S
Sarcelle
Guest
India and China have some of the highest abortion rates and the reason isn’t feminism.
The reason is females are considered worthless and killed either in the womb or shortly after birth.
- Status
The reason is females are considered worthless and killed either in the womb or shortly after birth.
M
MagdalenaRita
Guest
No. It doesn’t anger me at all.
Not getting married and having a vocation other than marriage is not solely a feminist thought. Women have chosen to remain single forever, for various reasons. There is nothing wrong with that at all. As a matter of fact, if it is where God has called you then that is where you should be.
I agree being forced to marry is not a good thing either. Women need to discern what God calls them to.
As I said, there have always been women who have chosen not to marry and have children. There is absolutely nothing wrong with that. Look at the history of our religious sisters and nuns and consecrated virgin women saints. They are some of the greatest saints and some are doctors of the Church. But rather it is God who says women have worth, not feminism. Our worth as women comes from God and He does not say all women have to marry and have children.
What feminism says is women ONLY have worth if they choose feminism and a career no matter who that choice hurts and their aim is usually at children and men.
I listed a few things around post 86 but I would also say that this is probably another something that feminism tries to convince women is good and is not;
deceiving women into believing that feminism is good because feminism is what gives women worth. That is truly a deception. As I mentioned above, it is God who gives women worth. It is God who gives women that perfect calling for each individual woman.
These things are horrible, absolutely horrible, completely agree, but are also done for so called “family planning” reasons. The question is why we would follow an “ism” that includes similar things only with a slightly different excuse?
Last edited:
S
Sarcelle
Guest
Thank you for your reasonable response.
I agree with you overall.
I agree with you overall.
A
Aquinas11
Guest
But being a SAHM in your grandmothers time was far easier than being a SAHM today. Back then, your grandmother was free to be a SAHM when she was in peak fertility (late teens/early 20s) but today women face social pressure to go to school (where they rack up 6 figure debt) and then work (to pay off the college debt). Then after about 10 years, when they’re well into their 30s and 90% of their fertility has passed, they try to desperately have kids and realize they can’t or that its very hard.
In 2020, women have to get their (1) education, (2) career and (3) motherhood all established by mid 30s, which is a ton of pressure. Meanwhile men in 2020 have it easy - they can sit back, work a little (dont have to support a family) , play video games, etc and be lazy. Plus men can wait until 40s to start family, which unfortunately most women can’t. Ironically, feminism has made life easier for men, not women. I hear all the time about women in late 30s/early 40s who have spent past 10-15 years working only to now realize they can’t have kids , are going to doctors to see if they can get their eggs frozen, etc. Its crazy. And then even the women in late 30s/early 40s who can have kids can’t find a husband since their standards are too high , looking for a guy in top 10% of income, etc, meanwhile those guys would rather a woman in early 20s who can be SAHM and doesn’t have work obligations to be mother of his kids.
Last edited:
M
MagdalenaRita
Guest
You’re welcome
Thank you.
Thank you. You’re whole post is so true and many women would attest to it.
Last edited:
L
Lea101
Guest
Not really. Technology really as made SAHMs’ lives easier.
Yes, but more so pressured into it since she and most women of her time couldn’t be anything else.
This narrative isn’t as common as you would think (that is, that majority of female college graduates are struggling with infertility). And isn’t the 90% of your fertility goes away in your 30s myth debunked?
If a woman takes up immense college debt despite wanting to be a SAHM…then I’m sorry I don’t have much sympathy. Unless she changed her mind, which sucks.
If a woman wants to be a SAHM today, she can just avoid doing all of this. I think the pressure to have it all in your 30s is stupid, but let’s take some individual responsibility. If they know they want a certain lifestyle, then work towards that.
My grandmother wanted a career but realised it once she was well into her adulthood. Unfortunately it wasn’t possible not because of she chose to be a SAHM, but that it was the only path given to her. She had no skills, no education, and is now in her 80s realising that she never had the opportunity to do otherwise.
This is obviously different than a woman today who have the choice, but may face some social pressure here and there. And as a woman, I can assure you that the pressure comes from both sides but it really isn’t that strong unless you always surround yourself with far left or right people.
And not every woman who wants to settle down in her 20s will easily do so. The dating pool, especially for a Catholic, is horrendous! And men her age may not be ready to settle down and she wouldn’t be interested in a 40 year old. Her dad wouldn’t be as well
Men are the ones complaining about how it is oppressing them, aren’t they?
But yea, the main reason why I said what I said is that I have more of a choice to pursue the path I want compared to my grandmother’s era. And even if the path I chose was a SAHM, I have a better chance of respected as an equal by my spouse, I have technology, and I would be able to get some income through online businesses. Marital rape is also recognised today. Being a SAHM wouldn’t be something that I was pressured into because I couldn’t get an education or a job I really wanted. But something I wholeheartedly chose.
L
Lea101
Guest
From letter to women by JPII: Women’s dignity has often been unacknowledged and their prerogatives misrepresented; they have often been relegated to the margins of society and even reduced to servitude. This has prevented women from truly being themselves and it has resulted in a spiritual impoverishment of humanity
To clarify, I was referring to the above sentiment.
This doesn’t equate to being a SAHM at all.
I did acknowledge that there are areas of feminism that are anti-Christian. The women then wanted the freedom to pursue their ambitions but they realised that society doesn’t allow this for mothers. That babies were “holding them back”. Instead of creating a society that welcomes mothers to be active in political/economic aspects in society, they tried to get the privilege that men had (not having to be tied down to the home after having a child).
With technological advancements and the general evolution of femininism, we are seeing a shift. Leah Darrow’s #babiesanddreams is a good example of how women are realising that modern feminism needs to evolve to understand that babies aren’t balls and chains and that women can still pursue what they want. Just more slowly.
Conservatives can’t keep going back and forth on this when it’s convenient for them.
One can’t say that relaxed social norms are contributing to gender issues today, and then turn and and say ‘Why can’t a girl just happen to be a girl because she wants to be a Knight? The parents are forcing strict gender stereotypes’ when they see a 5 year old trans individual.
Strict gender roles do have a link to gender confusion as well to a lot of distress. You clearly don’t feel that way because your personality aligns with a traditional expectation of womanhood. Which is not the reality of everyone.
It is romanticising the past when you say that women back then were better off without feminism, when they really didn’t have the freedom to choose what they want to do. A Conservative SAHM in 2020 is reaping benefits of femininism. Whether that is some sort of ability to make some income at her own home without judgement, or being able to own property or a bank account.
V
VanitasVanitatum
Guest
There are various branches of feminism so a blanket statement like that is not true.
R
Rhubarb
Guest
Then you’re a feminist. You have just boiled down feminism to its ideological core. What you might not be is the strange boogieman certain people want to paint feminists as.
Last edited:
J
jzea1992
Guest
I work part time and don’t have a family, who cares how many hours people work or don’t work. I don’t know why women tend to be so judgmental towards other women
P
Patri
Guest
Like I said, I do not want to be under that umbrella. I don’t understand why insist in calling me a feminist when I have stated clearly I don’t identify. I am a Catholic woman, that is all.
R
Rhubarb
Guest
¯_(ツ)_/¯
It’s just the word. A name that means “fighting for the rights of anyone that was in need”. If it makes you feel any better, there are a whole lot of different groups of feminist thought, and they often don’t get along. It’s a broad term but it doesn’t mean you identify with ALL of it. At least to people who understand what feminism is.
If someone tells me they’re a feminist, I usually respond with “Oh? What kind?” or I just assume the bare-bones “fighting for the rights of all that need it” kind.
It’s just the word. A name that means “fighting for the rights of anyone that was in need”. If it makes you feel any better, there are a whole lot of different groups of feminist thought, and they often don’t get along. It’s a broad term but it doesn’t mean you identify with ALL of it. At least to people who understand what feminism is.
If someone tells me they’re a feminist, I usually respond with “Oh? What kind?” or I just assume the bare-bones “fighting for the rights of all that need it” kind.
P
Patri
Guest
Yes, I understand that but if I’m saying I don’t consider myself or want to be under that umbrella, and people still say “then you are a feminist”, when what I want to do is follow the teachings of Christ, it feels that they are not taking what I want into consideration and that they are saying everyone has to be a feminist. No, I am a woman that believes in equality and in the teaching of Christ and his church, that is all. The law does not force the label feminist on anyone, nobody else should do it then. Those that believe in that movement are free to do so, those of us that want to do our best outside that movement should also be allowed to without people enveloping us in something we do not care for.
L
Lea101
Guest
I mean, you’re free to respond however you like. It’s just that when people ask and you say no, some of them may immediately think you’re anti equality instead of you not caring for labels. So I guess that response was to let you know that there are branches of feminism that’s consistent with Church teachings. Your views may align with that sort of feminism but you could always just say you don’t like these labels and hence you don’t identify.
Last edited:
A
Aquinas11
Guest
https://abcnews.go.com/amp/GMA/OnCall/women-fertility-falls-lose-90-percent-eggs-30/story%3Fid=9693015
No the point is many women do the career now and plan to be mother later without knowing her fertility mostly gone by age 30. Even you mistakenly called it a “myth” so obviously many are unaware of this
M
MagdalenaRita
Guest
This is true and I would agree with him but servitude and serving are two different things and nowhere does the Pope say husbands and wives were not to serve each other, and I mentioned in my post that men are also to love and serve their wives.
We are called by God to serve and by that we offer charity:
Galatians 5:13 DR by charity of the spirit serve one another
Pope Paul JPII also highly encouraged fighting for the family. What would he say today?
Personally, I do not like the title SAHM. Women who have babies are moms. Moms have responsibilities and there is work involved there. We should just be called moms.
Yes, there is a lot in feminism that is anti-Christian.
This too is my point, babies are not balls of chains. Women can and should follow dreams but in seasons. Going slow and waiting is not the encouragement one receives from feminism.
This might be another thread, I am not sure what you are exactly saying.
I did not say women were better off in the past, but I would never say women are better off today, far from it. We can and are bringing the good of the past into the future, a restoration.
Choice is something frequently heard by feminists but who chooses for the children and the family or are our choices only to be what we want to do.
Anything good that came out of feminism or is in feminism, came from God and was before feminism. There are not different branches. Feminism is feminism.
Women stayed at home and cared for their home and family long before feminism came along. Caring for one’s family is not a benefit of feminism. It is because of the rejection of feminism that more women are choosing to restore that which was lost…
every perfect gift, is from above, coming down from the Father of lights, with whom there is no change, nor shadow of alteration James 1:17
Giving thanks always for all things, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, to God and the Father: Ephesians 5:20
We don’t gives thanks to feminists for anything good. We always give our thanks to God.
Last edited:
M
MagdalenaRita
Guest
If feminism is about fighting for anyone in need, why are they not fighting for the rights of the unborn, children left alone, men and the elderly?
Feminists won’t even let you say you are not a feminist. Where is the freedom in that?
Last edited:
R
Rhubarb
Guest
You’re talking about “feminists” as if they are all one thing. They are not. There are pro-life feminists.
Feminism does argue for the rights of men. RGB won her big case arguing for a father’s paternity leave. This is widely considered a feminist victory on many levels.
Feminism does argue for the rights of men. RGB won her big case arguing for a father’s paternity leave. This is widely considered a feminist victory on many levels.
A
Aquinas11
Guest
From your source
90% eggs gone by age 30
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
90% eggs gone by age 30
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
Last edited:
S
Sarcelle
Guest
That is not Catholic teaching though.
As long as couples are open to the possibility of children even if there is the chance that they may never conceive, they are not sinning.
Catholic marriage is about being open to the possibility of children. It was never about having as many children as possible. If a woman would like to have children, it will be prudent of her to consider that age may not be on her side when it comes to conceiving. This should be part of the consideration when thinking about the future.
Catholic marriage is also built on the free will of the couple so there should be no pressure or coercion involved. If there is, the marriage will not be licit.
As long as couples are open to the possibility of children even if there is the chance that they may never conceive, they are not sinning.
Catholic marriage is about being open to the possibility of children. It was never about having as many children as possible. If a woman would like to have children, it will be prudent of her to consider that age may not be on her side when it comes to conceiving. This should be part of the consideration when thinking about the future.
Catholic marriage is also built on the free will of the couple so there should be no pressure or coercion involved. If there is, the marriage will not be licit.
Last edited:
- Status