecution, and risking what might happen in the way of vengeance after a perpetrator's been found not guilty.

Here's the thing. I wonder how many men are raped where it is not reported. Men have even greater stigma attached to being raped - especially by a woman. How many men are coerced into having sex, only to find out she used him as a form of sperm donor so she could get pregnant, have a baby, and sue him for all kinds of child support? What I'm saying is that there are men out there who also suffer at the hands of women. Yes, women have special issues when they are raped....and so do men.

And for work, I personally expect men to be upset. In order for women to have access to powerful positions in the work force, there are going to be men who must give up their power. No one likes to give up power. So while women fight for their equality, it would be necessary to recognize the loss of status men used to have simply by virtue of being a man. As women and especially as believers, we need to fight for human rights, for social justice for all, and we need to be mindful of the effect this fight has on those who are adversely affected by it.

Yes, a lot of men, even Christian men, are angry and hostile about feminism. I agree they need to be called on it. It would be easy to respond to them with the same hostility some of them extend to us. Rather than have a male/female fight for power, I think both sides need to seek to understand the other and work together to find solutions that work for both. We will all be accountable to God.....and I need to say that I appreciate your passion for social justice for women and for the victims of sex trade and human trafficking. All are huge social problems that truly need to be addressed. I wish church organizations could be more involved in addressing major social issues like this.

 

[Mairie]

Here's the thing. I wonder how many men are raped where it is not reported. Men have even greater stigma attached to being raped - especially by a woman. How many men are coerced into having sex, only to find out she used him as a form of sperm donor so she could get pregnant, have a baby, and sue him for all kinds of child support? What I'm saying is that there are men out there who also suffer at the hands of women. Yes, women have special issues when they are raped....and so do men.

Oh, men are raped too. I know they are. Sometimes by women, and sometimes by other men. But you have to admit that, as a whole, women are by far much more oppressed than men are.

I agree with everything you are saying and I hope others in this forum take this seriously.

 

[ValleyGal]

Oh, men are raped too. I know they are. Sometimes by women, and sometimes by other men. But you have to admit that, as a whole, women are by far much more oppressed than men are.

I agree with everything you are saying and I hope others in this forum take this seriously.

Absolutely, women are more oppressed than men are as a whole. That means something when we think in sociological terms. Unfortunately, it means something else to the men who are adversely affected by it, and for them, we need to extend understanding. In fact, in the same way we wish they would have compassion on women's issues, we also need to extend that compassion on the new issues men face as a result of feminism. That is not permission for them to express their hostility toward all women just because of feminism, though. We all need to be responsible for how we treat others.

I never took any feminism courses (although they were offered) in my undergrad degree. This seems to be a fairly prevalent topic now, and I regret not learning more about it when I had the chance. And international human rights is a huge area of interest for me - primarily human trafficking. I'll likely never work in international social work, but that whole area of my field just breaks my heart.....And yes, these are very serious issues that need to be taken seriously, and compassionately. The Lord bless you!

 

[Erth]

Let's address the sex trafficking industry, let's address rape. Christians need to be aware of this stuff and care about it. This is going to require people to get past their personal baggage, here. This stuff is very real, and is why egaliterianism needs to be accepted and fought for in the church. Women absolutely need and deserve equality, rights and respect, and to say otherwise is a lie straight from Satan.

You are saying that because of rape and sex trafficking, egalitarianism needs to be accepted and fought for in the Church. So just because of crimes like rape and slave trade, women should be ordained as priests and bishops, is that it? What exactly do you mean?

I disagree that rape and slave trade are feminist issues. Boys and men are harmed just as much, and the law is not in any way biased against women on this issue. It would be more true then to say that the law is biased against men, especially when rape in prison is taken into consideration. But on that we can agree to disagree, apparently. Please address the questions I asked you about what you think are implications for the Church, and why you think so.

 

[ValleyGal]

I disagree that rape and slave trade are feminist issues. Boys and men are harmed just as much, and the law is not in any way biased against women on this issue. It would be more true then to say that the law is biased against men, especially when rape in prison is taken into consideration. But on that we can agree to disagree, apparently. Please address the questions I asked you about what you think are implications for the Church, and why you think so.

I think the reason rape and sex trade/human trafficking are feminist issues is that even though it hurts all of society, men and women alike, the oppression is against women in favor of men. That is not to say men are not hurt by it. Some certainly are. But the oppression is against women, and feminism seeks to address oppression.

I think laws apply to everyone - rape is rape, whether it is perpetrated by men or women. I happen to think that rape and other sex crimes are more often perpetrated by men than women, so it might appear biased; however, women who are guilty of sex crimes are also subject to law.

There certainly are implications for the church. Imo, female pastors and chaplains are more likely to be called on when there are women as either victims or as perpetrators (in women's prisons). I'm not so sure a female victim would be comfortable seeking assistance from a male pastor...at least I wouldn't, since he represents the gender that hurt her to start with, and sometimes it is even men in positions of religious power who are the perpetrators (as noted in Canada's historical abuse of Aboriginal children by Catholic priests and nuns).

Indeed, there are implications. One is not exclusive to the other. All these systems and institutions are synergistic and fluid, so all must be taken into account when looking at something as over-arching as a movement such as feminism.

I hope it's okay that I responded to something you addressed to Mairie...

Erth, I have a question. In your icons, you indicate your political party is United States - Others, but you also indicate you are from Sweden. Maybe you could explain the discrepancy?

 

[Mairie]

You are saying that because of rape and sex trafficking, egalitarianism needs to be accepted and fought for in the Church. So just because of crimes like rape and slave trade, women should be ordained as priests and bishops, is that it? What exactly do you mean?

I disagree that rape and slave trade are feminist issues. Boys and men are harmed just as much, and the law is not in any way biased against women on this issue. It would be more true then to say that the law is biased against men, especially when rape in prison is taken into consideration. But on that we can agree to disagree, apparently. Please address the questions I asked you about what you think are implications for the Church, and why you think so.

Because the majority of rape and trafficking victims are women, in situations where men are in power, then yes, that is an egalitarianism issue. Women are not in power in the trafficking industry. Men are. So yes, that would also be a feminist issue. Boys and men are NOT harmed "just as much." They are harmed, yes, but nowhere near the plight of women. This is absolutely an issue the church needs to address. The Gospel and social justice go hand in hand, there cannot be one without the other. Women's issues need to be addressed by the church because women are people. The church's job is to love our neighbors. It really couldn't be more clear.

ValleyGal, feel free to respond whenever. You make excellent points

 

[Erth]

• It has been proved time and time again that women were often in charge of important aspects of abuse like sex traficking, genital mutilation, and other forms of physical abuse including rape and child pornography.
• Religious women in positions of power and/or religious authority have in some cases (just like men have in some cases) abused their power and abused people under their control, or under their influence, as a result. Abuse is not an argument in favour of female priests at all. It is only that when coming from the point of view that men are generally worse than women morally, and that is nothing but misandry. (That women would always find it easier to speak to women - no matter what the subject matter is - is a different line of argument of course, even if it may not be true that women really feel that way generally, and even if it does not settle the argument.) The argument against people in positions of religious power, made on the grounds of abuse, could just as well be reformulated as a general argument against all and any organized form of Christianity.
• Priesthood reserved for men is not an example of social injustice (nor for that matter do men have a right to be priests in the traditional Church bodies where priests are always men).

I am done with this discussion for now, but I appreciated all the input I got. Others are entirely free too go on, of course.

 

[Mairie]

Of course you're done as soon as actual feminists bring up the real issues.

Sorry. I shouldn't be snarky. But seriously...

 

[RealFaith]

Oh, men are raped too. I know they are. Sometimes by women, and sometimes by other men. But you have to admit that, as a whole, women are by far much more oppressed than men are.

I agree with everything you are saying and I hope others in this forum take this seriously.

Not true! Today I would say that men are much more oppressed than women. The media has worked its socks off to convince us that women are oppressed, when actually it's the other way around.

 

[Trailltrader]

*Drily said* Paying $45,000 dollars in 1987 for child support seems to be rape of my wallet by the United States divorce legal system. After all, the kid wasn't mine but I had to pay it anyway.

 

[RealFaith]

*Drily said* Paying $45,000 dollars in 1987 for child support seems to be rape of my wallet by the United States divorce legal system. After all, the kid wasn't mine but I had to pay it anyway.

If the kids wasn't yours, how can they make you pay? Isn't that illegal?

 

[PersephonesTear]

If the kids wasn't yours, how can they make you pay? Isn't that illegal?

There are certain circumstances that can make a man legally a child's father, even if he is not the biological father. For example, if you are married at the time the child is born, and you put your husband's name on the birth certificate, then your husband is legally your child's father regardless of biology. In such cases, the biological father has NO parental rights, and he usually can't even sue for custody or visitation.

I know there are other circumstances that can apply as well, but that's the one of which I have knowledge.