Women Are Still the Most Discriminated Against

[UnderHisWings1979]

I think alot of the problems stem from our own fallen & corrupted
perspectives that this secular world shapes for us.
I also think it's important to add that the world also shapes some of
the NASTY stereotypes as well.

Becuz of a minority of controlling idiots, both men and the bible standard of authority are undermined and attacked unecessarily.
*& this is where I add that men NEED to be taught & raised in
the proper concepts of Godly authority too. Not to Lord it over
others as a dictator, but view his wife as the equal partner that
God gave him to help him succeed in running a smooth and
productive, God fearing home.

He's to lead & mentor the "weaker vessel" - the problem is, (from
what I hear) there aren't a whole lot of men leading the home in
getting the family to church, teaching them things of the Lord,
giving family devotions when kids are younger, etc.
That is one way they're to be the leader - praying for his family,
seeking God in the correct decisions to make, etc.

As I see the woman, God has gifted her with the qualities or gifts
that dad doesn't have . . so together, they make a powerful team.

It's too bad it doesn't work as God intended (then again, what haven't
we corrupted that He established).

Beautifully said. Men and women are equally at fault for what has happened to the family today. We can sit in here and debate the issue all we want. What really matters, though, is that when we shut down our computers, we are doing our part to make it better. All I can do is try to be the husband God called me to be, and hope that my wife will reciprocate that. I cannot force her to treat me any way, I can only treat her the way she deserves to be treated and lead our family the way God has called me to.

 

[&Abel]

let me ask you something(more aimed towards the women in the thread)

if you were held at gunpoint with your spouse and the gunman told you that only one of you could live, who would you feel should stand up and take that bullet?

 

[AngelusSax]

Edit: Double post, sorry

 

[AngelusSax]

let me ask you something(more aimed towards the women in the thread)

if you were held at gunpoint with your spouse and the gunman told you that only one of you could live, who would you feel should stand up and take that bullet?

Okay, so I'm not a woman, but since you didn't say it was only aimed at women on this thread, I'll answer as one of those resident feminist-heretics (I would be classified as such in some denominations anyway):

The husband.

 

[Thaeoles]

Nothing wrong with this as long as 1 of the parents is home raising
their own kids (if at all possible).

Not everybody will fit into the Beaver Cleaver cookie cutter family
mold, but the husband absolutely can stay at home & raise the kids
AND be head of the home.
I guess income rules headship in the secular world - if you don't make
the most, you have to submit.
That's not how God set it up.

It just might not work with his ego - but I see nothing wrong with it
becuz he can still be head of the home (in fact moreso, he's "hands
on" management)

Good points, but I'm not sure if I completely agree with this. 1 Timothy 5:8 says this,
"But if anyone does not provide for his relatives, and especially for members of his household, he has denied the faith and is worse than an unbeliever."
It seems pretty condemning on the man's part. The exception would be if the man couldn't work from disability.

 

[UnderHisWings1979]

Good points, but I'm not sure if I completely agree with this. 1 Timothy 5:8 says this,
"But if anyone does not provide for his relatives, and especially for members of his household, he has denied the faith and is worse than an unbeliever."
It seems pretty condemning on the man's part. The exception would be if the man couldn't work from disability.

Though I think it is dangerous to try to take too much of Paul's writings as "cultural context," in this case I believe it is necessary. It is assumed that the man is the only providing for the family because women were not allowed to work at this time. The modern application would be more along the lines of a man who sits at home doing nothing while his wife is working and unable to pay the bills. In my case, I apply it like this. If my wife were to lose her job, have to take a pay cut, or our cost of living were to go up to such an extent as we were unable to pay the bills, it is incumbent upon me to drop my classes and go back to work to provide for my family. As long as she is earning an income, it is most incumbent upon me to do what is best for my family. Right now, that means she works and I go to school and take care of the house.

 

[bliz]

The most honorable position for a woman(other than a devout) is a mother. Nothing is more rewarding than that.

So what do you have to offer women who do not become mothers? What of those women who are given the gift of celibacy? What place do you offer women whose children are grown? My chldren all left home this past year so my parenting role has been dimminished considerably - does that kick me out of the "most honorable position"?

Allot of women I know that were all work and social who thought motherhood was a "low" position are actually very lonely unfulfilled unhappy people now. How many hard-nosed feminists do you see that look truly happy to you? The Gospel tells wives to be humble and meek to their husbands and realize that they are the head of the households, by God's choice. A true Christian wife doesn't try to usurp the authority of her husband. So many marriages have been ruined or hurt because this simple fact cannot be followed


Moreover, I do not allow a woman to teach or to usurp authority over a man. Instead, she is to be quiet. - 1 Timothy 2:12


Rebellious women tend to not like this verse. but hey , they probably do not understand the things of God.

The key word here is "usurp" - taking that which one does not have a legal right to. I have no desire to have my husband's authority. That does not mean I have no authority! Look up Abigail and her actions when her husband made a terrible decision. She did not sit back and let things unfold. She sprang to action, gave orders, took charge and saved the lives of her family and household. I think it's very clear that the Bible teaches mutual submission between husband and wife.

Look carefully at the Proverb's 31 woman - she was involved in manufacturning, real estate, and commerce.

Please, where in the Bible are women instructed to be humble and meek? Moreover, your I Timothy passage does not apply to husbands ans wives, the passage is discussing church structure.

 

[Nadiine]

Good points, but I'm not sure if I completely agree with this. 1 Timothy 5:8 says this,
"But if anyone does not provide for his relatives, and especially for members of his household, he has denied the faith and is worse than an unbeliever."
It seems pretty condemning on the man's part. The exception would be if the man couldn't work from disability.

Well, back in their culture, the women didn't have a career & work
outside the home really.
They relied on their spouses & it was one of the main reasons a woman
would get married; that and offspring which was extremely important.

So back then, a husband who wouldn't work would put the strain on
his wife to have to forge for food (probly glean from fields?)... it just wouldn't work well.
With women's liberation, I think that can be changed becuz women
do have high paying careers today that they didn't have even 100 or
so years ago.

I think alot of the meaning of that verse is essentially in his
attitude; if he's a louse of a husband who's too lazy to get a job
& would rather play or lay around than work.?

Thanks for the remind on that verse - I wonder what others think
about that one?

 

[lux et lex]

let me ask you something(more aimed towards the women in the thread)

if you were held at gunpoint with your spouse and the gunman told you that only one of you could live, who would you feel should stand up and take that bullet?

I would hope he would be as willing to stand up and take it for me as I would be willing to stand up and take it for him.

 

[lux et lex]

Nicely said . God never made a slave, mankind did that :O. as a man, I appreciate a strong willed woman who will also allow me to lead once in awhile, cause as much as she doesnt want to be controlled, neither do I . lux et lex makes a lot of sense although she seems to have deep emotional feelings about this subject, which is fine, nothing wrong with feeling strongly about something . I feel pretty strongly about it myself . anyways, a strong willed woman to me is one who will take the lead once in awhile if it is an area she can better handle, like nuturing the kids, I am a little clumsy when it comes to kids but have been told I would make a good father . In no way am I saying I wont help with that though, as a father it is my duty to be sure that the boy becomes a man and learns what that means and that the girl is made aware of what a good man is so she can find a good husband when the time comes. women on the other hand are natural nuturers, and no woman should be made to feel ashamed of this, it is totally natural and highly attractive, to me anyway. its the mother instinct that I believe 90% of the women of this world have . so lux et lex, keep on the look out for the right man that fits your beliefs as they do exist and are out there waiting, not saying you have to have a man, but who wants to go through life alone for all time? hehe. and to tell the truth, if I can meet a woman with similar beliefs to you I will try my best to win her over .

I will continue my hunt...lol. Thanks and I do agree with you with what you have said.

 

[LJSGM]

Not intentionally, no. However, I think that is the consequence of what you are advocating.

I'm curious as to what you think I'm advocating?

I agree. My point is both are exceptions, and not the social norm. The accepted social norm is equality in the home.

I thought you were saying that because of feminism, the social normal was that women degraded their husbands. If it's just an exception, then why are we talking about it?

I don't know a single man that believes this. This is your misunderstanding of what we believe.

I know this because of what men admit to on these forums.

Most that believe women are to be subjected believe so because of inferiority, although they wouldn't directly say that.

women either base their decisions on their emotions, are weaker minded, more easily decieved, less intelligent, more prone to sin, or as Abel has said they are prone to control and degrade men if they themselves are not controlled.

I am sorry that you cannot see it, but there is a difference between subjection and control, and the Biblical meaning of submission.

You should then define for us what submission and subjection are, based on your understanding.

It is not a matter of PHYSICAL submission, but of spiritual, because God's design for marriage is that the man exemplify Christ's love for the Church in his love for his wife.

A couple physcially submits to each's other sexual needs.

Spiritual submission belongs to our spiritual husband, that of Christ.

The scriptures also tell christians that they should submit to one another and be subject to one another.

I resent that. Your implication that I am part of some great conspiracy to subjucate women, and that I am lying to deceive you, is insulting. This is what I refered to as the 'spirit of feminism.'

there is no such a thing as biblical roles.

I know you are not trying to decieve me, I meant in general, to say there is somewhere in scriptures something called male/female roles, then that statement is decieving.

Actually, if you want to speak HISTORICALLY, no group or race has suffered more that Jews. And NOTHING that has ever happened to women can compare to the holocaust. After Jews, comes Christians. Millions of Christians have been slaughtered, and have endured unspeakable tortue. Look at Roman times. To compare the treatment of women to the mass genocide of Christians is also absurd. But this thread is about TODAY, and as I understand it, we were talking specifically about the United States.

No, I am not talking about just today. I am talking about history, every woman that has ever lived. That is half the persons that has ever existed. The USA is a minority of the population of the world. Because of the feminist movement, you no longer see such oppression or dehumanization of half the population. Where feminism has not spread, you see the most horrible and degrading things happen to women and a daily basis as a cultural norm (not an exception this time)

Not entirely. My point is, neither are men entirely to blame. The social problems of our day cannot be placed solely on the shoulders of EITHER gender. That's all I'm saying.

right, basing the problems of the world on feminism is just plain silly.

I believe that modern feminism is a strong contributing factor. But I think we differ in our definitions of modern feminism.

What is your definition of "modern" feminism? and where is the evidence of it?

And Jesus spoke out against them.

I bet Jesus would have been called a feminist in those times by the way he treated women at that day and age. It was completely radical.

Again, I think we have very different definitions of modern feminism. I agree that it is a good thing to be a woman. But, as said before, I think that it is unfair to try to tell men to treat women as women in the sense of buying them flowers, etc, but then do nothing in return to embrace what makes him a man.

modern feminists tell men to buy them flowers?

What are women suppose to do to embrace what makes a man a man?

We are suppose to become easily controlled by that man... err something?

I will sumarize my problem with modern feminism with a single example. In the military, I absolutely agree that women should be allowed to join. However, it has not gotten to the point, that women are held to such a lower standard of physical readiness that many of them cannot perform the tasks necessary to do their job. I used to work in the engine room of a Naval ship. I had several women working above me and with me. Some of them were outstanding sailors and engineers, just as some of the men were. However, every man was required to be able to carry a man out of the space in case of a fire. The women were not required to be able to do this. The consequence? If I had been standing watch with a woman instead of a man when there was a fire in the engine room, I would have died. THAT, to me, sums up the problem with feminism. There is nothing wrong with the fact that women are not as strong as men. I don't want them to be. Big, strong, burly women, to me, are not as beautiful. It is their beauty that makes them so special to me. In every way I hold my wife in esteem above myself. The fact that she can't lift me up doesn't change that, any more than equality changes the fact that she will never be able to lift me up.

So, from your point of view, modern feminism teaches women to become men, and look like them even?

I think society in general teaches the acceptance of people as who they are, and that they don't need to fit a stereotype. Such as tomboys are accepted by society as they are, and don't need to change.

That is not feminism.

I think society teaches not to discriminate against anyone, although they do take it too far sometimes, such as in the rare case that you are speaking of.

that might have some feminism in it, in that modern feminists preach against discrimination.

I think discrimination is a bad thing, don't you?

 

[&Abel]

I'm curious as to what you think I'm advocating?



I thought you were saying that because of feminism, the social normal was that women degraded their husbands. If it's just an exception, then why are we talking about it?



I know this because of what men admit to on these forums.

Most that believe women are to be subjected believe so because of inferiority, although they wouldn't directly say that.

women either base their decisions on their emotions, are weaker minded, more easily decieved, less intelligent, more prone to sin, or as Abel has said they are prone to control and degrade men if they themselves are not controlled.




You should then define for us what submission and subjection are, based on your understanding.



A couple physcially submits to each's other sexual needs.

Spiritual submission belongs to our spiritual husband, that of Christ.

The scriptures also tell christians that they should submit to one another and be subject to one another.





there is no such a thing as biblical roles.

I know you are not trying to decieve me, I meant in general, to say there is somewhere in scriptures something called male/female roles, then that statement is decieving.





No, I am not talking about just today. I am talking about history, every woman that has ever lived. That is half the persons that has ever existed. The USA is a minority of the population of the world. Because of the feminist movement, you no longer see such oppression or dehumanization of half the population. Where feminism has not spread, you see the most horrible and degrading things happen to women and a daily basis as a cultural norm (not an exception this time)




right, basing the problems of the world on feminism is just plain silly.



What is your definition of "modern" feminism? and where is the evidence of it?




I bet Jesus would have been called a feminist in those times by the way he treated women at that day and age. It was completely radical.



modern feminists tell men to buy them flowers?

What are women suppose to do to embrace what makes a man a man?

We are suppose to become easily controlled by that man... err something?




So, from your point of view, modern feminism teaches women to become men, and look like them even?

I think society in general teaches the acceptance of people as who they are, and that they don't need to fit a stereotype. Such as tomboys are accepted by society as they are, and don't need to change.

That is not feminism.

I think society teaches not to discriminate against anyone, although they do take it too far sometimes, such as in the rare case that you are speaking of.

that might have some feminism in it, in that modern feminists preach against discrimination.

I think discrimination is a bad thing, don't you?

"most won't admit"

so you assume that we would like to control you?

 

[one11]

I really appreciate the men in this thread that have said they have no problem with housework cuz doing the laundry, the dishes, vacuuming and all other chores are not a sin for a man to do. Think about it this way, when you read Leviticus and all the cleanliness they were doing, do you think only women did all that washing and cleaning? I don't think so. I think they ALL were involved in keeping things clean.

And why I think men were involved in the cleaning also is because water is very heavy. 1 gallon of water weighs 8 lbs. Also, a lot of housework is very physical and exhausting. Some big cleaning jobs are better suited to a man especially if the woman is not very physically strong even in her younger years.


My two cents for now.

 

[LJSGM]

"most won't admit"

so you assume that we would like to control you?

so many use the verse in 1tim 2:11 to imply that men have authority over women in general.

That is using a verse as a form of control and manipulation for what ever purposes they desire at the moment (such as trying to get a woman to shut it ).

If that's not what these men mean, then they shouldn't imply it.

 

[MarkSB]

you know men don't have it so easy anymore either

we don't even know what to do with ourselves anymore

women act as though they want to be in control and yet don't respect you if you give it to them

men have been discriminated against on television and in other more subtle ways for as long as I can remember and yet no one ever says anything about it

many women act as though they want equal rights but in reality they want to have their cake and eat it too

The above sums up most of the things I've seen from feminists. They get this in your face we won't be controlled attitude, then when you let them do their own or submit to them they use it to disrespect you. Its just a power struggle and its stupid.

 

[LJSGM]

Its just a power struggle and its stupid.

You haven't been listening...

 

[MarkSB]

No, I am not talking about just today. I am talking about history, every woman that has ever lived. That is half the persons that has ever existed. The USA is a minority of the population of the world. Because of the feminist movement, you no longer see such oppression or dehumanization of half the population. Where feminism has not spread, you see the most horrible and degrading things happen to women and a daily basis as a cultural norm (not an exception this time)

I've never seen any in depth studies on the subject, but from my studies of history a majority of women before the sufferage movement didn't see themselves as oppressed or dehumanized, particularly not the women in the U.S. up until the late 19th/ early 20th centuries.

 

[LJSGM]

Look,

Lots of people seem to be confused.

Forget all the rubbish that you've heard.

Feminists are advocates for women's rights, specifically human rights for women.

That's it.


Sadly, it is the world that is an advocate of women's rights most of the time, but much of the church that is their oppressors.

But I understand...

people don't like feel as if they're losing their control, as it was with slave owners after the civil war.

In fact, some of things that conservatives say are quite similar to what slave owners have said to justify themselves with taking slaves. They justified slavery by arguing that since God made their skin black, and their bodies muscular that they were made for labor, but white men, since they were more intelligent, and less muscular were made to be their masters, as if it were the natural order of things and ordained through the scriptures.

 

[ERice2nd]

And why I think men were involved in the cleaning also is because water is very heavy. 1 gallon of water weighs 8 lbs. Also, a lot of housework is very physical and exhausting. Some big cleaning jobs are better suited to a man especially if the woman is not very physically strong even in her younger years.


My two cents for now.

this is exactly why I dont mind helping out. I am fairly large, I am basically barrel chested and have a lot of upper body strength, much more then 99% of the women around here. so if the woman decided to vacuum thoroughly one day then I would be happy to lift the couch up so she can get under it. or if she wants to clean behind the fridge then guess who moves it out of the way, I do, hehe . and thats not all, I would help with the little stuff because I like team effort and enjoy it, but as for what you say about the heavier jobs then sure thing, I am basically built for it .

 

[UnderHisWings1979]

Look,

Lots of people seem to be confused.

Forget all the rubbish that you've heard.

Feminists are advocates for women's rights, specifically human rights for women.

That's it.


Sadly, it is the world that is an advocate of women's rights most of the time, but much of the church that is their oppressors.

But I understand...

people don't like feel as if they're losing their control, as it was with slave owners after the civil war.

In fact, some of things that conservatives say are quite similar to what slave owners have said to justify themselves with taking slaves. They justified slavery by arguing that since God made their skin black, and their bodies muscular that they were made for labor, but white men, since they were more intelligent, and less muscular were made to be their masters, as if it were the natural order of things and ordained through the scriptures.

I am sorry to disagree with you, but the fact is you are wrong. Mainline feminism today is not what you think it is. I know this because I am in the middle of it. My wife works at a women's college that is at the forefront of mainline modern feminism, and it is very much about man-bashing. I also attend school at another very liberal university that is on the forefront of feminist thinking, and again, it is not just about women's rights. If that is not where you fit in, then that is fine, but it does not change the fact that feminism has been hi-jacked by extremists.