(Edited Title) Feminist Christians & logic…

[AngryAtheist8]

…sadly, as the new speak in entertainment, people are being conditioned to not only seek “drama” but to create it and demand it… long gone are the days of reason… when male and female were counterparts… we are in a world the seeks to pit man against woman (conversely: parents against children and siblings against each other) in order to create that “drama.”

…what is really worse is that Christians have been buying into this ideology and we don’t even recognize the error as we assimilate all things “modern” or “politically correct” when we exchange our Yahweh centered life (theocentrism) for the mundane. :doh2:

Maran atha!

Angel

Ah yes, the Good Old Days.

For some context, here is a quote from an article on the Saint Thomas Aquinas’s Philosophy of Women (at CatholicCulture):

And while it is undeniable that Christianity contributed greatly to the position of woman in both the theoretical and the practical orders, and that it is his Christian faith that marks Thomas off from Aristotle, Aquinas is nonetheless well-supplied with Christian teachings and arguments that woman is inferior and subject to man, notably those of St. Paul.

Link to source:
catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?recnum=2793

 

[AngryAtheist8]

…and submit to their rule… if it furthers their agenda (ie: a trans/homosexual teaching women how to be more seductive and beautiful rather than an actual woman [pageant and modeling industries])! :banghead::banghead::banghead:

Maran atha!

Angel

LOL

You think Feminists promote Beauty Pageants and the modeling industry?

Oh I hope you’re trolling.

Serious or not, your commentary made me laugh though.

 

[AngryAtheist8]

God is always referred to in a masculine manner, never in a feminine manner. Through the Old Testament, the New Testament, and in Holy Tradition God was referenced as He or Him, but never as She. It is just wrong and disrespectful to refer to God or the Holy Spirit in a feminine manner.

Ran

That makes sense.
Catholicism is by nature a very very traditional religion and traditionally masculinity was seen as better.

 

[AngryAtheist8]

Official religion of Mexico?

History…read…you really really need to…

Ran

I assume you’re talking about the Marxist Mexican persecutions in the early 20th century?

 

[jcrichton]

The main problem with that argument is:
Women’s legal and social status has dramatically improved (in the West or areas heavily influenced by the West) only within the last century or so, specifically when Western societies were becoming much more secular (i.e. less Christian or at least Christian dominated).

…but the rights of women did not arise from nations turning into godless entities… rather from accepting that females are equal (equal value) as males… conversely, where the Church has not been able to influence cultures the female kin are still suffering horrendously!

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[jcrichton]

Men have always insulted each other by calling one another girly or otherwise implying that a man is like a woman.

Do you truly believe that this is something that modern media is responsible for?

How you account for female action heroes, something that was all but unimaginable in a more Christian/traditional society?

…again you keep equating Christianity with the cause for women suffrage… you are dead wrong… just because the present society salutes woman in “hero” type dipiction means very little when those that are celebrated can only be so if they hold a male persona… why can’t a woman be 'the woman" as females demonstrate that they are as capable as males? Shouldn’t females be proud to know that a woman does not have to have a pair of “x” in order to be found intelligent, resourceful, and able to hold her own?

…why must a woman ride another woman (or a weak character/physical guy) by telling her that she’s a “p?”

…and don’t think that it stops with hollowood… its influence seeps right onto the actual world around us!

Further, read the Bible… not only was Israel’s fate assisted by females… but during a very decive juncture it was a prostitute that saved Israel. Christians have had more females heroines than hollowood has ever dreamt!

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[jcrichton]

Strong/assertive women have traditionally been considered at least somewhat manly.
This is because Strength was considered Masculine and Weakness Feminine.

Frankly you should be happy about this:shrug:

This kind of language is a sign that the traditional worldview you so revere still has something of a hold on the modern mind.

…I think you still don’t get it… calling an actress “actor” does not demonstrate respect… it only shows that a woman is not good enough on her own to be respected and revered!

You want to complement Martha Stewart? Hold the men that robbed the country blind accountable for their deeds… don’t just tell me that Martha has a pair of “bs” because she has survived everything that came her way and still has not succumbed!

…talk about weak… I’ve known some women that have spent many hours in the excruciatingly devastating state of birthing… and they’ve done it several times over… (guys, yeah even me, get dropped by the flu and think that they are going to die) …still, not one of those ladies ceased being a woman nor did they walk around thinking they owned male genitalia… they are awesome on their own merits!

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[AngryAtheist8]

…but the rights of women did not arise from nations turning into godless entities… rather from accepting that females are equal (equal value) as males… conversely, where the Church has not been able to influence cultures the female kin are still suffering horrendously!

Maran atha!

Angel

It is interesting to wonder to what extent Catholicism influenced progressive movements like the battle to end slavery, the Suffrage movement, Temperance, etc.
There must have been some influence, since all those movements sprang from areas where the Church was at some point dominant.

 

[AngryAtheist8]

…again you keep equating Christianity with the cause for women suffrage… you are dead wrong…** just because the present society salutes woman in “hero” type dipiction means very little when those that are celebrated can only be so if they hold a male persona**… why can’t a woman be 'the woman" as females demonstrate that they are as capable as males? Shouldn’t females be proud to know that a woman does not have to have a pair of “x” in order to be found intelligent, resourceful, and able to hold her own?

…why must a woman ride another woman (or a weak character/physical guy) by telling her that she’s a “p?”

…and don’t think that it stops with hollowood… its influence seeps right onto the actual world around us!

Further, read the Bible… not only was Israel’s fate assisted by females… but during a very decive juncture it was a prostitute that saved Israel. Christians have had more females heroines than hollowood has ever dreamt!

Maran atha!

Angel

Are you actually saying that if a woman is heroic she is acting unfeminine (i.e. like a man)?

And you accuse Hollywood of misogyny

 

[jcrichton]

I admit that Christianity in general and Catholicism in particular treats women relatively good compared to many other religions (Islam is the first that comes to mind).

But that is not the same as saying that its attitude towards women has historically been good.

For a bit of context, here’s a section from the 1912 edition of the Catholic Encyclopedia (specifically the part covering Women):

The female sex is in some respects inferior to the male sex, both as regards body and soul.

Link to source:
newadvent.org/cathen/15687b.html

P.S. According the encyclopedia entry, the one area where women are superior to men is in quiet suffering (so apparently their more high quality victims and martyrs)

…heard of selective reading or selective reasoning?

…here’s a little take on that same document you’ve cited:

To deduce from this the inferiority of woman or her degradation to a “second-rate human being” contradicts logic just as much as would the attempt to regard the citizen as an inferior being because he is subordinate to the officials of the state.

…and just above your take:

Aristotle’s designation of woman as an incomplete or mutilated man (“De animal. gennerat.”, II, 3d ed. Berol., 773a) must, therefore, be rejected. The untenable medieval definition, “Femina est mas occasionatus”, also arose under Aristotelian influence. The same view is to be found in the “last Scholastic”, Dionysius Ryckel (“Opera minora”, ed. Tournay, 1907, II, 161a).

…and the fuller context of your extract:

The female sex is in some respects inferior to the male sex, both as regards body and soul. On the other hand, woman has qualities which man lacks. With truth does the writer on education, Lorenz Kellner, say: “I call the female sex neither the beautiful nor the weak sex (in the absolute sense). The one designation is the invention equally of sensuality and of flattery; the other owes its currency to masculine arrogance. In its way the female sex is as strong as the male, namely in endurance and patience, in quiet long-suffering, in short, in all that concerns its real sphere, viz., the inner life” (Lose Blätter", Collected by von Görgen; Freiburg, 1895, 50). On account of the moral equality of the sexes the moral law for man and woman must also be the same. To assume a lax morality for the man and a rigid one for the woman is an oppressive injustice even from the point of view of common sense. Woman’s work is also in itself of equal value with that of a man, as the work performed by both is ennobled by the same human dignity.

…gives us quite a different take, doesn’t it?

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[AngryAtheist8]

Originally Posted by AngryAtheist8
Strong/assertive women have traditionally been considered at least somewhat manly.
This is because Strength was considered Masculine and Weakness Feminine.

Frankly you should be happy about this

This kind of language is a sign that the traditional worldview you so revere still has something of a hold on the modern mind.

…I think you still don’t get it… calling an actress “actor” does not demonstrate respect… it only shows that a woman is not good enough on her own to be respected and revered!

You want to complement Martha Stewart? Hold the men that robbed the country blind accountable for their deeds… don’t just tell me that Martha has a pair of “bs” because she has survived everything that came her way and still has not succumbed!

…talk about weak… I’ve known some women that have spent many hours in the excruciatingly devastating state of birthing… and they’ve done it several times over… (guys, yeah even me, get dropped by the flu and think that they are going to die) …still, not one of those ladies ceased being a woman nor did they walk around thinking they owned male genitalia… they are awesome on their own merits!

Maran atha!

Angel

How does that answer my post at all?

The Catholic Church (and conservative Catholics in general) is usually the first one to say that there is nothing wrong with referring to groups of people (regardless of whether or not such groups include women) in masculine terms (like calling humans in general Man or Mankind).

Frankly if you object to such language because it seems to exclude or discriminate against women you are taking the Feminist position, not the Catholic one

 

[AngryAtheist8]

…heard of selective reading or selective reasoning?

…here’s a little take on that same document you’ve cited:

…and just above your take:

…and the fuller context of your extract:

…gives us quite a different take, doesn’t it?

Maran atha!

Angel

Its not my fault that the document contradicts itself

 

[jcrichton]

Mexico has had Catholicism as the official religion for the majority of its history.
If it has an anti-female bias it would be more natural to assume that Catholicism was somewhat responsible.

Check again… free masons attempted to eradicate the Catholic Church in the early 20th century… the US’ kkk offered them 10 million dollars to assist them in that glorious venture… the Church, though it educates and assist the people does not control the national government of any nation in the world… any practice that hinders/harms a sector/s of nationals is not accepted by the Church but she has to allow for the change to occur as the people become enlightened… millions of Catholics have been killed throughout the world and the Church has never supplied military aid… change (improved society) has always been slow because the Church cannot dictate nor take up arms to force her call to social justice.

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[jcrichton]

Actually, in the Middle East and many other areas women have been treated better by secular regimes than any other. And in places (like Egypt today or Iran in the 1970s) where secularist regimes have fallen and been replaced by overtly religious ones the rights and status of women has been substantially reduced.

…I must say that I’m not a scholar nor a learned person… so I will not argue how well non-Christian regimes have treated women… my general understanding is based on the people that I have met personally and the culture depicted by television.

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[jcrichton]

Ah yes, the Good Old Days.

For some context, here is a quote from an article on the Saint Thomas Aquinas’s Philosophy of Women (at CatholicCulture):

And while it is undeniable that Christianity contributed greatly to the position of woman in both the theoretical and the practical orders, and that it is his Christian faith that marks Thomas off from Aristotle, Aquinas is nonetheless well-supplied with Christian teachings and arguments that woman is inferior and subject to man, notably those of St. Paul.

Link to source:
catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?recnum=2793

I think you keep equating man the same as woman the same as man as a rule for equality.

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[jcrichton]

It is interesting to wonder to what extent Catholicism influenced progressive movements like the battle to end slavery, the Suffrage movement, Temperance, etc.
There must have been some influence, since all those movements sprang from areas where the Church was at some point dominant.

…again, you seem to equate Church to governnance… Fidel Castro took over Cuba… the nation was mostly Catholic… he proved to the people that God did not exist… Cuba is a major asset to the world’s economy, tech, information hub, and aerospace industry… get my drift?

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[jcrichton]

Are you actually saying that if a woman is heroic she is acting unfeminine (i.e. like a man)?

And you accuse Hollywood of misogyny

Not at all. I am stating the fact that females have always been part of the Christian life… even as far back into the Old Testament… contrary to your suggestion that females have been hindered by Christianity, I am stating the fact that females have been hindered by society not God or the Church… even when we see a move towards accepting females in more prominent roles the average female is still not respected and revered by society unless she is conforming to the characteristics demanded of them… I’m not political and I have trouble remembering names… but as clear example of this was the recent episode of the democratic rep (female) that blasted (got national coverage) the wife of a republican candidate; (my translation): she has no say since she never worked a day in her life… all she’s done is have one kid after another… this examplifies the social status of females: conform to the norm or be deemed as waste!

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[jcrichton]

Originally Posted by AngryAtheist8
Strong/assertive women have traditionally been considered at least somewhat manly.
This is because Strength was considered Masculine and Weakness Feminine.

Frankly you should be happy about this

This kind of language is a sign that the traditional worldview you so revere still has something of a hold on the modern mind.

How does that answer my post at all?

The Catholic Church (and conservative Catholics in general) is usually the first one to say that there is nothing wrong with referring to groups of people (regardless of whether or not such groups include women) in masculine terms (like calling humans in general Man or Mankind).

Frankly if you object to such language because it seems to exclude or discriminate against women you are taking the Feminist position, not the Catholic one

…can you be missing the meaning of “collective noun?”

“human kind” or “mankind” or “humanity” does not set either of the human species sex appart or as inferior…

…a woman being only “smart” or “capable” or “strong” if she adopts a male persona does not dignify the woman but actually deminishes her because the root importance is not a person but a female person that has evolved to male status.

Mother Angelica was a sickly woman who, ignorant of everything pertaining to the industry and lacking financial means and support, trusted in Jesus and forged the EWTN network… largest world-wide network… she never stopped being female and she demonstrated that she was very strong, capable, and as assertive as any person can be… she did not have to become a male persona in order to achieve her goals (ditto Mother Theresa of Calcuta)!

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[jcrichton]

Its not my fault that the document contradicts itself

…it is tracing an account… the passage of time and the social understanding of the female value/worth… as with anything else, time and practice causes the more effective improvement on things… just the other day females were not allow to vote in the US… it took nearly 200 years of “time and practice;” but social change is easier on the books than on practice… even the most self-proclaimed forward thinking org. keeps giving males preferred billings–yeah even after all participants are labelled “actors.”

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[AngryAtheist8]

Check again… free masons attempted to eradicate the Catholic Church in the early 20th century… the US’ kkk offered them 10 million dollars to assist them in that glorious venture… the Church, though it educates and assist the people does not control the national government of any nation in the world… any practice that hinders/harms a sector/s of nationals is not accepted by the Church but she has to allow for the change to occur as the people become enlightened… millions of Catholics have been killed throughout the world and the Church has never supplied military aid… change (improved society) has always been slow because the Church cannot dictate nor take up arms to force her call to social justice.

Maran atha!

Angel

Yet their more than willing to support thugs like General Franco when such people fight in the Church’s name.