Catholics Trapped by Feminism

[MarcoPolo]

At a glance, my view on the excerpts in this thread are this: yes, there are some women, Catholics included, who seek “refuge” in contraception in order to support a career. However, the quotes from the site up in post #18 above about how women need to be “submissive” sounds an awful lot like some kind of slavery and alien to the Church’s teaching of the mutuality of spouses. The Church has avoided that kind of thinking, such as in Pope Leo’s comment in Arcanum:*Moreover, plurality of wives and husbands, as well as divorce, caused the nuptial bond to be relaxed exceedingly. Hence, too, sprang up the greatest confusion as to the mutual rights and duties of husbands and wives, inasmuch as a man assumed right of dominion over his wife, ordering her to go about her business, often without any just cause; while he was himself at liberty “to run headlong with impunity into lust, unbridled and unrestrained, in houses of ill-fame and amongst his female slaves, as if the dignity of the persons sinned with, and not the will of the sinner, made the guilt.” When the licentiousness of a husband thus showed itself, nothing could be more piteous than the wife, sunk so low as to be all but reckoned as a means for the gratification of passion, or for the production of offspring. *And later, he says:*the woman, because she is flesh of his flesh, and bone of his bone, must be subject to her husband and obey him; not, indeed, as a servant, but as a companion, so that her obedience shall be wanting in neither honor nor dignity.*You will notice how the Pope cautions against such a demeaning dignity of the woman.

Regarding the idea of submissiveness, it only really “works” when the husband is willing to give of himself as Christ gave to the Church. The wife is called to “submit” to “his love for her.” It’s quite a romantic enterprise.

Pope John Paul II says in Theology of the Body:
*One could even hazard the idea that the wife’s submission to her husband, understood in the context of the entire passage of the Letter to the Ephesians (5:21-33), signifies above all the “experiencing of love.” This is all the more so since this submission is related to the image of the submission of the Church to Christ, which certainly consists in experiencing his love.*See more at What did the Church teach about marriage, men and women in 1880?

 

[Angelsflight]

It is not the Church but individual men and, sadly, some women who say this. I am quite sure Pope Francis would not say this.

Pope Francis: my rock. My guiding light. I do love that guy!

 

[jilly4ski]

Sure people do. There are still some very scary radical feminists out there. However, I think the definition of “feminist” has changed with the generations - someone who is 20 has a very different view of the term than someone who is 40 or 60.

Yep, I an not very old (28) but when I was in high school, one of my classmates refused to spell “women” but instead wrote “womyn” or “wymyn” because she thought it degrading for women to mean “from men.”

Again there are indeed some criticisms of today’s post secondary education model for both women and men. The cost (loans, how little you actually have to learn, the drinking partying culture, the emphasis on sports in big universities, the prevalence of progressive/liberal professors, etc. But I think it goes back to the education the children receive in home, if they were trained up right in the home, they can seek out the education they want in college and participate in the events that are good for the body and mind, and maybe even soul. (I went to a bad Catholic school, but I went to a very nice daily mass with monks when I wasn’t skiing, and occasionally went to LOTHs, that was very nice).

 

[Sarcelle]

Yeah, I am pretty offended by this website too. It is things like this that make me never want to marry a Catholic man …and it seriously makes me doubt the faith. I am almost done with this religion I think.

If ever you feel discouraged about how some Catholics view women, ask yourself if the Church actually teaches that females should not have higher education. If that were the case there wouldn’t be Catholic universities for women. But they do exist.

Individual Catholics can come up with pretty wacky ideas whether their ideas are actually sanctioned by the church is another matter.

Please do not let that get between you and Jesus.

 

[Sarcelle]

Sorry, I said something hurtful again.

I think that I, personally, am not very suited for being a SAHM. I’m awful at most housework and find it hard to motivate myself to do it. So for me, even if I were a mother, I’d want to be contributing to society in a way that was more suited to my talents. I don’t think I’d make a very good housewife.

But it’s important for me to remember that some women are very good at running households, and that they are using their talents to the fullest without having a career. If I want the fix the family guy to respect working women when he talks about how amazing SAHM’s are, then I need to respect SAHM’s when I talk about how some women are more suited to careers outside the home. It’s important that each person be able to use his or her talents to the glory of God, and we shouldn’t be tearing others down in an effort to build ourselves up.

So again, sorry. I’ll try to do better in the future.

Personally, I think I would have made an excellent housewife. I like cooking, cleaning, crocheting, gardening. I’m pretty much a homebody. In my opinion the domestic arts are too undervalued.

 

[Sarcelle]

The author is sickening and sad. He thinks he is empowering himself by finding reasons to control women. He must be terrified of strong women.

Yes, why is he still bothering with being Catholic.

He can always be Muslim. But then again I grew up in a Muslim country and a lot of Muslim fathers sent their daughters to college. Even Saudi Arabia educates it’s women.

 

[on_the_hill]

Sure people do. There are still some very scary radical feminists out there. However, I think the definition of “feminist” has changed with the generations - someone who is 20 has a very different view of the term than someone who is 40 or 60.

Yeah, but it’s not like it used to be. Male chauvinist pig was a common term on TV in the '70s when I was a kid. No one uses it anymore. Radical feminists have been pushed to the margins.

 

[SuperLuigi]

I never said college is a definite guarantee of intelligence. I also know plenty of people that are smart and never went to college. What I was saying in my post is that there are many Catholic men that are attracted to the women who share the college-educated background they also have, unlike the author of the article we are all discussing who thinks college ruins women.

Consider the prior post an added point to the discussion then. :yup:

 

[edwest2]

I fixed it for you.

People don’t think this way anymore. Not even the feminists do.

I strongly disagree. Too many young people don’t know what dating, courtship and engagement means, much less marriage. It’s only after the ceremony that they realize who they ended up with. Cart before the horse.

Peace,
Ed

 

[VeritasLuxMea]

I strongly disagree. Too many young people don’t know what dating, courtship and engagement means, much less marriage. It’s only after the ceremony that they realize who they ended up with. Cart before the horse.

Peace,
Ed

There are a lot of great things that the Church might (and often does) teach young men and women about these subjects.

I don’t think that “wives must never attend college,” is one of them. Because, well for one thing, the Church actually doesn’t teach that.

The rejection of that statement:

1. Is not a rejection of the Church.
2. Is not an indicator that the bearer holds to radical feminist ideas. Now it may be a sign that the person making the statement holds to non-radical feminist ideas such as, “wives are genuine, honest-to-goodness human beings also!” and “wives may have worthy talents that extend beyond homemaking!” but that does not sound particularly radical.

The author frames the article to indicate that the rejection of that statement is both 1 and 2, which is reckless and just plain incorrect.

 

[Joie_de_Vivre]

There was a time when most women were stay at home moms. It was enough that the father worked and they could pay the bills. But the radical feminists sought to frighten women. Their goal was to convince them to distrust all men. Don’t be a housewife - a mother. Get a career. Get power. Because, one day, that man will divorce you and kick you to the curb and leave you with the kids. Or, that the odds are that he will treat you badly. These so-called feminists did not want to help solve the problems that existed between some men and some women - they wanted a complete separation. Soon, colleges began offering courses in “women’s studies” as if men and women did not have a species relationship. Feminist icon, Gloria Steinem, said, “A woman needs a man like a fish needs a bicycle.” Men were called “male chauvenist pigs.”

Today, we have confusion about marriage and many people don’t know what having a real relationship or getting married means. We’re all imperfect, but we need to take that chance and learn how to relate to each other and find that person who matches you.

Stop listening to the radical feminists who have sown fear and discord.

amazon.com/Extreme-Makeover-Transformed-Conformed-Culture/dp/1586175610

Learn. Plan. Trust in God.

Peace,
Ed

Men are nice to have, but unnecessary for the temporal happiness of women and for spiritual happiness needed only as priests.

 

[RPRPsych]

There are a lot of great things that the Church might (and often does) teach young men and women about these subjects.

I don’t think that “wives must never attend college,” is one of them. Because, well for one thing, the Church actually doesn’t teach that.

Agreed wholeheartedly.

The rejection of that statement:

1. Is not a rejection of the Church.
2. Is not an indicator that the bearer holds to radical feminist ideas. Now it may be a sign that the person making the statement holds to non-radical feminist ideas such as, “wives are genuine, honest-to-goodness human beings also!” and “wives may have worthy talents that extend beyond homemaking!” but that does not sound particularly radical.

Unfortunately, too many people, here and elsewhere, conflate “women’s higher education” with “radical feminism”. This argument is as stupid as “I know a woman who got her Ph.D and became a sedevacantist, therefore, college for women leads to sedevacantism.”

The author frames the article to indicate that the rejection of that statement is both 1 and 2, which is reckless and just plain incorrect.

I have a stronger adjective than “reckless” in mind, but - la charite, toujours la charite.

The author has what are politely called “mommy issues”. (There’s a fancier technical term, but it’s a dead donkey at this point, and I’ll refrain from using it.)

I would also take issue with his “damning with faint praise”, “let’s ignore Evangelii Gaudium” “support” of the Holy Father.

People, let’s not feed trolls. The best way to handle such a person - whether he claims to be Catholic, Muslim, Evangelical or Atheist - is to ignore them. Your mothers must have taught you that.

 

[RPRPsych]

Yeah, I am pretty offended by this website too. It is things like this that make me never want to marry a Catholic man …and it seriously makes me doubt the faith. I am almost done with this religion I think.

Hey, not all Catholic men are that bad!

Also - please don’t confuse the swaggering Internet tough guy-ism of some blogger with the authentic teachings of the Church. And please don’t reject the Church because of Scandinavian mountain creatures like this individual.

 

[57thDimension]

The gentleman behind the “6 Reasons to NOT Send Your Daughter to College” article that went viral not to long ago have done a follow up of sorts called “Catholics Trapped by Feminism.”

The article was already posted a while back: forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=823388

(Please observe what happened to the person who posted the article.)

I do see the mentions of the lost wages, though I think that’s a reflection of the consumerist culture American Catholics find themselves in (how do you “keep up with the Joneses” without exploiting the full labor force of a household?)

I can’t help but notice the arguments being made reflect poorly on what is being argued for.

One can possibly argue that if the feminist movement never occurred the price of living wouldn’t have shot up so much.

One can certainly argue that (and with few opposing arguments).

Part of it is that companies don’t actually want to pay employees a livable wage.

Would you expand on that?

It’s not just that the guy is running around telling Catholics how it needs to be

And there’s nothing wrong with that.

but it’s the lack of any real response from Catholics.

Why would they?

I mean, there could be a good Catholic couple that gets a hold of this type of material and takes it as its word, and that could trap them into a lifetime of abuse or mistreatment.

Name the fallacy you use here.

For a married woman to have any kind of vision, any kind of dream or goal in her life—that is the “wrong” way, that is abhorrent to God apparently.

The strawman fallacy makes another appearance in your comments.

I’ve seen some people on here ask why the Church is considered anti-woman. This is why. It’s these types of articles that are the problem. There are too many people like this and we aren’t doing enough to combat their misrepresentations.

They likely also consider the Church’s opposition to abortion, birth control, and premarital sex to be anti-women. What happens when you borrow ideological talking points from anti-Catholic ideologies? …

Also, you seem to forget (or overlook) the fact that feminism is, definitionally, opposed to Catholicism, no matter how you want to spin it. Which is covering for the other in this situation?

By the way ,the article has 181,000 likes on facebook. That means more than 181,000 people that are getting the wrong impression of Catholicism.

Or rather, the one you disapprove of.

Also, Catholic men do not think this way. Some Traditionalist (with a capital T, who do not recognize the validity of Vatican II and/or the Pope) might think this way, but the majority of Catholic men do not.

First: Catholic men do not think this way

Then: the majority of Catholic men do not.

Pick one.

God Bless and do not leave the Church based on what people say who are not Priests or Bishops.

There are plenty of priests and bishops who support the views of the article linked in the OP (also, see for ex. a recent book published on the topic: costanzamiriano.com/about/english-version/, mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/csate-y-s-sumisa-submissive-2926469, and thelocal.es/20131111/spanish-bishop-backs-submissive-wife-book).

One of these “traditionalist” women marries at 20. Her husband does provide well for her, making sure he has plenty of life insurance and such. They have 3 children by the time she’s 25. He dies in an accident that year. She’s now 25 with 3 children, no marketable skills but she’s OK because he had life insurance? Really?

Name the fallacy (hint: it’s inductive).

Typical progressive response: don’t agree with it, SILENCE it.

Some people are so blind to it, they don’t even notice.

That site does not represent true Catholic beliefs.

Name the fallacy you use here.

Plenty of Catholic men love smart women.

This is fairly common mistake that people make. Being smart does not mean one is schooled. You don’t need a degree to be smart, and if you think that you do, I would say that your education is worth far less than what you think it’s worth.

 

[57thDimension]

Don’t forget, barefoot too so they can’t leave the house easily

I can’t say that I’m opposed to the use of non-arguments such as the above, primarily because it signifies a lack of an actual argument.

The author is sickening and sad. He thinks he is empowering himself by finding reasons to control women. He must be terrified of strong women.

Again. (You use ad hominems why?)

It is not the Church but individual men and, sadly, some women who say this.

Why is it sad that women say it?

there are many Catholic men that are attracted to the women who share the college-educated background they also have

Education level is actually a low priority for men (and, it has been demonstrated that men say they are attracted to it without meaning it - see the first link in my post above).

unlike the author of the article we are all discussing who thinks college ruins women.

What are the criteria for determining “ruin”?

A lot of younger feminists think that the older ideas of gender as a social construct are pretty silly and harmful to real people, and they’ve moved past that.

And you are mistaken. Gender as a social construct is still in vogue (what the feminists you are interacting with are likely confused by is the common misuse of the word “gender” to describe biological sex, a frequent mistake). (Don’t forget that feminism doesn’t issue membership cards.)

 

[Joie_de_Vivre]

Would you expand on that?

In order for a family of four (assume parents, one boy, one girl) to be viable on a single income without handouts from the government in the US, the breadwinner would have to make 2x+ the minimum wage pretty much everywhere and many places more like 4x minimum wage. It’s out of reach of at least half of the population and that’s assuming only public school/homeschooling and the family sets no money aside for the son to go to college. For a family of six the sole breadwinner would probably need to be upper white collar such as an architect, engineer, middle management, etc. unless living in an area with below average cost of living.

Most women work, not because they think they need to in order to be as good as a man, but rather in order to make ends meet.

 

[RPRPsych]

I thought something looked familiar about those last few posts, so I did a bit of research:

Folks, please don’t give 57D any more rope. He’s a Gnostic. This discussion will degenerate into unprofitability.

 

[Angelsflight]

Hey, not all Catholic men are that bad!

Also - please don’t confuse the swaggering Internet tough guy-ism of some blogger with the authentic teachings of the Church. And please don’t reject the Church because of Scandinavian mountain creatures like this individual.

LOL. You are right, I should probably not have said that. I guess I was just tired of the general attitude toward women by many on this forum. And its not even so much about the “teachings of the church” really.

But on this forum I have read about 101 different threads all about:

1. What women wear and what they should or shouldnt wear.
2. The horrors of female altar servers
3. Whether or not women should be educated
4. Whether or not women should have any decision making rights in a marriage
5. Whether or not women should be allowed to speak in church or at Mass

I could go on and on…and it gets a little old after awhile.

Remember when Pope Francis washed a woman’s feet? There must have been 100 threads that day exclaiming the horror of that. I thought it was an awesome gesture on his part.

I am not a radical feminist. I do not think that women have the right to be priests or anything like that. But some of these threads regarding women are sometimes insulting.

But I am glad there are many good people like you out there. I can usually count on a good post from you to make me feel better, thank you.

 

[Burt_Macklin]

This stuff bothers me. It really does. It’s not just that the guy is running around telling Catholics how it needs to be, but it’s the lack of any real response from Catholics.

I don’t think that you should expect people to put more thought into an essay than the author did. The author obviously didn’t even bother to proofread what he wrote before he hit submit, so I don’t think you should expect anybody to have to respond. I don’t suppose there is any way that anyone could honestly interpret the author as acting in any kind of official teaching capacity.

 

[JimG]

Men are nice to have, but unnecessary for the temporal happiness of women and for spiritual happiness needed only as priests.

One could always get a pet, but it’s not quite the same.

Men and women are made for each other.