|
|
|
|
|
Users viewing this topic:
none
|
|
Login  | |
|
RE: Men's/Women's roles in the Home - One Stop Thread - 9/19/2009 12:32:30 AM
|
|
|
Lizahana
Posts: 415
Status: offline
|
From: RE: The Paradox of Declining Female Happiness - 9/18/2009 6:18:06 PM
quote:
Child4Jesus
Senior Member
Posts: 564
Joined: 5/24/2005
From: Long Island, Nassau, Elmont, NY
Status: offline The problem I have with feminism it what it has become.
A promiscuous girl sees her self as a feminist. Multiple partners without a care or attachment.
Abortion-It's my body and I can do what I want with my body.
No gender distinctions. Men and women are exactly the same. Same roles and made for the same purposes.
Women are BETTER than men and can do EVERYTHING better.
Porn is even seen a an empowering endeavor for a woman.
Babysitters raising the kids while mom and dad are out making the loot.
If a man want's to help a woman in anyway it is assumed he is trying to oppress her.
For one, why on earth do you interpret feminism in such an overtly 'sexual' way? Feminism means to me, as a women, being able to choose what I want to do. If I want to go for a Phd, not marry, no kids - then fine. If I want to go for a Phd, marry, no kids - then fine. If I want go for a Phd, marry and have loads of kids - then fine. If I want to marry, have loads of kids and be a SAHM, then fine.
The 'sexual' notion that you describe does not even enter into what I consider as feminism. The people that bring this up, imho, maybe, then, have a little too much of that on their mind - because when I think of feminism, it's about brain power, not 'sexual' power. Please, get your mind out of the gutter.
Second, I have NEVER considered women that are SAHMs ANY less superior than 'career' women. IN FACT, most of the 'career' women that I know, think that motherhood is THE most important, and hardest job on the planet.
Third, I don't know of any 'career', feminist women that think women are better than men in any way. They simply believe, brain-wise, we are EQUAL - hence the name of the movement, 'women's equality' - get it?
Before you make blanket statements, such as above, you better start to get to KNOW the women you are speaking of; because most feminists are FAR from how you describe.
The more I read posts like these, the more I am convinced that the people that ridicule the 'other' side of this arguement, are not happy with their choice.
BTW, I am very happily married, want kids and have a fairly succesful career.
Peace and God bless,
_____________________________
"If you judge people, you have no time to love them." - Mother Teresa
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Men's/Women's roles in the Home - One Stop Thread - 9/19/2009 9:33:26 AM
|
|
|
Sideways
Posts: 3376
Joined: 4/12/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: 3cappuccinosmom
My husband worked three jobs at one point (and they were lousy, low-paying jobs, of which there are usually many available), because he felt that our small children/babies needed their mother at home.
And that's what worked for you and your husband, and that's great. But it's not what works for everyone, and that's where feminists clash with conservatives.
Some believe that it's more important for children to spend time with their dad, and so that means (for them) that mom gets a part time job at night or on the weekend and dad helps out with childcare, rather then the children rarely seeing their father.
Sometimes the mom has a far greater earning potential and other necessary things like medical and dental insurance. One lady I know is a pastor's wife and his job doesn't provide any type of insurance for the family, so she does.
One family I know has the father as the SAH, homeschooling dad. He's a natural teacher and he loves it. The mom makes a good income to support the family and she loves her work. Are they wrong? I don't think so.
Except for breastfeeding (and there's always pumping) a father is completely capable of caring for the needs of his children. Many families also use grandparents, which I think is fine when it works.
Basically, there's more then one way to skin a cat, and still raise healthy, godly children.
_____________________________
Row, row, row your boat, gently down the stream. If you see a crocodile, don't forget to scream.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Men's/Women's roles in the Home - One Stop Thread - 9/19/2009 10:04:47 AM
|
|
|
Sideways
Posts: 3376
Joined: 4/12/2005
Status: offline
|
I hear you, Maggie. I'm sorry if I came off to strong.
I suppose I have trouble understanding why it must be that the wife is home, no matter what, no matter the circumstances. But I respect your devotion to your husband, children and your beliefs.
_____________________________
Row, row, row your boat, gently down the stream. If you see a crocodile, don't forget to scream.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Men's/Women's roles in the Home - One Stop Thread - 9/19/2009 11:55:55 AM
|
|
|
solo_soprano23
Posts: 2085
Joined: 4/27/2005
From: I'm a Southern girl
Status: offline
|
Honestly, there are men right now who can't find a job whatsoever, but his wife has. So, it's not always about choice and our preferences. I'm sure that people who believe women are to be at home only would have preferred that the husband find a job, but it didn't happen.
I was telling my mother the other day, that the job market isn't like it used to be. I'm having to go through three rounds of interviews, and compete with hundreds of other applicants for one position. Those "lousy" jobs won't hire me, because I'm overqualified. (They think they'll spend time training me and I'll leave once I find a job in my field; so they don't invest in me to begin with.) Some men just can't find a job right now-- a good one or a bad one; the money is dwindling-- sometimes gone completely. I think the question is, do you do what you have to do at the moment, even if that's not the way you wanted it to be and have no income (when one is available), just not how you'd like it to be?
I do disagree that women would be wrong if she worked after having kids, but no one is saying to change your beliefs. Sometimes you just have to do what you have to to stay afloat, and it's not permanent. I suppose maybe some people see it as a sin for mom to work outside the home.
_____________________________
For God, For Learning, Forever.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Men's/Women's roles in the Home - One Stop Thread - 9/19/2009 12:13:02 PM
|
|
|
huangshan
Posts: 2307
Joined: 8/6/2008
Status: offline
|
Because I feel this is a stupid, stupid, stupid idea that should not go un-addressed:
quote:
ORIGINAL: SonInMe1
My pastor had a sermon series on sex where he described an aspect of porn I never realized.
In porn, women act like men. They are aggressive.
For all the disparaging of men that feminism proclaims their ultimate goal is to be...a man.
Gotta love the hypocracy of liberalism...eh?
...except that's not even remotely true. I'm a feminist and a liberal and I have no desire for women to be men.
Your pastor's analysis is completely ridiculous. Where did he get the notion that porn is somehow representative of feminism? That's insane. This might be a shocker, but: pornography is predominantly produced by and consumed by males. What kind of moron would assume that porn is where to look for feminist ideals?
I hope you don't tithe to that church.
Feminism is not "disparaging of men" unless you're using the nutty Dworkin stuff as your definition of feminism. That stupid for a few of reasons: She was a fringe nutter, she essentially believed that all sex is rape, and she was famously anti-porn.
If your pastor had any integrity at all, his analysis of pornography would have revealed that the porn producers, who are predominantly male, and the porn consumers, who are predominantly male want women to be "aggressive like men". That's the secret male fantasy revealed by porn, and the porn starlets are merely actors in the fantasies created by and for males.
It's bad enough when pastors lie, it's worse when this kind of misogynistic trash doesn't get picked apart.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Men's/Women's roles in the Home - One Stop Thread - 9/19/2009 1:08:24 PM
|
|
|
Sideways
Posts: 3376
Joined: 4/12/2005
Status: offline
|
Well, you have to remember huangshan, that there is a group of conservatives (not all!) that will pin any evil they see in society on liberalism and feminism. It doesn't matter if it's true, it's just easy and puts all the blame on the other guy.
There are definitely men I've met who would love to return to a day when women did not compete with men for jobs or college acceptance. Women were "trainable" (I've heard that one recently), they did what they were told, stayed safely at home, and kept quiet. Men were demi-gods. Feminism doesn't teach us that men are evil, either, just human.
_____________________________
Row, row, row your boat, gently down the stream. If you see a crocodile, don't forget to scream.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Men's/Women's roles in the Home - One Stop Thread - 9/19/2009 2:57:50 PM
|
|
|
a_sparrow
Posts: 569
Joined: 6/20/2006
From: Los Angeles
Status: offline
|
Posts in the other thread seem not to be based on the idea that the Biblical ideal of marriage requires not that a wife submit to her husband's leading out of obedience to God. Rather, they seem to assume that 1) money=power, and 2) in a Biblically-ordered household, men must have control of the money, in order to compel their wives' obedience. I don't see in the New Testament an emphasis on coercive control in the family, and I certainly don't see any suggestion that a husband should use money as an instrument of control over his wife.
_____________________________
Elizabeth
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Men's/Women's roles in the Home - One Stop Thread - 9/19/2009 3:53:00 PM
|
|
|
ourgreatestSource
Posts: 732
Status: offline
|
Arriving from Paradox..women less happy or something that that..
"Indeed, most modern feminists are less focused on "women" as a topic, and more focused on gender roles in general. So there's a great deal in modern feminism which men might find liberating: in as much as it would suggest that "men" do not have to live up to common culturally constructed masculine ideals (i.e. watching sports, being aggressive, not being interested in one's appearance, etc, etc, ) in order to be men."
Yes, as much I do understand the bold part..I have huge problem with those feminists of today also into "liberating" males..:
1) There are huge number of kids both genders growing up without fathers around, the men exemple, him translating himself as a male brought up by another male influence in his life also (not being translated by 2nd or 3rd parties).
2) There is the homosexual agenda around also gaining more grounds as liberating the men in the closets also and also the "bi" sexual males (and females) are growing in numbers and their expressions, all being liberated also.
3) It seems some groups engaged in "liberating masculine ideals" have their own ideals of men, some give their ok, encourage the low testosterone males, or very sensitive or afeminated males as keep giving a voice for those more mellow men (let them find for themselves their own voices!!). Others are up to encourage males to find the female side inside themselves to balance their whole being, or whatever..
4) There is already to much estrogene around, unbalanced air, to much female blablabla influence around, nowdays during males growing up, in the bud stages, without fathers and males figures of real influence. Not even good amounts of testosterone around, very much present in a fathers home, his territory.
5) As much good happens when women is liberated and walk their own walks, great, hopefuly now they will take care their own business and life, and just give a brake to men who might want just be allowed to be, including an "older men model"..or"conservative John Wayne or other style men".. 
5) I just do hope at least some males just rebel big time and set themselves free from all those agendas and "forces", of course- if- they find themselves been pressed from all sides, being boxed or whatever.
Anyways.."more power to the people!"..Go people go !!! 
_____________________________
"Whoever has no rule over his own spirit Is like a city broken down, without walls." Prov. 25:28
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Men's/Women's roles in the Home - One Stop Thread - 9/19/2009 4:38:12 PM
|
|
|
3cappuccinosmom
Posts: 3595
Joined: 4/12/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
1) money=power, and 2) in a Biblically-ordered household, men must have control of the money, in order to compel their wives' obedience.
Which posts do you see that in?
I'm on the wife-at-home side of things, but I disagree with #1, so #2 is moot, and anyway, just because one person earns the only income does not mean that that person is in control of the money. Otherwise we'd have to say that women who work out of the home are controlling the finances simply because they earn the only paycheck, and keeping their husband's home doing menial drudgery in a sorry state of oppression.  It is not about power. It is about following the order God set out in his word, and being obedient to it.
My husband is not the sole wage-earner so that he can have financial power over me and force me into submission. (I have access to all the money, my name is on anything, I usually have the checkbook, manage the accounts, etc, anyway. Sure, he's a real patriarchal oppressor.... )
He works because he believes that as the man of the home he has a Biblical obligation to provide for his family to the best of his ability, and so that I can be a keeper at home, and so that I can properly care for my babies, as we believe that both the Bible and nature have demonstrated are ideal. And I know that people may disagree that any of those are Biblical, but I'm trying to point out that it is *not* an issue of oppressor vs. oppressed. The like-minded people that I know have a similar viewpoint as dh and I do, and either they work very closely together on finances, or the wife does the budget as part of her realm (keeping the home). The husband is not the sole wage-earner so that he can wield power over his wife. He is the sole wage-earner so that she can be home as they both believe is good and proper.
If a man does use finances or anything else to hurt his wife, or if he does believe his is superior and supposed to be all powerful and rule with an iron fist, then he hasn't been reading his Bible. But it is possible for a man to lead and his wife to follow, and for a man to work and his wife to stay home, and for them to believe that those things are Biblical, without the man being an Evil Oppressor.
_____________________________
 Moo
The Ballad of Bad Biruk
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Men's/Women's roles in the Home - One Stop Thread - 9/19/2009 4:42:41 PM
|
|
|
Mollymouser
Posts: 3951
Joined: 4/18/2005
From: california, land of the happy cows
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: 3cappuccinosmom
... just because one person earns the only income does not mean that that person is in control of the money. ... It is not about power. It is about following the order God set out in his word, and being obedient to it.
My husband is not the sole wage-earner so that he can have financial power over me and force me into submission. (I have access to all the money, my name is on anything, I usually have the checkbook, manage the accounts, etc, anyway. Sure, he's a real patriarchal oppressor.... )
He works because he believes that as the man of the home he has a Biblical obligation to provide for his family to the best of his ability, and so that I can be a keeper at home ... as we believe that both the Bible and nature have demonstrated are ideal. And I know that people may disagree that any of those are Biblical, but I'm trying to point out that it is *not* an issue of oppressor vs. oppressed. The like-minded people that I know have a similar viewpoint as dh and I do, and either they work very closely together on finances, or the wife does the budget as part of her realm (keeping the home). The husband is not the sole wage-earner so that he can wield power over his wife. He is the sole wage-earner so that she can be home as they both believe is good and proper.
If a man does use finances or anything else to hurt his wife, or if he does believe his is superior and supposed to be all powerful and rule with an iron fist, then he hasn't been reading his Bible. But it is possible for a man to lead and his wife to follow, and for a man to work and his wife to stay home, and for them to believe that those things are Biblical, without the man being an Evil Oppressor.
Agree 1000% ... and I bolded the stuff that I REALLY agree with!!!
_____________________________
  MARRIED TO A MILITARY PILOT ~ PLEASE PRAY FOR OUR TROOPS!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Men's/Women's roles in the Home - One Stop Thread - 9/19/2009 4:51:55 PM
|
|
|
solo_soprano23
Posts: 2085
Joined: 4/27/2005
From: I'm a Southern girl
Status: offline
|
It's in a lot of the posts in the thread that was shut down, Maggie. Odd thing is, most of the men were saying women use education/careers as power.
If someone believes it is a sin for women to work outside the home, then don't do it, and marry someone who thinks likewise. I think more of the problem than anything is outside criticism for those who are of different beliefs and do things on a different system.
< Message edited by solo_soprano23 -- 9/19/2009 5:05:12 PM >
_____________________________
For God, For Learning, Forever.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Men's/Women's roles in the Home - One Stop Thread - 9/19/2009 4:53:02 PM
|
|
|
3cappuccinosmom
Posts: 3595
Joined: 4/12/2005
Status: offline
|
It doesn't matter what cultural construct is used. A person can end up mistreated and abused because human beings will take anything and twist anything to use for their own benefit. This can happen in patriarchal societies or families, and it can happen in "liberated" societies and families. A "patriarchal" man may be overbearing, or he may be loving and a true servant-leader. A "liberated" man may truly be egalitarian, or he may take advantage of a woman, and use and abuse her heart in the name of "freedom" and "liberation". While a society as a whole may not value females, there have been plenty of historical examples of a father adoring his daughter, educating her at home if she could not be educated elsewhere, and demonstrating how much he loved and valued her for her own individual self. And likewise in a society where laws make discrimination against women illegal and people have limitless options for contraception, there are plenty of examples of people who would not call themselves conservative Christians demonstrating a complete lack of care and concern for the children of their own body. Likewise, a woman can abuse a man, control him, and mistreat him, and can reject boy-children that she bears. And women do that, and it's ironic because that is just what feminists have accused men of doing since time began.
The Bible does (I believe) set out a structure for roles and authority, not just in families but in the church. However, if someone looks only at the structure and not at anything else in the Bible and uses that structure to hurt and oppress his family or people under his authority in church, he's just as wrong and disobedient to the word as he would say someone is who rejects the structure completely.
_____________________________
Moo
The Ballad of Bad Biruk
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Men's/Women's roles in the Home - One Stop Thread - 9/19/2009 6:39:33 PM
|
|
|
everythingat
Posts: 285
Joined: 2/21/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: solo_soprano23
I hear all the time, both women and men telling women not to "depend on a man." They mean that, even if you believe that women are SAHM/Ws and men bring in the money, one day you might be on your own, even if that wasn't your plan. Husbands die; they become disabled; some, unfortunately leave. I think every human being should be prepared to work, because you never know. You might have to be the one to support the kids/family. I don't know of these people running around telling females to be educated because men are undependable beasts. 
This is certainly true. My uncle was a pastor of a church, then he was diagnosed with MS and had to retire. Now his wife is having to work a job and take care of him at the same time while dealing with their son who has a Peter Pan complex. And in another example, my grandmother had never even pumped gas until her husband died. She had to learn to support herself in every way during her 70's.
On a less serious note, solo_soprano...the other topic that's blending with this one read like The Taming of the Shrew.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Men's/Women's roles in the Home - One Stop Thread - 9/19/2009 8:00:29 PM
|
|
|
Sideways
Posts: 3376
Joined: 4/12/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: solo_soprano23
Honestly, I don't do "radical" anything.
Me neither.
quote:
People need to choose things for themselves. No one forces a woman to go to college, have a career and shun marriage in the meantime. Choose something, and forget about the nay-sayers, if that's what you think is right for you. It's not always about choosing a career over being with her children either; it's about what works for that family-- even if that's the opposite of what works in someone else's life. Now that is just way to sensible. 
The only exception would be my own daughter, simply because she is my daughter. I plan on strongly encouraging her to prepare for a career that would allow her to support herself if she needed to. I married at 23, so it would seem awfully hypocritical of me to discourage her from marrying in her early 20's. If she started talking about children before finishing her post-high school education, I would talk to her about the impact of that decision, but at that point she'll be a married adult and making her own call.
_____________________________
Row, row, row your boat, gently down the stream. If you see a crocodile, don't forget to scream.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Men's/Women's roles in the Home - One Stop Thread - 9/19/2009 8:37:12 PM
|
|
|
solo_soprano23
Posts: 2085
Joined: 4/27/2005
From: I'm a Southern girl
Status: offline
|
Where does the Bible say a woman is to stay at home once she has babies? I see verses that say to take care of/manage the house... to be busy at home... things to that effect. It seems like the Proverbs 31 woman was busy both inside and outside the home working because that benefitted her family. I'm not trying to be facetious, and I hope we can discuss things nicely, but I've never seen a verse that says that women, upon having children, can't work outside the home (as long as inside the home is taken care of).
Most of the time, people say it's a biblical mandate that wives stay home when they have kids. The others say it's not a mandate, but a choice based on individual families. It can't be both.
_____________________________
For God, For Learning, Forever.
|
|
|
|
 New Messages |
 No New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/ New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/o New Messages |
 Locked w/ New Messages |
 Locked w/o New Messages |
|
 Post New Thread
Reply to Message
Post New Poll
Submit Vote
Delete My Own Post
Delete My Own Thread
Rate Posts |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Tools
Printable Version
