SSPX and women in positions of authority

  • Thread starter Thread starter Nechasin
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
N

Nechasin

Guest
First off, I do want to state I’m not starting this thread to be a pain or put down the SSPX. I genuinely have a question.

I was reading the following article:
Female Referee Removed From Officiating Boys’ Basketball Game by Religious School

As I was reading it, I assumed that it must be some fundamentalist school or maybe LDS. I was shocked that it was affiliated with the SSPX. Is it truely a belief of the SSPX that women in no circumstance can be put in a position of authority over boys? Or is this school totally in the wrong?

What about all of the Catholic schools that used to be run by nuns?

Thank you for your consideration.
 
I was reading the following article:
Female Referee Removed From Officiating Boys’ Basketball Game by Religious School

As I was reading it, I assumed that it must be some fundamentalist school or maybe LDS. I was shocked that it was affiliated with the SSPX. Is it truely a belief of the SSPX that women in no circumstance can be put in a position of authority over boys? Or is this school totally in the wrong?

What about all of the Catholic schools that used to be run by nuns?

Thank you for your consideration.
Several years ago the St. Mary’s football team took a loss by default rather than play against a team with a female player.

When interviewed, the priest-coach explained that St. Mary’s plays football in order to teach the boys how to play an agressive game against other males and contain it within the rules establised.

This is part of a larger context of preparing men to help shape a Catholic society in general and as the heads of Catholic families in particular.

Fr. said that what was not part of that formation is to pretend that women are not women and bat them around a football field.

Bishop Williamson gets into details with the concept of gender roles in his interview with Colleen Hammond. It may still be available online to listen to.

Bishop Sheen also used to talk about the differences and how eventually it becomes prudent to separate the genders for teaching purposes.
 
I don’t understand your comment about Alice and Wonderland.
Wonderland made no sense. The issue of a woman referee not refereeing boys makes no sense.

I went to grade school from 1952 - 1960. The nuns who taught us refereed our games. No one before Vatican 2 had a problem with it; why is it now suddenly that it is an issue?
 
Several years ago the St. Mary’s football team took a loss by default rather than play against a team with a female player.

When interviewed, the priest-coach explained that St. Mary’s plays football in order to teach the boys how to play an agressive game against other males and contain it within the rules establised.

This is part of a larger context of preparing men to help shape a Catholic society in general and as the heads of Catholic families in particular.

Fr. said that what was not part of that formation is to pretend that women are not women and bat them around a football field.

Bishop Williamson gets into details with the concept of gender roles in his interview with Colleen Hammond. It may still be available online to listen to.

Bishop Sheen also used to talk about the differences and how eventually it becomes prudent to separate the genders for teaching purposes.
Good non-sequitur. There is a slight difference between tackling a girl playing football and a woman refereeing a game of basketball.
 
Good non-sequitur.
Nice to see you starting things off in a good spirit.
There is a slight difference between tackling a girl playing football and a woman refereeing a game of basketball.
You’re right. The differences are slight. The similarities are significant.

The real question is why should a woman be wanting to run around a court red-faced blowing a whistle in a man’s game?

What kind of clothing is the female referee wearing? Is she projecting an image of modesty and feminity?
 
Nice to see you starting things off in a good spirit.

You’re right. The differences are slight. The similarities are significant.

The real question is why should a woman be wanting to run around a court red-faced blowing a whistle in a man’s game?

What kind of clothing is the female referee wearing? Is she projecting an image of modesty and feminity?
The similarities are not to be had. There is no similarity between a grade school or high school girl playing a rough physical sport where she might be tackled, and a woman refereeing a game where she is not a player.

No, that is not the “real question”. The real question is why would the school have a problem with a woman referee? What difference does it make if she is red faced or a male referee is red faced? It has nothing to do with her gender or her sexuality. Mothers get red faced when they get upset with their children; being red faced has nothing to do with the question.

Why should she or might she want to referee? What difference does it make? It is not a “man’s job” except in your perception. The nuns used to referee us when we were in grade school, and no one got their panties in a twist over it, long before Vatican 2. If it was not an issue then, why should it be an issue today?
Maybe you have never been to a ball game, or maybe you think that a burkha is the only modest clothing for a woman; I have never seen an actual working referee, woman or man wear anything that was immodest. If you have a problem with a woman wearing a referee’s shirt, it sounds like a personl problem. If you; have a personal problem with women wearing pants and shirts, that is just that - a personal problem. Femininity is not defined by fashion; it is an attitude. I have seen women in skirts and blouses, and in dresses, who display no femininity whatsoever; psooibly because they were in attitude and demanor displayedf, homosexual.

And basketball for children is not a “Man’s game” - or for adults, for that matter.
 
Nice to see you starting things off in a good spirit.

You’re right. The differences are slight. The similarities are significant.

The real question is why should a woman be wanting to run around a court red-faced blowing a whistle in a man’s game?

What kind of clothing is the female referee wearing? Is she projecting an image of modesty and feminity?
If you don’t know the answers to that question then you should be careful to suggest that it is for that reason.

But your response doesn’t surprise me considering you support “Bishop” Williamson’s heretical stand that women Saints can’t be declared Doctors by the Universal Church.
 
First off, I do want to state I’m not starting this thread to be a pain or put down the SSPX. I genuinely have a question.

I was reading the following article:
Female Referee Removed From Officiating Boys’ Basketball Game by Religious School

As I was reading it, I assumed that it must be some fundamentalist school or maybe LDS. I was shocked that it was affiliated with the SSPX. Is it truely a belief of the SSPX that women in no circumstance can be put in a position of authority over boys? Or is this school totally in the wrong?

What about all of the Catholic schools that used to be run by nuns?

Thank you for your consideration.
Good heavens! When did we Catholics become fundamentalists??? How incredibly silly and embarrassing.
 
Good heavens! When did we Catholics become fundamentalists??? How incredibly silly and embarrassing.
It’s not when Catholics became fundamentalists. It’s when did Catholics become such humanists that they’ve lost the sense of masculinity and femininity?

Just go back and reread the article and the comments from all the so-called “enlightened” characters saying there is no difference between a male and female referee.

Gender blurring and gender neutrality is ultimately an attack on the Trinity by way of redefining male and female as God created them into an interchangeable mix that allows same sex pairings (they can’t be couples) and other abhorrations.

When the society, the family and the individual lose sight of the nature that God created in them, the Trinity ceases to be accessible to them.
 
If you don’t know the answers to that question then you should be careful to suggest that it is for that reason.
What reason are you talking about?
But your response doesn’t surprise me considering you support “Bishop” Williamson’s heretical stand that women Saints can’t be declared Doctors by the Universal Church.
I love how people throw out the term “heresy” without any thought whatsoever. It’s silly to call it heresy.

Bishop W said it was a mistake, not the biggest mistake made since the Council but a mistake all the same. He backed it up beautifully and even Colleen Hammond who really agressively pressed him with direct questions was catching onto what he was explaining.
 
Is refereeing a game a gender role? Would it be wrong for a female referee to referee a female game?
 
It’s not when Catholics became fundamentalists. It’s when did Catholics become such humanists that they’ve lost the sense of masculinity and femininity?

Just go back and reread the article and the comments from all the so-called “enlightened” characters saying there is no difference between a male and female referee.

Gender blurring and gender neutrality is ultimately an attack on the Trinity by way of redefining male and female as God created them into an interchangeable mix that allows same sex pairings (they can’t be couples) and other abhorrations.

When the society, the family and the individual lose sight of the nature that God created in them, the Trinity ceases to be accessible to them.
That’s quite a jump there, from refereeing a kids’ basketball game to “same sex pairings” and other “abhorrations” (sic). I gather you meant “aberrations”, e.g., “departure from the norm.”

I have a feeling the Trinity is not feeling under “attack” by this woman. Good grief.
 
The similarities are not to be had. There is no similarity between a grade school or high school girl playing a rough physical sport where she might be tackled, and a woman refereeing a game where she is not a player.
Really? When did referee’s stop breaking up fights?
No, that is not the “real question”. The real question is why would the school have a problem with a woman referee?
For the same reason they would have a problem with a male bridesmaid at a wedding.
What difference does it make if she is red faced or a male referee is red faced?
Nothing about being red faced intrinsically, but the fact that she is red faced doing an un-lady like profession is a surrender of her femininity.
It has nothing to do with her gender or her sexuality.
Sure it does. She’s forsaking it for a man’s game. A man getting red-faced while doing a manicure would look just as silly.
Mothers get red faced when they get upset with their children; being red faced has nothing to do with the question.
That’s an appropriate situation for a woman to get red faced.
Why should she or might she want to referee? What difference does it make?
There’s got to be an internal motivation at work. And there are external consequences to choices that are made. Some of them wear away at the natural identity that God has given man and woman.
It is not a “man’s job” except in your perception.
Boys would generally be able to establish their own refereeing as well.
The nuns used to referee us when we were in grade school, and no one got their panties in a twist over it, long before Vatican 2.
I remember playing basketball with Sr. M P in the school yard. Butting heads and bumping bodies. I didn’t realize till later how inappropriate it was and how right the Mother Superior was for calling her back into the Convent. She was a young and attractive woman. It could’ve been a near occasion of trouble/sin had I been a year or two older.
If it was not an issue then, why should it be an issue today?
Because gender identities have eroded that much more.
Maybe you have never been to a ball game, or maybe you think that a burkha is the only modest clothing for a woman;
No. I think short shorts and a tight striped shirt are the way to go for modest dressing. Just as I think a strapless ball gown is appropriate for men going to the office.
I have never seen an actual working referee, woman or man wear anything that was immodest.
Maybe you just don’t notice in your gender free world.
If you have a problem with a woman wearing a referee’s shirt, it sounds like a personl problem.
Yes. I value the dignity of women.
If you; have a personal problem with women wearing pants and shirts, that is just that - a personal problem.
How I feel about it is one thing. How it affects society is not a personal problem. It’s a societal problem.
Femininity is not defined by fashion; it is an attitude.
People are more often than not affected by how they dress. The mode of dress affects the attitude. Look around in Church and you’ll spot the trends.
I have seen women in skirts and blouses, and in dresses, who display no femininity whatsoever; psooibly because they were in attitude and demanor displayedf, homosexual.
Feminine clothing and behavior will help to remedy that far more than a ref’s outfit.
And basketball for children is not a “Man’s game” - or for adults, for that matter.
Well, if you don’t understand that a Catholic incorporates their faith into every aspect of their identity from the food they eat and the time of day to the activities that they engage in, that’s your problem.
 
Bishop Sheen also used to talk about the differences and how eventually it becomes prudent to separate the genders for teaching purposes.
The gender separation for teaching purposes makes sense to me but has a different motivation from the concept of having a female referee. Please remember that Bishop Sheen (to be canonized soon, I hope) used to make somehow disparaging jokes about women in his radio and television programs. He was great but not perfect or infallible.
The real question is why should a woman be wanting to run around a court red-faced blowing a whistle in a man’s game?

What kind of clothing is the female referee wearing? Is she projecting an image of modesty and feminity?
I remember nuns acting as referees at the soccer games in the oratories in Italy. Nobody challenged them and they did not appear immodest.
 
That’s quite a jump there, from refereeing a kids’ basketball game to “same sex pairings” and other “abhorrations” (sic). I gather you meant “aberrations”, e.g., “departure from the norm.”

I have a feeling the Trinity is not feeling under “attack” by this woman. Good grief.
It may seem like quite a jump but once you’ve been acclimated to all of the intermediate stages you won’t even notice it till it’s too late.

And “kids” these days in High School are engaging in the most barbarous, abominable sorts of behavior’s because they’ve been mongrelized by a society dead set against Catholic ideas, ideals and modes of living.

The attack on the Trinity isn’t to hurt the Trinity. It’s to make your children unable to see their own lives in the Trinity. Since it’s dimmed in your eyes compared to your ancestors, it’s only a few generations to pure paganism.

This woman is symptomatic of the whole stream of corruption to souls that the world, the flesh and the devil is offering.
 
It’s not when Catholics became fundamentalists. It’s when did Catholics become such humanists that they’ve lost the sense of masculinity and femininity?

Just go back and reread the article and the comments from all the so-called “enlightened” characters saying there is no difference between a male and female referee.

Gender blurring and gender neutrality is ultimately an attack on the Trinity by way of redefining male and female as God created them into an interchangeable mix that allows same sex pairings (they can’t be couples) and other abhorrations.

When the society, the family and the individual lose sight of the nature that God created in them, the Trinity ceases to be accessible to them.
There is no difference between a female referee and a male referee, as the job is not gender related. There is nothing about the job that favors or disfavors either a male or a female. Humanism has nothing to do with the issue. Neither does masculinity or femininity. There is no difference between a male and female referee becuase both have two eyes, both can see a foul, both can blow the whistle, and nonoe of those actions have anthing to do with gender. You have made no case at all; you are just blustering. You have in your mind that the job requires a male; show the evidence.

There is nothing inherent in blowing a whistle or calling a foul that is masculine. It is a judgement call. If you are saying that women cannot make such judgements, please show evidence of the fact. Or in the alternative, show evidence that calling a foul is “blurring her sexual identity” or is “not feminine”.

There is nothing about a referee’s uniform that either hides the fact that she is a woman, nor is there anything about the uniform that is seductive or immodest. Your point is not well taken; you are simply huffing and puffing because it suits you. Taking this to issues about gender blurring (I can’t imagine anyone ever not being able to figure out that the ref was a woman) and issues of the Trinity not being accessible to them because they saw a woman referee a game - or for that matter, to the woman because she was a referee, or to the other male referees because they would not put up with such BS - is a totally unfounded charge.
 
Really? When did referee’s stop breaking up fights?
When did nuns stop breaking up fights in high school? Your question does nothing to show there should be no women referees. I went to a boy’s high school, and it was the nuns who constantly patrolled the halls; and they were the ones who broke up the fights. Your point shows nothing.
For the same reason they would have a problem with a male bridesmaid at a wedding.
is that the best you can do? That has nothing to do with the propiety of a woman referee, and absolutely no relevance.
Nothing about being red faced intrinsically, but the fact that she is red faced doing an un-lady like profession is a surrender of her femininity.
other than your statement that it is unladylike, you have given no evidence.
Sure it does. She’s forsaking it for a man’s game. A man getting red-faced while doing a manicure would look just as silly.
Neither men nor women get red faced doing a manicure. Is that the best you can do?
That’s an appropriate situation for a woman to get red faced. =
The only thing you can come up with is your opinion that refereeing is inappropriate; that however is a conclusion. Show your evidence.
There’s got to be an internal motivation at work. And there are external consequences to choices that are made. Some of them wear away at the natural identity that God has given man and woman.
The internal motivation may be that she likes refereeing. that has nothing to do with whether or not she should. Asw I said, why she wants to do it is irrelevant as to deciding whether or not a woman should referee.
Boys would generally be able to establish their own refereeing as well.
Again, irrelevant as to whether or not a woman should referee.

I
remember playing basketball with Sr. M P in the school yard. Butting heads and bumping bodies. I didn’t realize till later how inappropriate it was and how right the Mother Superior was for calling her back into the Convent. She was a young and attractive woman. It could’ve been a near occasion of trouble/sin had I been a year or two older.
If you want to hit on nuns, that is a different issue. Your point is irrelevant as to whether or not it is appropriate for a woman to referee. A young teenage boy who may be having problems with sexual identity might be attracted to a male referee; that is the boy’s problem and not an indicator that a male should not referee. And if a boy is having problems with a female referee, he has no business butting heads with her or bumping bodies with her; for that matter, they have no business doing that with a male referee. The problem gets solved quickly, as the boy who does that won’t be playing for long. It is called a technical.
Because gender identities have eroded that much more.
It is your problem as you are the one who identifies refereeing as a male only job. Do you identify typing up a paper fon a copmputer as a female job - as in secretary work?
No. I think short shorts and a tight striped shirt are the way to go for modest dressing. Just as I think a strapless ball gown is appropriate for men going to the office.
Given that I have yet to see any referee - male or female - in short shorts and tight shirts, your point is not conducive to the conversation, nor is it indicative that a woman should not referee. There are some people who cimply cannot be around women without having lustful thoughts, whether they are in the stands watching the game or in the floor refereeing it. That, however, is a problem of the individual and is not indicative of any intrinsic issues as to the rightness or wrongness of a woman refereeing a boys basketball game.
Maybe you just don’t notice in your gender free world.
I don’t live in a gender free world. I just learned long ago that gender is not an issue in many jobs. You are the one who wants to make it an issue, and all we have is your opinions with nothing backing them that your “it is because I said so” approach.
Yes. I value the dignity of women.
one of the most dignified women I have known was an older, very short nun who had artheritic knees. She would walk down the hall moving from side to side; and it was amazing how fast she could move with stiff knees. I remember many a time seeing her wade into a group of juniors and seniors who were in a scuffle, and reach up to grab the two combatants by the collar and haul them up short. Everybody respected her. Your comments are specious at best. I am not convinced that you respect women; it appears more that you respect an image of what you think women should be. And the question is, if a woman doesn’t meet your image, do you still respect her?
People are more often than not affected by how they dress. The mode of dress affects the attitude. Look around in Church and you’ll spot the trends.
Which ahs nothing to do with a woman wearing a uniform.
Feminine clothing and behavior will help to remedy that far more than a ref’s outfit.
Agian, non responsive to the issue.
Well, if you don’t understand that a Catholic incorporates their faith into every aspect of their identity from the food they eat and the time of day to the activities that they engage in, that’s your problem.
I don’t seem to be the one with the problem here.
 
Take away the fact that a referee was involved. Please respond to the quote below and my original question.
The reason given, according to the referees: Campbell, as a woman, could not be put in a position of authority over boys because of the academy’s beliefs.
This isn’t about referees. My question was a very general question.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top