The purpose of adhering to gender roles

[mpok1519]

Most divorces NOWADAYS are because of irreconciliable differences, but it wasn't until the mid-1900's 'irreconciliable differences' became a legally justifiable reason for divorce. There was no such thing as irreconciliable differences until recently; dont you think that if a woman had the option of divorce bc of irreconciliable differences, there would have been more divorces in the past?

A woman's main role is to do what she wants.

lol

Not be an egg incubator, meal cooker, and child raiser.

If anyone tells a woman "Your role is to take my seed, pop out a baby, take care of it while I work, make me dinner when I come home, and change the diapers when needed," they need a serious mind deprogramming. Its not healthy for a society to tell a woman "You MUST make babies, and do what your man tells you to do." Its not healthy for a society to tell a man "You MUST join the military, and you must be the sole provider for your family."

A woman can raise a family, and be the sole provider; my mom is a perfect example. She raised two successful soon to be college graduate sons on her own, and now shes a district judge. If anything, shes a good example of how divorce can work out just fine. Who knows? If she had stayed with our dad, perhaps she wouldn't have been able to achieve as much, and if you had to ask me, she wouldn't have risen to the level of success she has now if she had another man to worry about.

 

[Jane_the_Bane]

It is interesting to note, though, that the most openly misogynist comments and commandments of Paul come from epistles that are now known to be pseudepigraphia by now.

His authentic letters, on the other hand, contain numerous references and appellations to prominent female members of the congregations he addressed - something that was highly unusual for the time and place.

My educated guess would be that early Christianity (both in its Judaic and its gentile manifestations) used to be quite egalitarian, but eventually lapsed back into patriarchal traditions from the turn of the 2nd century onwards.
Another hint of that is the conflict between Gnostic Christianity and what came to be the dominant Church, which also revolved around the Gnostics' refusal to treat women as lesser beings.
Couple that with the observation that the Catholic Church turned Mary Magdalene, the Apostle of Apostles (as she is still known in the Ethiopian church, if memory serves) into a supposedly "Fallen Woman", a former prostitute, demoting and maligning her; and what you get is a good idea as to how patriarchal tradition and hierarchy re-established themselves.

 

[cantata]

CreedIsChrist, could you answer a specific question for me?

Do you think that both "natural" and socially constructed gender roles are important? I recognise that you think it is in a woman's nature to be meek and mild, and that this is therefore important to you; but do you think, for example, that it is important that a boy does not wear pink or that a woman does not become a (meek and mild) bricklayer?

 

[geekgirlkelli]

Divorce has increased because modernism is hurting our values. Its not some crazy "liberating" event that its cracked up to be. In fact our domestic abuse rate has increased since. There are more dead beat dads because mans gender role has become so confused and hazed that they can justify what they do much easier now. Also feminism made women more rebellious and brash and thus increased turmoil in their marriages.

But wait... You just contradicted yourself. You said in one post that men had become more feminine, and that femininity is staying at home and taking care of the home and kids and such. Now you're saying that this causes men to be dead beat dads?

Which is it? Are men now more compassionate, caring and nurturing in the home or are they dead beats?

 

[Jane_the_Bane]

Let's also note that "Stiff Upper Lip"-ism is pretty much a late 19th century creation. In the past, men could show emotions, write poems and take care of their children without "risking" their masculinity. And see where this new conception of what it is to be a "real" Man has brought us to: emotional wrecks who have learned to suppress their feelings until they crack, ADHS-boys who barely manage to finish their homework without medication, schoolyard bullies who try to prove their manliness by beating up weaker kids, a culture that reveres "jocks" and looks down upon "nerds", a culture that embraces violence yet cannot deal with nudity and/or sexuality in a non-neurotic way.

 

[CreedIsChrist]

Most divorces NOWADAYS are because of irreconciliable differences, but it wasn't until the mid-1900's 'irreconciliable differences' became a legally justifiable reason for divorce. There was no such thing as irreconciliable differences until recently; dont you think that if a woman had the option of divorce bc of irreconciliable differences, there would have been more divorces in the past?

A woman's main role is to do what she wants.

lol

Not be an egg incubator, meal cooker, and child raiser.

If anyone tells a woman "Your role is to take my seed, pop out a baby, take care of it while I work, make me dinner when I come home, and change the diapers when needed," they need a serious mind deprogramming. Its not healthy for a society to tell a woman "You MUST make babies, and do what your man tells you to do." Its not healthy for a society to tell a man "You MUST join the military, and you must be the sole provider for your family."

A woman can raise a family, and be the sole provider; my mom is a perfect example. She raised two successful soon to be college graduate sons on her own, and now shes a district judge. If anything, shes a good example of how divorce can work out just fine. Who knows? If she had stayed with our dad, perhaps she wouldn't have been able to achieve as much, and if you had to ask me, she wouldn't have risen to the level of success she has now if she had another man to worry about.

and with that kind of attitude the divorce rates and turmoils in familys today will never improve. Doing "what you want" could be anything, even killing someone. Marriage isn't always about doing what you want.

Let's also note that "Stiff Upper Lip"-ism is pretty much a late 19th century creation. In the past, men could show emotions, write poems and take care of their children without "risking" their masculinity. And see where this new conception of what it is to be a "real" Man has brought us to: emotional wrecks who have learned to suppress their feelings until they crack, ADHS-boys who barely manage to finish their homework without medication, schoolyard bullies who try to prove their manliness by beating up weaker kids, a culture that reveres "jocks" and looks down upon "nerds", a culture that embraces violence yet cannot deal with nudity and/or sexuality in a non-neurotic way.

Taking care of your children or writing peoms dosen't reduce a mans masulinity. However in todays near non-existant roles and with feminism causing even more confusion and turmoil many men today will have identity problems as well as a plan later on as far as rearing a family. If there are no roles then there is no plan, and if there is no plan how can you expect to raise a decent family when you don't even know the role your in. Again, this makes is more justifiable for fathers to leave their familys and children simply because they have no idea anymore what role to be or what to do, and since many women are so abrasive towards the male role of supporter-provider it makes it even more confused and convoluted.

Let's also note that "Stiff Upper Lip"-ism is pretty much a late 19th century creation. In the past, men could show emotions, write poems and take care of their children without "risking" their masculinity. And see where this new conception of what it is to be a "real" Man has brought us to: emotional wrecks who have learned to suppress their feelings until they crack, ADHS-boys who barely manage to finish their homework without medication, schoolyard bullies who try to prove their manliness by beating up weaker kids, a culture that reveres "jocks" and looks down upon "nerds", a culture that embraces violence yet cannot deal with nudity and/or sexuality in a non-neurotic way.

Again I blame this more on the violence in secular TV and the anti-establishment youth culture. Also children are taught about sex at an extremely early age in most public schools and thus their innocence is damaged. Bullys tend to actually come more from broken familys that had physical or emotional abuse and divorce, so again we see it because of a family structural problem and the roles of wife and husband. Children need both these roles to respond too and it is very important to they' re developement. Its good for a boy to see his father be the supporter, protector and provider, and in turn it will teach him to do the same. Just as a daughter seeing her mother act in a motherly, feminine, modest manner, which in turn will teach her to act the same in thus increase her chances of having a successfull family and meeting a good husband.

The dialogue between man and woman has changed drastically. Men today talk to women in a very disrespectful objective manner. Women too talk to men in a disrespectful, brass, un-ladylike manner. Because neither person knows their role they talk to each other in any way they please. It is the loss of chivalry that domestic abuse has risen so considerably. With feminism making women more masculine men will start treating women more roughly and be more prone to violence. ANd with this increase in turmoil because there are no roles we can only see why divorce has increased the way it has. Because in a true God fearing woman and man a wife wouldn't even think of talking to her husband in the way most Western women do and visa versa. If that mutual respect between the roles of wife and husband cannot be met, then we will see the death of what very little chivalry we have left and continue to see the ruin of many familys and rising divorce rates.

But wait... You just contradicted yourself. You said in one post that men had become more feminine, and that femininity is staying at home and taking care of the home and kids and such. Now you're saying that this causes men to be dead beat dads?

Which is it? Are men now more compassionate, caring and nurturing in the home or are they dead beats?

No the maculinization of women today has perverted the males role between man and woman. A man who has a strong faith and understands the roles of man and woman could not even think of walking out on their wife and children. But if this solid footing and role is confused or perverted being a dead beat dad is alot more justifiable. They figure that if the woman is "independant" and 'liberalized' then she can do it herself without his help anymore. With the thinking that everyone is independent the husband and wife no longer think together as a unit. Marriage is a giving oneself to the other person and working together as a unit.

CreedIsChrist, could you answer a specific question for me?

Do you think that both "natural" and socially constructed gender roles are important? I recognise that you think it is in a woman's nature to be meek and mild, and that this is therefore important to you; but do you think, for example, that it is important that a boy does not wear pink or that a woman does not become a (meek and mild) bricklayer

Our natural God given roles are extremely important. But both men and women today are suppressing their natural God given instincts. A boy who is being brought up correctly in a solid foundation will not even think or care what color clothes he's wearing. We should not teach our children to be concerned with such small things. Feminism is a socially constructed role and a denial of a womans own natural traits

 

[Catherineanne]

Actually most divorces are filed under irreconsiliable differences with only a small percent being domestic abuse.

Divorce papers are public records. Therefore, as far as the public is concerned, my marriage ended because of irreconcilable differences.

What I did not make public is my own affair, and I suspect this is true of many other women. We don't wash our dirty laundry in public.

 

[cantata]

Our natural God given roles are extremely important. But both men and women today are suppressing their natural God given instincts. A boy who is being brought up correctly in a solid foundation will not even think or care what color clothes he's wearing. We should not teach our children to be concerned with such small things.

Okay, let me put it this way. Suppose you had a baby boy and you were given a pink sweater for him as a gift from a friend. Would you be happy for him to wear it?

Would you be okay with your baby girl wearing a blue sweater with a fire engine on it?

And, I would ask you again, do you think it is acceptable for a man to be a ballet dancer or a woman a bricklayer? How would you feel if your children took up these careers?

 

[CreedIsChrist]

It is interesting to note, though, that the most openly misogynist comments and commandments of Paul come from epistles that are now known to be pseudepigraphia by now.

His authentic letters, on the other hand, contain numerous references and appellations to prominent female members of the congregations he addressed - something that was highly unusual for the time and place.

My educated guess would be that early Christianity (both in its Judaic and its gentile manifestations) used to be quite egalitarian, but eventually lapsed back into patriarchal traditions from the turn of the 2nd century onwards.
Another hint of that is the conflict between Gnostic Christianity and what came to be the dominant Church, which also revolved around the Gnostics' refusal to treat women as lesser beings.
Couple that with the observation that the Catholic Church turned Mary Magdalene, the Apostle of Apostles (as she is still known in the Ethiopian church, if memory serves) into a supposedly "Fallen Woman", a former prostitute, demoting and maligning her; and what you get is a good idea as to how patriarchal tradition and hierarchy re-established themselves.

TOo much Divinci Code and history channel hype. I think you need to read up more on your history. Many Gnostic documents were written around the 2nd century long after Paul had died . In fact many of the extra biblical alledge writings of Paul date around the 2nd to the 4th century AD.

 

[Braunwyn]

Actually most divorces are filed under irreconsiliable differences with only a small percent being domestic abuse.

Divorce has increased because modernism is hurting our values. Its not some crazy "liberating" event that its cracked up to be. In fact our domestic abuse rate has increased since. There are more dead beat dads because mans gender role has become so confused and hazed that they can justify what they do much easier now. Also feminism made women more rebellious and brash and thus increased turmoil in their marriages.

It would be nice if you actually presented evidence to back your claims but you never do. And you ignore data presented by others.

In 1973 sexual assault within a marriage was legal. There were no shelters unitl '74. It was socially acceptable to abuse women. There is no doubt that it existed in your so-called glory days, it just wasn't illegal. Why you ignore this, I don't know.

http://www.vermontwoman.com/articles/1007/domestic.shtml

http://www.mincava.umn.edu/documents/herstory/herstory.html

'Men have beaten women for centuries and have avoided the severe and just consequences for their actions. Domestic violence has been an acceptable, clandestine method of behavior.
...
Documentation of family violence dated back to the Roman Empire and the Middle Ages. The writings revealed wife beating was a common method used to administer punishment to women. Punishment resulted from women’s voicing of opinions, showing anger, disobeying their husband, or choosing to escape the drudgery of their life’s existence.
...
Due to the emergence of the feminist movement, women gave publicity to wife beating. They developed an awareness of the victimization of women and the non-constitutionalism of the American Justice System. In 1970, legislation voted that assault and battery within the family, was considered a crime. Justification was now provided for women to leave abusive relationships. Until this moment in history, the phenomenon of wife beating was invisible."

http://cultural-anthropology.suite101.com/article.cfm/history_of_wife_beating

There is more than enough information out there that clearly shows that violence against women was par for the course and a social norm long before feminism. It wasn't an issue of a crime that was underreported because it wasn't considered a crime. To state that feminism plays a role in inciting violence against women is not only incorrect, it's a violent position on your part.

You have been corrected on your erroneous position several times and without fail you willfully ignore information that doesn't align with your worldview. That is intellectually dishonest and childish.

 

[Braunwyn]

Divorce papers are public records. Therefore, as far as the public is concerned, my marriage ended because of irreconcilable differences.

What I did not make public is my own affair, and I suspect this is true of many other women. We don't wash our dirty laundry in public.

Having to point out the obvious is just sad.

 

[Jane_the_Bane]

TOo much Divinci Code and history channel hype.

Neither one nor the other.

I think you need to read up more on your history. Many Gnostic documents were written around the 2nd century long after Paul had died .

Nor did I claim that this was not so.

In fact many of the extra biblical alledge writings of Paul date around the 2nd to the 4th century AD.

I didn't even address the issue of extra-biblical writings.
What I did address was that from the 2nd century onwards, the predecessors of Christianity as we know it returned to a more patriarchal line, whereas early Christianity was egalitarian in nature. The fact that rival groups, such as Gnostic Christians, continued in this vein only reinforced the need to oppose it - as the pseudepigraphical epistles within the Bible clearly show.

As for Mary Magdalene, you needn't resort to pseudo-historical populist nonsense to see that the Catholic church treated her vastly different from other Christian traditions, such as the Eastern Orthodox. Her identification as a prostitute can be interpreted as a direct reaction to Gnosticism and its egalitarian aspects.

 

[LJSGM]

establishing laws and rules for people to follow will not produce righteousness. That is pharisical thinking and has no place in the gospel.

Christians recieve the Holy Spirit when they are born again, which is a righteousness from God, not a self-righteousness produced by obeying the "law." We are no longer under the law, as the bible says. We are lead by the Holy Spirit to do what is right.

This is what is right (as the scriptures proclaim): To love one another, which is selflessness. The reason for divorce is not because women are not controlled by men, but in many instances is because of selfishness, it erodes a marriage and some times divorcing it's self is selfish. This "brashness" that you speak of some women having is not because of the break down of "roles," it is selfishness, and there is no double standard either, men who are brash with their wives are exibiting selfishness as well.

 

[Catherineanne]

The reason for divorce is not because women are not controlled by men, but in many instances is because of selfishness, it erodes a marriage and some times divorcing it's self is selfish.

How can you say what causes or does not cause divorce? How can you stand in judgment of people whose lives are falling apart, and accuse them of selfishness? How can you think that a woman who faces the loss of her home, her social circle, her financial stability, almost everything she has, and in return faces bringing up her children without the support of a husband, is acting out of selfishness, of all things?

This is not acceptable.

 

[Oneofthediaspora]

I think we all need to take time to consider the immortal words of "Dyke and the Blazers", later plagiarised by "The Nobhead Formerly Known As Prince":

"Gotta let a woman be a woman and let a man be a man."

Aye thang yow.
Mike.

 

[LJSGM]

How can you say what causes or does not cause divorce? How can you stand in judgment of people whose lives are falling apart, and accuse them of selfishness? How can you think that a woman who faces the loss of her home, her social circle, her financial stability, almost everything she has, and in return faces bringing up her children without the support of a husband, is acting out of selfishness, of all things?

This is not acceptable.

Ha! Now I think you are just willfully misunderstanding me because you are angry.

I said sometimes it is because of selfishness that the person divorced, and sometimes selfishness coming from her husband that made her want to divorce.

That is what I believe on the subject, you can give reasons why I'm wrong if you would like to be involved in an adult like discussion.

 

[wanderingone]

While gender roles and gender identity are two different things, the one does affect the other. Had I lived in a society where gender roles were much more androgynous in nature, I likely would have felt much less of a need to change my outward appearance so as to be recognized in my proper gender (gender identity).

And for me, it really had nothing to do with clothing, it had everything to do with wanting to be recognized as who I am and not wanting any longer to be associated with all things masculine and trying to measure up as a male in our society, which for me, was next to impossible anyway.

Aya! I am not wording things well this morning. Anyway, what I am trying to say is that I think that gender roles typically do affect how one views and reacts to their own gender identity.

I agree I think the expected roles and behaviors effect gender identity. (I don't think I'm doing so great this morning with words either.. so forgive me as I fumble around here)

I think what you are talking about here why I have such a hard time understanding how being transgendered "works" I hear stories about little boys wanting to wear a dress all the time as an example of how early they knew they were "different" but since clothing and interests are so.. cultural.. I guess it makes sense to me that the child who identifies as female would choose the trappings of what is "feminine" in the world they live in... perhaps if it had not been for my dislike of all things "feminine" as a girl child I wouldn't find it so confusing, I am considered "masculine" in my behavior (I'm told this rather often) but I am a female, I have no desire to be male. I see people viewing me as masculine as part of their own understanding of the world.

I have no doubt there is more to being transgendered than feeling more comfortable in a "feminine" or "masculine" role. I understand that having people view me as "masculine" is simply not the same thing-- and for me I noticed that heading towards middle age has freed me of the societal push to be feminine (hmm.. somebody said something about middle aged women being invisible...I can't remember what they wrote about it.. but that's another issue isn't it?) Gender roles, identity, how we abuse or nurture each other's individual character, talents, interests in the context of cultural expectations for our gender are endlessly fascinating and frustrating for me. I don't need to understand completely to accept that some people are transgendered and need to go through medical treatment in order to be who they ARE, but geesh it frustrates me completely that I simply can't wrap my head around the matter.

 

[wanderingone]

There are "trousers" that are made specifically for women that aren't made for men. There are not skirts made for men. That's why the different reaction.

What's a kilt?

 

[LJSGM]

I agree I think the expected roles and behaviors effect gender identity. (I don't think I'm doing so great this morning with words either.. so forgive me as I fumble around here)

I think what you are talking about here why I have such a hard time understanding how being transgendered "works" I hear stories about little boys wanting to wear a dress all the time as an example of how early they knew they were "different" but since clothing and interests are so.. cultural.. I guess it makes sense to me that the child who identifies as female would choose the trappings of what is "feminine" in the world they live in... perhaps if it had not been for my dislike of all things "feminine" as a girl child I wouldn't find it so confusing, I am considered "masculine" in my behavior (I'm told this rather often) but I am a female, I have no desire to be male. I see people viewing me as masculine as part of their own understanding of the world.

I have no doubt there is more to being transgendered than feeling more comfortable in a "feminine" or "masculine" role. I understand that having people view me as "masculine" is simply not the same thing-- and for me I noticed that heading towards middle age has freed me of the societal push to be feminine (hmm.. somebody said something about middle aged women being invisible...I can't remember what they wrote about it.. but that's another issue isn't it?) Gender roles, identity, how we abuse or nurture each other's individual character, talents, interests in the context of cultural expectations for our gender are endlessly fascinating and frustrating for me. I don't need to understand completely to accept that some people are transgendered and need to go through medical treatment in order to be who they ARE, but geesh it frustrates me completely that I simply can't wrap my head around the matter.

I have a hard time wrapping my head around it too.

It's a good thread, isn't it?

 

[Braunwyn]

I don't buy into the idea of trousers made specifically for women. Half of the winter pants I wear came from my old house mate's dad. It's perferctly acceptable that I wear them. And pants 'designed for women', while a bit better these days, have always been poorly designed imo. Fortunately, we now have low-riders.