Gender Mainstreaming

[flyingfish]

Makes me wonder if I haven’t been the creepy one with my could-have-beens,

Well, the kind of guys that I wanted to flee from because of their creepiness came across as stalker types. Generally they would start out being normal and fun, but then they’d come across as really desperate, but not just in a lonely guy kind of way, but in a can’t take no for an answer, won’t take the hint that I don’t want to talk kind of way (and in one case it wasn’t even a hint, I outright told a guy not to talk to me and he would still try). Also other creepy guys would very openly objectify women, talk in a very vulgar terms about graphic porn scenes.

 

[Ridgerunner]

But, somebody please help me out, what do you do as a guy, with a crying girl who wants ALL your beads?? :banghead:

This is easy. When I was a kid, I went through my “American Indian” phase. My folks gave me a book for my birthday on Indian crafts and lore. Showed you how to make headdresses and all kinds of things. I was really into it. Made spears, bows and arrows, hatchets and all kinds of things that I simply came up with myself as well.

My older sister not only had beads,she had just about every decorative item in the universe. She was not adverse to trading that kind of thing for Indian artifacts of my manufacture. I don’t recall getting any beads in trade for my Indian stuff, but I really admired this green and red ink she had in bottles. She had some paints too, from a painting set. That stuff can really brighten up almost any Indian item.

So, you find a way to trade. That’s what you do. There’s always going to be something the girl wants. I don’t think I ever gave her my faux “bear claw” necklace, though. Too hard to whittle out those bear claws from wood, which is what you have to do. No way to come up with equivalent value in beads or ink or paints.

Come to think about it, isn’t that all sort of like adult life?

 

[Randi]

I agree society should not dictate our actions, we listen as they say to a ‘higher authority’! as I have understood it - treat all (men and women) as we wish to be treated - recognize that God loves each person equally ---- But - can you explain what you mean by the above red and bold statement? Does the church say that there is a man’s soul and a woman’s soul and that they are somehow different - if they do, I’ve missed it.

Sorry it took me so long to answer your question about my comment, I didn’t look back at this thread until late this morning. Anyway, I looked up the answer in the Catechism again, so that I could first make sure I hadn’t misspoken and second, give you the proper reference. So here is what I have found:
CCC2331 references Genesis 1:27-28 and affirms that ‘Man’ is made in God’s image, male and female God made Man.
CCC2332 “Sexuality affects all aspects of the human person in the unity of his body and soul.” (this section continues a bit to describe the various ways it is expressed, and not just within marriage)
CCC2333 “Everyone, man and woman, should acknowledge and accept his sexual identity (italics are emphasis in CCC, not mine). Physical, moral, and spiritual difference and complementarity (again, emphasis in CCC) are oriented toward the goods of marriage and the flourishing of family life. The harmony of the couple and of society depends in part on the way in which the complementarity, needs, and mutual support between the sexes are lived out.”
CCC2334 discusses equal dignity of the two sexes
CCC2335 “Each of the two sexes is an image of the power and tenderness of God, with equal dignity though in a different way.”

Also, because I am a recent convert, I have been reading numerous apologetics articles on catholiceducation.org in order to learn the authority and reasoning behind denying women the ability to enter the priesthood. At that particular website, they have a wealth of Catholic theologians and writers who very eloquently and clearly demonstrate, for me at least, how our identity as male or female goes all the way down to the soul level, and is not merely physiological differences.
‘Body-persons’ is a frequently used phrase in Catholic theology, and it means that God intended us to be beings with two inextricable parts, our body and our soul, both an essential part of our identity. Physical death separates our body from our soul, but only for a time, until the end of time when body and soul are reunited in the resurrection of the body (according to the Apostles Creed, also discussed at length in the Catechism). So God’s will for us to be body-soul beings, which we rejected through original sin and personal sin, is restored to us through salvation, and His ultimate plan for us to have dominion over the earth (good stewardship), to be fruitful and multiply, and to be in communion with him will come to fruition at the end of time. I have only recently learned all this, so if I am in error, please correct my misunderstanding. This is what I have been able to grasp from the CCC and from RCIA and from reading about Catholic theology and teachings about God’s revealed plan, as passed on through scripture and tradition.
So, I hope I adequately answered your question. It was actually a good thing for me to go back and do the research again, because Catholic theology is still so new to me (I came from a Baptist background). This is one of the ways that the Catholic church teaches something different, yet more beautiful and simple that Protestantism.

 

[ac_claire]

I’m still confused as to what Gender Mainstreaming actually is. Does anyone have a simple definition, and maybe a practical example of what implementation of this idea or whatever it is would look like?

 

[Havard]

Makes me wonder if I haven’t been the creepy one with my could-have-beens,

Just hold off on your Peter Lorre impressions until the fifth or sixth date.

 

[4elise]

Sorry it took me so long to answer your question about my comment, I didn’t look back at this thread until late this morning. Anyway, I looked up the answer in the Catechism again, so that I could first make sure I hadn’t misspoken and second, give you the proper reference. So here is what I have found:
CCC2331 references Genesis 1:27-28 and affirms that ‘Man’ is made in God’s image, male and female God made Man.
CCC2332 “Sexuality affects all aspects of the human person in the unity of his body and soul.” (this section continues a bit to describe the various ways it is expressed, and not just within marriage)
CCC2333 “Everyone, man and woman, should acknowledge and accept his sexual identity (italics are emphasis in CCC, not mine). Physical, moral, and spiritual difference and complementarity (again, emphasis in CCC) are oriented toward the goods of marriage and the flourishing of family life. The harmony of the couple and of society depends in part on the way in which the complementarity, needs, and mutual support between the sexes are lived out.”
CCC2334 discusses equal dignity of the two sexes
CCC2335 “Each of the two sexes is an image of the power and tenderness of God, with equal dignity though in a different way.”

Also, because I am a recent convert, I have been reading numerous apologetics articles on catholiceducation.org in order to learn the authority and reasoning behind denying women the ability to enter the priesthood. At that particular website, they have a wealth of Catholic theologians and writers who very eloquently and clearly demonstrate, for me at least, how our identity as male or female goes all the way down to the soul level, and is not merely physiological differences.
‘Body-persons’ is a frequently used phrase in Catholic theology, and it means that God intended us to be beings with two inextricable parts, our body and our soul, both an essential part of our identity. Physical death separates our body from our soul, but only for a time, until the end of time when body and soul are reunited in the resurrection of the body (according to the Apostles Creed, also discussed at length in the Catechism). So God’s will for us to be body-soul beings, which we rejected through original sin and personal sin, is restored to us through salvation, and His ultimate plan for us to have dominion over the earth (good stewardship), to be fruitful and multiply, and to be in communion with him will come to fruition at the end of time. I have only recently learned all this, so if I am in error, please correct my misunderstanding. This is what I have been able to grasp from the CCC and from RCIA and from reading about Catholic theology and teachings about God’s revealed plan, as passed on through scripture and tradition.
So, I hope I adequately answered your question. It was actually a good thing for me to go back and do the research again, because Catholic theology is still so new to me (I came from a Baptist background). This is one of the ways that the Catholic church teaches something different, yet more beautiful and simple that Protestantism.

Thank you for such a thoughtful and through response! While I can understand what is referenced here as we are beings comprised of body and soul - and that as such they are inseparable (until the time of death till bodily resurrection) - what I had taken from the original post was a concern that this was somehow saying that there should be concern for people (in this life) being given equal opportunities in education, jobs, etc. - but also reading into this an implied desire to breakdown all gender rolls - obviously, only women can bare children… but I think recent efforts for shared responsibility for the raising of children is an improvement in our society. Blessings

 

[chevalier]

Just hold off on your Peter Lorre impressions until the fifth or sixth date.

I’ve never lasted until 5th or 6th date, I think.

 

[Joseph_L_Varga]

Starts with a hug but I’m not sure it doesn’t end with a lecture.

Wow, good advice! Thanks! I think there’s always a little theatrics in those tears, but as a guy you need to learn how to play the game, and being “that brute who makes his sister cry” is a loosing move. However, hugging her and then gently scolding her, that’s genius!

Seriously, though, your example made me wonder if sometimes it isn’t like women test you and if they can beat you, then you aren’t their leader. I hope it’s not true because while I can play a willpower contest, I just don’t want to be rated weak by the same people whose wishes I’m granting.

I think I have a possible solution to this dilemma. In a case like this, you could simply let the woman dump you, and let her think that she was in control and she was the one who decided to dump you! While in reality, her immature behavior indicates that she is not worth you wasting your time on her (well, maybe she’ll grow up some time in the future, but for NOW, you are going to spare yourself lots of frustration by staying away from her), and in fact when she decided to rate you as “weak” and to dump you, she spared you the dirty job and possible drama of YOU DUMPING HER! Remember, “Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned”, and the woman dumping you before you are forced to dump her might just have saved you a lot of drama and headache! It is certainly not too high a price, and a good effective exit strategy, in my opinion, to let her believe that she was in control of the situation, and that she was the one who dumped you!

I was recently in a situation, at the workplace, no less, where I had to play my cards wisely in order to avoid the “scorned woman” effect. I mean, you really don’t want to deal with a dragon who’s mad at you and breathes fire trying to incinerate you, while at the same time your work duties call for a continued cooperation on a professional level, with this person! Thus, I can really appreciate a smooth exit that serves my goal of avoiding a future war, and I’m not particularly sensitive to being low-rated by the other party!

Remember the joke with the scientist who thought that he trained the laboratory mouse to climb a ladder, in return for being rewarded with a piece of cheese? However, this was absolutely not true in reality, because the mouse managed to train the scientist to feed him any time he felt like having some cheese! He was a smart mouse, he just climbed a ladder when he wanted cheese, and bingo, the scientist would dutifully feed him! LOL

Also, just try to explain to a cat, what is he/she supposed to do! I have seen cats who successfully trained their owners how to feed them, cuddle them, etc, but I have yet to meet an owner who managed to train and control his/her cats!

 

[sharmin]

“Gender mainstreaming is the public policy concept of assessing the different implications for women and men of any planned policy action, including legislation and programs in all areas and levels.” (from Wikipedia)

This sounds quite innocent, but it is part of the feminist scheme to mandate elimination of all distinctions between men and women. This is done in the name of gender equality. The underlying values, though, are the dismantling of traditional roles for men and women, and the destruction of traditional family life.

Gender mainstreaming is favored by the United Nations, feminist organizations, and women’s rights groups. They wish to ban the “Patriarchal family model” and to remove gender roles from kindergardens and elementary schools.

The term, “Gender mainstreaming,” was new to me. Why haven’t we heard more about this scheme?

I’m curious as to why you view this as bad? What does it really matter if a man stay home and his wife works?

 

[Randi]

I’m curious as to why you view this as bad? What does it really matter if a man stay home and his wife works?

Well, in my own life, that wouldn’t really work, because I am the one with the womb and the mammaries! My husband doesn’t exactly have the proper equipment to stay home and grow/nourish babies!
However, if other parents make the decision to seriously limit the number of children and choose to pump breast milk or rely on infant formulas, they might be able to make such a scenario work.
But formula gets expensive fast, and child care for more than two children in the case of two-wage-earner households is usually cost-prohibitive. For families that do not limit the number of their children to one or two, they usually find that it makes more financial sense for the mother to stay home.
And it is wonderful for the babies to get to drink their mommy’s milk nice and warm from her soft breast instead of from a bottle, so whenever it is possible to give that to children, it is good for parents to make that happen.

 

[Randi]

But my guess is that “gender mainstreaming” is meant more to address those places in the world where there are different streams in girls’ and boys’ education. Like say some 100 years ago in the Western world women went to “finishing schools” to be taught how to be stay at home wives, rather than to real universities.

I went to a world class university, then took an extremely low-paying job teaching at the local Episcopal parish school, which gave me fulfilling employment so that I could actually live in the same town as my husband, and then once I had my first child, guess what? I became a stay-at-home mom. I do not live to work. My husband and I work to live. He works enough to provide financially, and I get to stay home and be in baby-land all day. Think that’s boring and unfulfilling and not fit for university-educated women, do you? Think again.

 

[sharmin]

*There’s a lot of professions now, where women make more money than or as much as men, doing the same job…I think a lot has changed on that front…at least where I work. *

Really? I am surprised, because on the average, women make about $0.70 on the dollar of what men make.

 

[Havard]

I’ve never lasted until 5th or 6th date, I think.

I can’t believe that! The women in your area are losing out.

 

[chevalier]

Wow, good advice! Thanks! I think there’s always a little theatrics in those tears, but as a guy you need to learn how to play the game, and being “that brute who makes his sister cry” is a loosing move. However, hugging her and then gently scolding her, that’s genius!

Well, you credit me with more than I deserve because the well-rounded version is yours! I was operating on the premise than when a woman has a problem with you, you generally need to hug her and any logic is pointless, as she needs reassurance and emotional assistance and arguing = attack. If you give her a hug and show her you love her (but won’t give in to her crazy), she’s going to love you as the big guy. And it will generally always (well, almost always), unload her negative emotions. And a lecture… well, I’m a wet blanket, how could I skip an opportunity!

I think I have a possible solution to this dilemma. In a case like this, you could simply let the woman dump you, and let her think that she was in control and she was the one who decided to dump you! While in reality, her immature behavior indicates that she is not worth you wasting your time on her (well, maybe she’ll grow up some time in the future, but for NOW, you are going to spare yourself lots of frustration by staying away from her), and in fact when she decided to rate you as “weak” and to dump you, she spared you the dirty job and possible drama of YOU DUMPING HER! Remember, “Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned”, and the woman dumping you before you are forced to dump her might just have saved you a lot of drama and headache! It is certainly not too high a price, and a good effective exit strategy, in my opinion, to let her believe that she was in control of the situation, and that she was the one who dumped you!

Yeah, if she is *that *mistaken, she needs to grow up some. The problem is I generally always bump into women who are generally well rounded-out with some exceptional areas, but also with some emotional liabilities. So there is always *something *and that *something *doesn’t preclude a high general value as a person, meaning it’s not a clear benefit getting dumped by one. Another idea that comes to my mind is that sometimes traditional women, who tend to be generally well adjusted, have those quirky tests like that. On the other hand, the whole testing is so icequeenish that I generally don’t feel bad about failing because I need a warm woman. (Classy but warm, here’s the catch.)

Thus, I can really appreciate a smooth exit that serves my goal of avoiding a future war, and I’m not particularly sensitive to being low-rated by the other party!

Well, I am, when I care for the other party.

Remember the joke with the scientist who thought that he trained the laboratory mouse to climb a ladder, in return for being rewarded with a piece of cheese? However, this was absolutely not true in reality, because the mouse managed to train the scientist to feed him any time he felt like having some cheese! He was a smart mouse, he just climbed a ladder when he wanted cheese, and bingo, the scientist would dutifully feed him! LOL

Yeah, you need to let the woman think that she’s letting you think that you control the situation. (Just kidding, ladies. )

Also, just try to explain to a cat, what is he/she supposed to do! I have seen cats who successfully trained their owners how to feed them, cuddle them, etc, but I have yet to meet an owner who managed to train and control his/her cats!

Sounds like you know Richard.

 

[Joseph_L_Varga]

This is easy. When I was a kid, I went through my “American Indian” phase. My folks gave me a book for my birthday on Indian crafts and lore. Showed you how to make headdresses and all kinds of things. I was really into it. Made spears, bows and arrows, hatchets and all kinds of things that I simply came up with myself as well.

My older sister not only had beads,she had just about every decorative item in the universe. She was not adverse to trading that kind of thing for Indian artifacts of my manufacture. I don’t recall getting any beads in trade for my Indian stuff, but I really admired this green and red ink she had in bottles. She had some paints too, from a painting set. That stuff can really brighten up almost any Indian item.

So, you find a way to trade. That’s what you do. There’s always going to be something the girl wants. I don’t think I ever gave her my faux “bear claw” necklace, though. Too hard to whittle out those bear claws from wood, which is what you have to do. No way to come up with equivalent value in beads or ink or paints.

Come to think about it, isn’t that all sort of like adult life?

What a nice story, thank you for sharing it!

And your advice about finding a way to trade is well taken, as well. I will keep this in mind, just in case that my BIL could use some help from my part. I feel for the poor guy, after all he decided to marry my sister of his own will, nobody was forcing him to do it! I even tried to gently warn him, whether he was sure he really wanted to do this, before the wedding! But the poor guy wanted it, and did it, more than 10 years ago! So, now he is stuck with my sister, for better or worse! He really handled the consequences of his colossal mistake marvelously, so far, but I want to stand by as a good BIL, with sensible advice and tactics on how to handle my unruly sister, just in case that he would need it!

 

[chevalier]

I can’t believe that! The women in your area are losing out.

Thanks! I always get friended (except when I have to flee, e.g. unable to marry but I always end up thanking God later. I sometimes wonder what His reasons are, if any–maybe it’s just something in me, maybe He’s protecting me from myself and/or a girl from me and my not being ready yet. Being grateful for that and for what’s yet to come is the safe course, I guess.

 

[flyingfish]

I went to a world class university, then took an extremely low-paying job teaching at the local Episcopal parish school, which gave me fulfilling employment so that I could actually live in the same town as my husband, and then once I had my first child, guess what? I became a stay-at-home mom. I do not live to work. My husband and I work to live. He works enough to provide financially, and I get to stay home and be in baby-land all day. Think that’s boring and unfulfilling and not fit for university-educated women, do you? Think again.

You’re not going to like what I say, but no I think it’s wrong for highly educated women to become stay at home mothers. When you went to that world class university, you took a spot that could have gone to someone who would have used their education throughout their life.

Not to mention that this is the kind of thing that causes women to be discriminated against, with employers either not wanting to hire women or not taking women seriously because they expect them to quit to be stay at home moms.

 

[Mary_Gail_36]

You’re not going to like what I say, but no I think it’s wrong for highly educated women to become stay at home mothers. When you went to that world class university, you took a spot that could have gone to someone who would have used their education throughout their life.

Not to mention that this is the kind of thing that causes women to be discriminated against, with employers either not wanting to hire women or not taking women seriously because they expect them to quit to be stay at home moms.

Sigh…nothing better than women criticizing other women’ s life choices. My DH has a poli sci degree, his work has nothing to do with poli sci. They didn’t ask him,":are you going to be working in this field perpetually…if not, we’ll just have to give your spot to someone else."

Or I guess stay at home moms should be just functionally literate, not like taking care of children is important or anything.

 

[flyingfish]

Sigh…nothing better than women criticizing other women’ s life choices. My DH has a poli sci degree, his work has nothing to do with poli sci. They didn’t ask him,":are you going to be working in this field perpetually…if not, we’ll just have to give your spot to someone else."

Or I guess stay at home moms should be just functionally literate, not like taking care of children is important or anything.

I’m not saying women who intend to be stay at home moms shouldn’t learn beyond basics, but the poster I responded to said she went to a top school. Do I think someone who intends to be a stay at home mom deserves a spot in a very selective school, with opportunities for people who want to develop their careers? No, I don’t. And anyone who would openly say on an application to say Harvard that they intend to be a stay at home mom would very likely never be accepted. There is a certain amount of deception that would have to go on an application, with people make it seem as though they are a good candidate for a spot and that they have great professional dreams and intend to try to achieve great things in their professional life.

I don’t know if she was talking about undergrad or grad, but if someone takes one of the few spots in selective grad school knowing all the while that she plans to be a stay at home mom…

 

[LongingForLight]

Well, in my own life, that wouldn’t really work, because I am the one with the womb and the mammaries! My husband doesn’t exactly have the proper equipment to stay home and grow/nourish babies!
However, if other parents make the decision to seriously limit the number of children and choose to pump breast milk or rely on infant formulas, they might be able to make such a scenario work.
But formula gets expensive fast, and child care for more than two children in the case of two-wage-earner households is usually cost-prohibitive. For families that do not limit the number of their children to one or two, they usually find that it makes more financial sense for the mother to stay home.
And it is wonderful for the babies to get to drink their mommy’s milk nice and warm from her soft breast instead of from a bottle, so whenever it is possible to give that to children, it is good for parents to make that happen.

The womb and mammaries do make a difference (and I dislike people who say they don’t matter at all; obviously they haven’t tried switching roles), but it can still work. I WFH and nurse my 3rd daughter on a nursing pillow while I work. DH is normally a SAHD, but during the recession he has returned to work some to supplement my income. I earn double to triple what he can earn, and always have. Also, my field is far more family-friendly, with opportunities to WFH with flexible hours - and generally has better benefits, too.

Sadly, my contract ends soon and I’ll need to find a new job. However, I really like having the whole family at home during the day, so I’m going to try to find another WFH position even if it it means I have to take two jobs because of a pay cut. Getting to eat every meal as a family is an amazing luxury.

There are compensations for the difficulties of being pregnant and working, or nursing and working, too. It’s nice to have both parents familiar with the “at home” role, and it gives us greater stability during this rough economy. Plus, no one has to always be the one spending the entire day away from the kids. We have both had our turns at home (and both prefer to be SAHP’s, actually; it’s the most important job there is!).

However, it only works well if BOTH parents respect the nature of the woman’s job to grow and nourish life, and the man’s role as leader and supporter of the woman. Otherwise, it is so easy for the woman to get overwhelmed “doing it all”!