Are Catholic men being turned into wimps?

[BiologyBrain]

I guess Susan B. Anthony List is anti-feminine, because even though it’s pro-life, it (GASP!) tries to get pro-life women in political office. I guess Catholic Campaign for Human Development (affiliated with the USCCB) is anti-feminine because it (GASP!) helps single moms and ex-convict women start their own businesses which (GASP!) help women provide for their families!

I think you’re getting a little defensive. The radical feminism is what has taken over and that’s typically what people mean now-days when they say feminism. The radicals have ruined the word feminism.

Passivity may not be a feminine trait of yours, but stereotypically women are more passive than men are. That doesn’t mean women don’t make strong decisions and strong leaders. It simply means that a woman is usually more content to think things thoroughly through than a man is.

Women need to stop taking umbrage to the fact that we are the ‘weaker’ sex physically, and realize that we are the stronger sex emotionally. I think what needs to happen is women need to embrace & glorify that they are women and men need to embrace & glorify that they are men. Each need to respect the other and welcome the differences because together men & women make a wonderful team. Its not a competition between men & women to see who is the best. We’re both made in the image & likeness of God. Together we can join to make the most perfect expression of His love humans are capable of. That’s what needs to be emphasized.

 

[xyneshia]

I think you’re getting a little defensive. The radical feminism is what has taken over and that’s typically what people mean now-days when they say feminism. The radicals have ruined the word feminism.

Passivity may not be a feminine trait of yours, but stereotypically women are more passive than men are. That doesn’t mean women don’t make strong decisions and strong leaders. It simply means that a woman is usually more content to think things thoroughly through than a man is.

Women need to stop taking umbrage to the fact that we are the ‘weaker’ sex physically, and realize that we are the stronger sex emotionally. I think what needs to happen is women need to embrace & glorify that they are women and men need to embrace & glorify that they are men. Each need to respect the other and welcome the differences because together men & women make a wonderful team. Its not a competition between men & women to see who is the best. We’re both made in the image & likeness of God. Together we can join to make the most perfect expression of His love humans are capable of. That’s what needs to be emphasized.

you are right on! on both of ur posts

 

[sanctamaria17]

The kind that blurs the unique distinctiveness between masculinity and femininity. The kind that tries to change men into girls and women into boys.

What do you mean? A working woman being “masculine”? A SAHD being feminine? Women with short hair? Men with long? Women who do yardwork? Men who cook? Women who take roles in church (lector, cantor, etc)? Women engineers? Male nurses?

I’ll be honest, I’m not seeing it. Aside from abortion, illicit sexual activity, I don’t see why all the rest of it is wrong?

I guess I just don’t like generalizations because I don’t fit them. I’m a strong, socially active, highly motivated woman. I guess that makes me more “masculine”? I guess God made me that way. And I’ll admit, I’m kind of happy He did.

 

[LongingForLight]

Women need to stop taking umbrage to the fact that we are the ‘weaker’ sex physically, and realize that we are the stronger sex emotionally.

Hrm, I’m actually not sure it’s true that women are stronger emotionally. We’re better at nurturing and supporting other’s emotions and don’t lose our tempers as easily, but women have double the rate of the depression of men.

I think it’s more accurate to say that we women are weaker in any given moment both emotionally and physically, but we endure - both emotionally and physically. Women bend more easily, but are less likely to break than men. In general, of course.

 

[GraceDK]

What exactly is Catholic masculinity? I read the article, and there are some points I agree with, but some I don’t. But why is there an either or type of thing here, I wonder? If there are women serving on the altar, this somehow diminishes Catholic masculinity? My husband is very much a man, and he’s Catholic…and I’m a very strong minded woman. I think that women shouldn’t be shadows of men, in order to make them ‘feel’ masculine, or act it. My husband’s masculinity, in other words, is not dictated by me. It’s dictated by God.

I agree with you.
I always say: its not about roles but about personalities.
I don’t see it as a male thing to be outspoken, independant and evangelistic. These traits are just as well found in women, and that’s all good. Especially I feel offended even if men claim that I should not evangelise because I am a woman… what nonsense is that.
I think the un-masculine man is the one who needs to dominate and put women into boxes in order to feel in control. Its the same kind of men who tyranise other men, because they are actually insecure… these are the same ones that look at porn because they cant get the real thing… etc.
A real man can handle an equal partner instead of a silent slave.

 

[jmcrae]

Women need to stop taking umbrage to the fact that we are the ‘weaker’ sex physically,

I don’t take umbrage at being physically weaker than some men - but what makes me crazy is having to pretend that I am weaker than all men, so that their egos don’t get bruised.

To me, that’s an even greater weakness, to need to have people around you pretend that they are not as good as you, so that you can have self-esteem. I have absolute contempt for a man who needs me to play at being helpless, so that he can imagine that he is strong. (ie: watching him struggle away at trying to open a jelly jar, and stand there complimenting his feeble efforts, when I am perfectly capable of opening it myself, in less time and with less struggle.)

Self-esteem should be based on real accomplishments and real strengths - not on people around you pretending to be weaker than you, so that you can imagine that you are stronger than them.

I admire a man who can do things that I am not actually able to do.

But I have contempt for men who require me to do anything less than my best, in order to make them look good. A real man should actually be stronger than me - I should be free to do my absolute best, and then he should actually do it better than I can do it. I shouldn’t have to play at being weak, for the sake of his ego.

 

[GraceDK]

I don’t take umbrage at being physically weaker than some men - but what makes me crazy is having to pretend that I am weaker than all men, so that their egos don’t get bruised.

To me, that’s an even greater weakness, to need to have people around you pretend that they are not as good as you, so that you can have self-esteem. I have absolute contempt for a man who needs me to play at being helpless, so that he can imagine that he is strong. (ie: watching him struggle away at trying to open a jelly jar, and stand there complimenting his feeble efforts, when I am perfectly capable of opening it myself, in less time and with less struggle.)

Self-esteem should be based on real accomplishments and real strengths - not on people around you pretending to be weaker than you, so that you can imagine that you are stronger than them.

I admire a man who can do things that I am not actually able to do.

But I have contempt for men who require me to do anything less than my best, in order to make them look good. A real man should actually be stronger than me - I should be free to do my absolute best, and then he should actually do it better than I can do it. I shouldn’t have to play at being weak, for the sake of his ego.

You said it sister! and thats all there is to that

 

[Marycruz]

I don’t take umbrage at being physically weaker than some men - but what makes me crazy is having to pretend that I am weaker than all men, so that their egos don’t get bruised.

To me, that’s an even greater weakness, to need to have people around you pretend that they are not as good as you, so that you can have self-esteem. I have absolute contempt for a man who needs me to play at being helpless, so that he can imagine that he is strong. (ie: watching him struggle away at trying to open a jelly jar, and stand there complimenting his feeble efforts, when I am perfectly capable of opening it myself, in less time and with less struggle.)

Self-esteem should be based on real accomplishments and real strengths - not on people around you pretending to be weaker than you, so that you can imagine that you are stronger than them.

I admire a man who can do things that I am not actually able to do.

But I have contempt for men who require me to do anything less than my best, in order to make them look good. A real man should actually be stronger than me - I should be free to do my absolute best, and then he should actually do it better than I can do it. I shouldn’t have to play at being weak, for the sake of his ego.

I couldn’t agree more!

 

[Lepanto]

Funny how a thread about men has turned into a thread about women.

 

[mesurman]

I am a man. No one mistakes me for a girly man. Not boastful, not pushy and brazen, not self absorbed, not a womanizer, not a pushover, not wishy-washy. I am strong in my faith and my vocation as a father, husband & provider/protector. Head held high and purposeful. My 4 sons are being taught the same. Strong and quiet manly confidence. Yes means yes and no means no. No in between. God Bless America (please) and thank God for womanly women!

 

[jman507]

… (because funding for women in sports wouldn’t have been possible before feminism) …

To give a cynical joke, women sports (along with a number of other men’s sports) would also not be possible without mens football and basketball.

 

[jman507]

I think you’re getting a little defensive. The radical feminism is what has taken over and that’s typically what people mean now-days when they say feminism. The radicals have ruined the word feminism.

Passivity may not be a feminine trait of yours, but stereotypically women are more passive than men are. That doesn’t mean women don’t make strong decisions and strong leaders. It simply means that a woman is usually more content to think things thoroughly through than a man is.

Women need to stop taking umbrage to the fact that we are the ‘weaker’ sex physically, and realize that we are the stronger sex emotionally. I think what needs to happen is women need to embrace & glorify that they are women and men need to embrace & glorify that they are men. Each need to respect the other and welcome the differences because together men & women make a wonderful team. Its not a competition between men & women to see who is the best. We’re both made in the image & likeness of God. Together we can join to make the most perfect expression of His love humans are capable of. That’s what needs to be emphasized.

I agree with your main idea that men and women are different, and those differences in an optimal situation are not in competition, but complementary. (I guess you could say the difference between resonance in waves. They can resonate and make a greater wave together, or they can destructively interfere with each other and end up with a smaller wave. Couldn’t resist the physics reference.)

With regard to women being more passive, I would say in certain contexts women will be more passive than men, but in others the men will be more passive. Lets just say that if John and Bill work at a company. John works within the formal channels to get an inititive through, and Bill works though an informal channel; either could appear passive from the view of the perspective of different people watching in the company.

 

[DavidChrist]

As a Catholic man myself, I can very much relate to this article. I have seen the effects of what the author describes.

insidecatholic.com/Joomla/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=29&Itemid=48

Judaism is a patriarchal religion. Christianity is a matriarchal religion disguised as a patriarchal one (the Father). Men cannot follow a religion that is matriarchal because that would go against their ego so the Church disguised Christianity.

Christianity is really a religion of the Madonna (not God).

Jesus was effeminate.

The problem 2,000 years ago is that the everyday man could never get beyond ego without the empowerment of women. So the Church saw to it to overthrow Judaism which controls the wife very much like the present day orthodox Jews and everday Muslim in the Middle East does.

With Christianity, the everyday man could be exposed to a feminine religion without him ever being wise to know it. haha. Jesus talked about love like a woman (a motherly woman) would. Men wouldn’t follow a religion based on Mother Mary but they would from her son (as long as you also say he is God’s son).

So, yes, the Catholic male has been feminized.

If men want to get their ball back then they have to grow out of Christianity and go back to their roots.

That means abundant sex with the intention of making women stronger in their sexuality.

The world has enough babies.

What it lacks is MEN.

 

[GraceDK]

Judaism is a patriarchal religion. Christianity is a matriarchal religion disguised as a patriarchal one (the Father). Men cannot follow a religion that is matriarchal because that would go against their ego so the Church disguised Christianity.

Christianity is really a religion of the Madonna (not God).

Jesus was effeminate.

The problem 2,000 years ago is that the everyday man could never get beyond ego without the empowerment of women. So the Church saw to it to overthrow Judaism which controls the wife very much like the present day orthodox Jews and everday Muslim in the Middle East does.

With Christianity, the everyday man could be exposed to a feminine religion without him ever being wise to know it. haha. Jesus talked about love like a woman (a motherly woman) would. Men wouldn’t follow a religion based on Mother Mary but they would from her son (as long as you also say he is God’s son).

So, yes, the Catholic male has been feminized.

If men want to get their ball back then they have to grow out of Christianity and go back to their roots.

That means abundant sex with the intention of making women stronger in their sexuality.

The world has enough babies.

What it lacks is MEN.

You just wasted three minutes of my day.

 

[Cbailey2]

Judaism is a patriarchal religion. Christianity is a matriarchal religion disguised as a patriarchal one (the Father). Men cannot follow a religion that is matriarchal because that would go against their ego so the Church disguised Christianity.

Christianity is really a religion of the Madonna (not God).

Jesus was effeminate.

The problem 2,000 years ago is that the everyday man could never get beyond ego without the empowerment of women. So the Church saw to it to overthrow Judaism which controls the wife very much like the present day orthodox Jews and everday Muslim in the Middle East does.

With Christianity, the everyday man could be exposed to a feminine religion without him ever being wise to know it. haha. Jesus talked about love like a woman (a motherly woman) would. Men wouldn’t follow a religion based on Mother Mary but they would from her son (as long as you also say he is God’s son).

So, yes, the Catholic male has been feminized.

If men want to get their ball back then they have to grow out of Christianity and go back to their roots.

That means abundant sex with the intention of making women stronger in their sexuality.

The world has enough babies.

What it lacks is MEN.

Did you attend school? Did you finish it? I don’t know which Country/State you come from, but you just penned the most powerful argument I’ve ever seen for increasing education funding as soon as possible.

 

[mrpathetic]

One author on this subject that I trust is Paul Caughlin. He wrote a book entitled “No More Christian Nice Guy.” It is one of the few books written on this subject, and I find it to be evocative reading.

His blog can be found here, along with links to the book.

crosswalk.com/blogs/PCoughlin/

 

[GraceDK]

I think some Catholic men are fixated on gender roles instead of on personality.

Four guys may be faced with each other… two of them are real touch and full of testoteron and the other two are sensitive, emphatic etc.
But they are all equally men just like the very sporty or witted woman or the politician leader-woman is just as much a woman and a true woman as the one who sits at home with two babies and a soft voice.

All I can say to these men who bully other men is… gosh you must have a low self esteem. Accept that any human being has all kinds of characteristics… I am not less a woman if I am an extroverted teacher with many friends who like to play with mathematical equasions and play soccer than if my interests and temper is another one…

 

[chevalier]

True.

 

[mrpathetic]

I would argue that many of us are deciding even further from the level of the “wimp”. Some of us are even turning into eunuchs. We have no sex lives, and we just live with it, day after day, year after year.

I mean that figuratively, not literally. No, I haven’t been physically castrated. Instead, my wife refuses me sex, and I am forced to accept it. This has gone on for 16 years. So I have been practicallly castrated, although my sex organs are still intact.

Most Jewish/pagan/agnostic/atheistic men wouldn’t put up with this. They would leave. Or they would demand change of their wives.

I have no such opportunity. I have no leverage to address the situation. Our church forbides divorce and remarriage. And adultery, polygamy, even masturbation, are not permitted to us. Essentially, for men in my position, there is no opportunity for sexual release. We have two choices: abandon the faith, or live in 100% abstinence.

I could live in 100% abstinence, if I were called to this, and made an oath to this. If I did that, I would be a priest, religious, or committed single. But this was not my vocation calling; I was called to marriage. This is what I discerned when I was still a transitional single. But instead of enjoying the benefits of the marriage bed, I get years of sexlessness. My self-respect and self-esteem have plummeted, as a result.

In effect, we have become eunuchs, even though all the parts are still attached. No wonder that we are often objects of ridicule by non-Christians, and even other Christian believers. They must think that Catholic men are big, dumb idiots, for putting up with this.

 

[TOP]

As a testicular cancer survivor I have to say , yes you are all whimps except me.