Catholicism – Too Feminized?

  • Thread starter Thread starter ShadowBoxer
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Sarcelle said:
So you think that keeping the peace at all cost even at the expense of hiding the truth is feminine?
Click to expand...
If done in the spirit of “laying low until the right moment arrives” (like special operations by the military or undercover work by the police who have to “lay low” for the time being) or giving a person a second chance, then no.

If it is because one simply is afraid of or does not like conflict, then yes. Or if you prefer, you could call it cowardly, lazy, or a misguided/incorrect view of Christianity. Remember, admonishing the sinner - which may break the peace - is a work of mercy. And Ezekiel stated that if we do not warn the wrongdoer, we will share in his/her punishment. So no, we are NOT supposed to hide the truth simply to keep the peace.
 
Xantippe said:
  1. Aren’t there quite a few assertive CAF women? Do you suppose they’re all potted plants in real life?
  2. Is it really the case that all of our Biblical male heroes fit your model? I don’t think that that is actually the case. (St. Paul was obviously assertive and confrontational, but it doesn’t sound like St. John was.) Furthermore, there are a lot of assertive, persistent women in the Bible. In fact, to this day, Jewish women have a reputation for being assertive.
Click to expand...
Which is why I worded my response very carefully as “values traditionaly associated with masculinity”. Yes, females need it as well (such as mother’s being able to say “no”), just as males need “values traditionally associated with feminity” (such as tenderness, like when changing a baby’s diaper).

The problem is that many of us see a decrease in those “masculine” values, or gender roles are reversed and it is the women exhibiting the masculine values whereas if men exhibit them they are punished.
 
Norseman82 said:
If done in the spirit of “laying low until the right moment arrives” (like special operations by the military or undercover work by the police who have to “lay low” for the time being) or giving a person a second chance, then no.

If it is because one simply is afraid of or does not like conflict, then yes. Or if you prefer, you could call it cowardly, lazy, or a misguided/incorrect view of Christianity. Remember, admonishing the sinner - which may break the peace - is a work of mercy. And Ezekiel stated that if we do not warn the wrongdoer, we will share in his/her punishment. So no, we are NOT supposed to hide the truth simply to keep the peace.
Click to expand...
So things that are “feminine” are things that are cowardly, lazy, and/or misguided. “Masculine” things are strategic and forgiving.

If I remember correctly, you’re unmarried. Given this worldview, that’s probably for the best.
 
Norseman82 said:
Reported for rude, personal attack.
Click to expand...
Why? If you’re at a point in your life where you associate things that lack honor with femininity, it is objectively better for you, your would-be wife, and any potential children that could come that you not marry, at least not right now.
 
Norseman82 said:
If done in the spirit of “laying low until the right moment arrives” (like special operations by the military or undercover work by the police who have to “lay low” for the time being) or giving a person a second chance, then no.

If it is because one simply is afraid of or does not like conflict, then yes. Or if you prefer, you could call it cowardly, lazy, or a misguided/incorrect view of Christianity. Remember, admonishing the sinner - which may break the peace - is a work of mercy. And Ezekiel stated that if we do not warn the wrongdoer, we will share in his/her punishment. So no, we are NOT supposed to hide the truth simply to keep the peace.
Click to expand...
So having a cowardly lazy or incorrect view of Christianity is feminine? Do you really have that low a view of women?
Well, your post has just added validation that the word feminine is an insult.

You ascribe negative values as being a part of the essential nature of half the population. Don’t be surprised that some may take offense.

What do you expect?
 
Norseman82 said:
Which is why I worded my response very carefully as “values traditionaly associated with masculinity”. Yes, females need it as well (such as mother’s being able to say “no”), just as males need “values traditionally associated with feminity” (such as tenderness, like when changing a baby’s diaper).

The problem is that many of us see a decrease in those “masculine” values, or gender roles are reversed and it is the women exhibiting the masculine values whereas if men exhibit them they are punished.
Click to expand...
Women can either exhibit masculine or feminine values. But if feminine values are defined by you as being cowardly, dishonorable or weak why do you think women should exhibit these values?
 
Sarcelle said:
So having a cowardly lazy or incorrect view of Christianity is feminine? Do you really have that low a view of women?
Well, your post has just added validation that the word feminine is an insult.

You ascribe negative values as being a part of the essential nature of half the population. Don’t be surprised that some may take offense.

What do you expect?
Click to expand...
Yes.
 
Sarcelle said:
Women can either exhibit masculine or feminine values. But if feminine values are defined by you as being cowardly, dishonorable or weak why do you think women should exhibit these values?
Click to expand...
You’ve got a point there. Why should anybody want to exhibit “feminine values” if those values are cowardly, dishonorable and weak?

If women are going to feel happy about living traditional female lives, we need to get a lot more respect than that approach offers–we aren’t just not-men.
 
Xantippe said:
You’ve got a point there. Why should anybody want to exhibit “feminine values” if those values are cowardly, dishonorable and weak?

If women are going to feel happy about living traditional female lives, we need to get a lot more respect than that approach offers–we aren’t just not-men.
Click to expand...
If such negative values were inherent in being feminine, how does one explain the Blessed Virgin? Either she is not sinless or she is not feminine.
 
The last few posts remind me of my rather brief stint at a small, conservative Catholic college. Most of the profs were excellent. There was one, however, who had a bit of a bugbear about women and historical Christian femininity. At one point during class, he said in a rather dismissive, patronizing tone that “of course, women all carry the sin of Eve.” At which point I, being rather more confrontational at 18 than I am today, raised my hand, was called on (women in his class were referred to as “dear heart,” while men were referred to as “Mr. Lastname”), and inquired pseudo-innocently if this meant that men also carried the sin of Adam.

I rather suspect this comment may have contributed negatively to my grade in that class…
 
UbiCaritas said:
The last few posts remind me of my rather brief stint at a small, conservative Catholic college. Most of the profs were excellent. There was one, however, who had a bit of a bugbear about women and historical Christian femininity. At one point during class, he said in a rather dismissive, patronizing tone that “of course, women all carry the sin of Eve.” At which point I, being rather more confrontational at 18 than I am today, raised my hand, was called on (women in his class were referred to as “dear heart,” while men were referred to as “Mr. Lastname”), and inquired pseudo-innocently if this meant that men also carried the sin of Adam.

I rather suspect this comment may have contributed negatively to my grade in that class…
Click to expand...
UbiCaritas,

How can you manage to be weak, cowardly and dishonorable if you keep doing stuff like that?
 
Xantippe said:
UbiCaritas,

How can you manage to be weak, cowardly and dishonorable if you keep doing stuff like that?
Click to expand...
No doubt a Good Catholic Woman ™ would have meekly bowed her head and admitted her personal responsibility for the problems of the modern world.

It seems I still have a ways to go until I attain absolute perfection. 😃
 
Norseman82 said:
If done in the spirit of “laying low until the right moment arrives” (like special operations by the military or undercover work by the police who have to “lay low” for the time being) or giving a person a second chance, then no.

If it is because one simply is afraid of or does not like conflict, then yes. Or if you prefer, you could call it cowardly, lazy, or a misguided/incorrect view of Christianity. Remember, admonishing the sinner - which may break the peace - is a work of mercy. And Ezekiel stated that if we do not warn the wrongdoer, we will share in his/her punishment. So no, we are NOT supposed to hide the truth simply to keep the peace.
Click to expand...
Whoa whoa whoa whoa. Hold on there, big fella. I don’t like conflict. I try to aviod conflict. I work to avoid conflict. Maybe it’s because I grew up in an emotionally explosive household that I have a strong natural aversion to conflict.

But at the same time, if someone like you were to call me un-masculine, you’d be a laughingstock to anyone within earshot.

And you’re the one reporting posts, I might add.
 
I should have remembered that internet discussions are filled with “loaded” questions. My fault for falling into the trap.

But that still does not excuse personal attacks on a practicing Catholic’s marital status. I’ve been issued infractions for a lot less.
 
on_the_hill said:
Maybe it’s because I grew up in an emotionally explosive household that I have a strong natural aversion to conflict.
Click to expand...
I also grew up in an emotionally explosive environment, but I came to realize that avoiding conflict simply made matters worse.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top