Catholics Trapped by Feminism

[RPRPsych]

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.

I understand. Actually, this place is quite harmless and a paragon of charity compared to, say, Tradition in Action. It takes me (on an average) 2 scoops of ice-cream to recover from even a brief visit there.

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.

Points 2 and 5 probably keep cropping up because of the issue of liturgical abuse, which is dear to the hearts of many, so I shall not comment on it. However, 1, 3 and 4 are the proverbial dead donkeys or dead horses, and we really should stop beating them. (We recently had a thread complaining about modesty threads, if my memory serves me well.)

The trouble is that we live in a secularized world which can be very menacing at times - anti-Catholicism, gay marriage, abortion, quickie divorce, disintegration of social networks, economic hardship, militant Islam and atheism, materialism and the like. Faced with such a threat, some people retreat into a mythical “Golden Age” in which all was well and nothing hurt; others simply pick the easiest targets. After all, it’s easy to whack a young woman who wants a college education; less easy to whack a member of the Taliban or the local Congressman.

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 agree with you.

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.

I’m a guy, and I agree with this.

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.

Unfortunately, on the Internet, it’s often the most strident who have the most time to post stuff like this. The rest of us tend to have jobs, families and other commitments to honour. Don’t let them get you down!

 

[Burt_Macklin]

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

Men and women are made for each other.

Yes, they were. I’m beginning to think it was probably as some sort of punishment though.

 

[severus68]

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.

Thanks. I had decided not to.

 

[JimG]

Yes, they were. I’m beginning to think it was probably as some sort of punishment though.

Well sure. That’s why he made them different. Maybe in the Garden of Eden, Eve’s punishment was that she had to live with a man! And Adam’s punishment was that he had to live with a woman!

 

[severus68]

I understand. Actually, this place is quite harmless and a paragon of charity compared to, say, Tradition in Action. It takes me (on an average) 2 scoops of ice-cream to recover from even a brief visit there.

Points 2 and 5 probably keep cropping up because of the issue of liturgical abuse, which is dear to the hearts of many, so I shall not comment on it. However, 1, 3 and 4 are the proverbial dead donkeys or dead horses, and we really should stop beating them. (We recently had a thread complaining about modesty threads, if my memory serves me well.)

The trouble is that we live in a secularized world which can be very menacing at times - anti-Catholicism, gay marriage, abortion, quickie divorce, disintegration of social networks, economic hardship, militant Islam and atheism, materialism and the like. Faced with such a threat, some people retreat into a mythical “Golden Age” in which all was well and nothing hurt; others simply pick the easiest targets. After all, it’s easy to whack a young woman who wants a college education; less easy to whack a member of the Taliban or the local Congressman.

I agree with you.

I’m a guy, and I agree with this.

Unfortunately, on the Internet, it’s often the most strident who have the most time to post stuff like this. The rest of us tend to have jobs, families and other commitments to honour. Don’t let them get you down!

Nice responses.

 

[Angelsflight]

I understand. Actually, this place is quite harmless and a paragon of charity compared to, say, Tradition in Action. It takes me (on an average) 2 scoops of ice-cream to recover from even a brief visit there.

Points 2 and 5 probably keep cropping up because of the issue of liturgical abuse, which is dear to the hearts of many, so I shall not comment on it. However, 1, 3 and 4 are the proverbial dead donkeys or dead horses, and we really should stop beating them. (We recently had a thread complaining about modesty threads, if my memory serves me well.)

The trouble is that we live in a secularized world which can be very menacing at times - anti-Catholicism, gay marriage, abortion, quickie divorce, disintegration of social networks, economic hardship, militant Islam and atheism, materialism and the like. Faced with such a threat, some people retreat into a mythical “Golden Age” in which all was well and nothing hurt; others simply pick the easiest targets. After all, it’s easy to whack a young woman who wants a college education; less easy to whack a member of the Taliban or the local Congressman.

I agree with you.

I’m a guy, and I agree with this.

Unfortunately, on the Internet, it’s often the most strident who have the most time to post stuff like this. The rest of us tend to have jobs, families and other commitments to honour. Don’t let them get you down!

Ice cream therapy! Now why didn’t I think of that? LOL

 

[Angelsflight]

Well sure. That’s why he made them different. Maybe in the Garden of Eden, Eve’s punishment was that she had to live with a man! And Adam’s punishment was that he had to live with a woman!

Sometimes I really think this too…men and women are sometimes TOO different. It is amazing that the two get along at all sometimes.

 

[RPRPsych]

Ice cream therapy! Now why didn’t I think of that? LOL

Works for me every time, except that I have to exercise afterwards…

But let me not derail this thread any further.

 

[RPRPsych]

Nice responses.

Glad you liked them. I used to have fun debating an Evangelical friend on stuff like this. For starters, he wanted his wife to call him “Sir” every time, and wanted a girl from a village (keep in mind the context is Indian, so he was talking about an arranged marriage) because “they’ll be less educated, and hence respect me more.” )

 

[Angelsflight]

Glad you liked them. I used to have fun debating an Evangelical friend on stuff like this. For starters, he wanted his wife to call him “Sir” every time, and wanted a girl from a village (keep in mind the context is Indian, so he was talking about an arranged marriage) because “they’ll be less educated, and hence respect me more.” )

Oh my…lol

 

[marymary1975]

That site does not represent true Catholic beliefs. Plenty of Catholic men love smart women. My husband and I bond over the fact that we are both in the medical field. We are both huge science nerds. He has always said he loves my “big sexy brain”. lol

I would be curious to see how that website views St. Gianna, who is a Saint and was a mother and physician during her lifetime.

This is true. Fix the family does not speak for the catholic church, In fact it has some statements in conflict with the church. Fix the family is the interpretation of one particular person of catholic doctrine. Now I am against radical feminism of course, but this guy has a serious subject confusion and he is confusing evangelical ideas into catholic doctrine.

 

[57thDimension]

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

Thanks for the personal attack and the complete mischaracterization.

–

I must admit, the usage of classic liberal attacks (e.g. silencing, mispresenting, etc) really undermines the points in opposition to the article.

---

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

 

[57thDimension]

Thanks. I had decided not to.

A ‘thank you’ towards RPRPsych is certainly in order, seeing as how they gave you an ‘out’ in not having to respond to criticisms of your lacking points.

I guess one could make a koan of it: If a person doesn’t respond to criticism, are their points still valid?

 

[kozlosap]

This is true. Fix the family does not speak for the catholic church, In fact it has some statements in conflict with the church. Fix the family is the interpretation of one particular person of catholic doctrine. Now I am against radical feminism of course, but this guy has a serious subject confusion and he is confusing evangelical ideas into catholic doctrine.

I had read their first blog concerning sending your daughters to college and thought that was total bunk, but this is almost worse. To deny either a young woman or man from obtaining an education because of the fear that the "“controller” will no longer be worshipped as a king, is unreal in this day and age. It is beyond by reasoning that a woman with one grain of self respect would ever become involved with a man who believes this anti-woman and anti education ****. This is, by no means, Catholic teaching.

Everyone should read both blogs - the entire concept is so corrupt. Does anyone here on CAF know if there are even any non-Catholic religious groups in the First World who spout this damaging rhetoric?

 

[VeritasLuxMea]

Thanks for the personal attack and the complete mischaracterization.

–

I thought it helped. If I didn’t know all of that then I would have spent more time addressing your claims. As it stands, I’m not going to even touch on any of your claims unless you start by explaining why my strawmen are strawmen. I don’t see them as mis-characterizations.

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

The original post features a new article.

kozlosap:

Can anyone here on CAF if there are even any non-Catholic religious groups in the First World who spout this damaging rhetoric?

Some nominally Catholic groups, some fundamentalist Christians, probably certain Jews… I don’t know. There’s not too many of them, really.

 

[thewanderer]

Thanks for the personal attack and the complete mischaracterization.

–

I must admit, the usage of classic liberal attacks (e.g. silencing, mispresenting, etc) really undermines the points in opposition to the article.

---

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

All right, I will bite and write up a piece opposing the article, but first I must ask which article in particular you wish me to address, the one you pointed out in this post? or the related one pointed to in the beginning of this thread?

 

[57thDimension]

I had read their first blog concerning sending your daughters to college and thought that was total bunk, but this is almost worse. To deny either a young woman or man from obtaining an education because of the fear that the "“controller” will no longer be worshipped as a king, is unreal in this day and age. It is beyond by reasoning that a woman with one grain of self respect would ever become involved with a man who believes this anti-woman and anti education ****. This is, by no means, Catholic teaching.

Everyone should read both blogs - the entire concept is so corrupt. Does anyone here on CAF know if there are even any non-Catholic religious groups in the First World who spout this damaging rhetoric?

Where is your argument? (Registering dislike is not an argument.)

I definitely recommend reading through this thread: forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=823388 (It’s a bit long, by the way)

 

[VeritasLuxMea]

It’s (obviously) not Church teaching that women discerning marriage must refrain from engaging in higher education. That’s the beginning and the end of the discussion for many of us.

 

[57thDimension]

I thought it helped.

The personal attack or the mischaracterization? Frankly, neither are warranted.

If I didn’t know all of that then I would have spent more time addressing your claims.

Seeing as how it’s not true (baseless claims are…?), it looks like an out to avoid addressing claims. Even then, they are primarily demonstrating that your claims (fallacy-ridden as they are) are not suitable refutation.

As it stands, I’m not going to even touch on any of your claims unless you start by explaining why my strawmen are strawmen. I don’t see them as mis-characterizations

Since when am I supposed to teach you logic?

The original post features a new article.

I was referring to the “6 reasons” article.

 

[RPRPsych]

Thanks for the personal attack and the complete mischaracterization.

I’m sorry. Perhaps Catharist would have been a better term.