what if you were in our (womens') shoes?

[Lilybean11]

I sometimes wonder why so many don’t understand why some women may become a bit demoralized by the passages in the bible that refer to us. Put yourself in this world, in the world that women live in. Imagine that this is how things were, not that you WERE a woman, but a man, in this situation.

---

You are married to a wonderful woman (you took her last name). You have a couple of great kids. After your wife had them, she went back to work, for she is the breadwinner. Your primary role is to be the father. So when she goes off to work, you stay home with the children.

The whole family goes to church together on Sundays. You listen to the female priest give the sermon, because in this world the bible is clear that the church is domain of the woman, and the church is “her” husband. After all the bible states “let your men be kept silent in churches : for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the law. And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their wives at home: for it is a shame for men to speak in the church.” It is not god’s will that men be ordained, because after all, Jesus picked only women apostles.

You are not bitter about this, though, because you know that men and women have different roles. Women are called to the church and to be the head of the family (“the head of ever woman is Christ, and the head of the man is the woman” and “for the woman is not of the man, but the man for the woman. Neither was created for the man, but the man for the woman” as is seen in the bible) and men are called to the family and to be fathers. You are equal, but just have different roles.

You and your wife have a pretty equal partnership, but as the bible commands you to do, you allow her to make the big decisions and head the family. "Let the men learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a man to teach, nor to usurp authority over the woman, but to be in silence. For Eve was first formed, then Adam.” Because of the many passages like this, you accept that sometimes you must submit to her.

---

I mean, i just wonder how men may feel if this is how things were. If the roles were reversed. What if all the passages in the bible about womens’ submission, male roles, etc were backwards? So I am just curious, what is your (men or woman’s) reaction to the above? Does imagining it make you at all uncomfortable? Do you think you would not be disappointed for that to be the case, but fully embrace whatever God’s will is for you the way women do? Would you feel, at all, inferior? Does the above sound just “silly” or “nonsensical”? I am interested in any thoughts!

 

[FNDRB58]

Well, the first woman took charge and told the man to eat the apple from the tree which was a bad decision, hence the man figured he must start taking charge and not let a woman tell him what to do.

 

[FNDRB58]

If the positions were backwards then it would be the man that told the woman to eat the apple…which was very bad advice.

 

[LeafByNiggle]

God sends us trials in proportion to our strength to endure them. Perhaps women are simply more capable?

 

[ZDHayden]

God sends us trials in proportion to our strength to endure them. Perhaps women are simply more capable?

I’ve heard a reflection somewhere that said that Jesus chose male disciples, not because men were better, but because men, on the whole, need to be held more accountable. Women tend to be more religious in their attitudes, so, in order to save all of humanity, God had to, according to the person who gave this reflection (I cannot remember who, I wish I could) make men essential in a specifically religious way - to make the responsibilities of men within the realm where men seldom trod. That might also be why a lot of the major saints are men - men just tend to need the extra influence.

 

[AlanFromWichita]

OMG! I just typed for an hour on this topic, and then messed up and hit “edit” instead of reply when I posted the second half, and ended up wiping out the first half … wow … well, maybe I’ll just join the lengthy post in progress and we’ll take it from there.

(continued)

So I’m never going to exactly experience it your way unless I had your body, mind, spirit, and previous experiences, exactly. Even identical twins can’t share the same space, so they can’t see the world from exactly the same viewpoint as each other.

What I can do is try to empathize with certain categories of similar feelings you tell me it’s like. So you can tell me the pain is sharp, or dull, or stronger now and weaker then. You can tell me it hurts so much you wish you never had a baby because you think you’re going to die, or you can say, “it hurts so good,” because it is all worth it when the baby is born, and the “agony” of the pain is replaced by the joy of the new birth. That’s enough information right there that I can make comparison’s between Jesus’s passion and labor pains. How can he have endured those things? Well, I can’t tell you how a woman can go through what she goes through in labor and not insist on having her tubes tied. Somehow I wonder if men were the ones who had the babies, if most of us would even be here.

Again, you can tell me, “well you know what it’s like when a chiropractor pops your back and for a second there is this sharp pain and suddenly relief comes upon you? The pain feels good, in a way, because it’s connected to feeling better.” So I can say, "oh, I can understand in my mind how pain can ‘hurt good’ but not in the exact way you understand it. If I’m clueless and shallow and don’t go below the surface, then I focus on the literal meaning, just like my stupid dog watches my hand instead of the stick so he doesn’t even know I threw it much less where it is. For example, “having a baby is like having a back massage? That sure isn’t what it sounded like to me when my wife was going through it.” So no, the pain is neither exactly the same nor at the same level, but the concept of “joyful pain” or “pain that brings hope,” we can at least talk about, if not actually feel a taste.

So what can we learn from a woman’s labor pains we will never experience directly, and Christ’s passion, which we can never experience directly (though we can live it vicariously through scenes in a movie) but from which we can gather certain concepts. For example, sacrificial love. A woman willingly allows a man to set her on a path for huge amounts of pain and suffering, judging by men’s standards at least. She could very well die from the experience, even though she isn’t rally expecting that. She is expecting the pain, though, but when she says to her friend “I’m expecting,” people think, “I’m expecting the joy of a new baby,” and not usually “I’m expecting to go through terrible agony about twelve weeks from now.” Men might think that, “God how can she put herself through that again,” even though they say, “congratulations. I’m very excited for you.”

Sorry for my many words. I’m making this up as I go, so I’m sure it could have been much more succinct. Thank you for taking time to read all or part of my words, though. I have much more to say on these ideas and how they relate to your question, but I’ve gone on long enough I want a break so I’ll post this now and maybe expand more on it later, unless other posters suggest other directions to take the conversation.

Peace and ,
Alan

 

[FNDRB58]

I’ve heard a reflection somewhere that said that Jesus chose male disciples, not because men were better, but because men, on the whole, need to be held more accountable. Women tend to be more religious in their attitudes, so, in order to save all of humanity, God had to, according to the person who gave this reflection (I cannot remember who, I wish I could) make men essential in a specifically religious way - to make the responsibilities of men within the realm where men seldom trod. That might also be why a lot of the major saints are men - men just tend to need the extra influence.

There were women disciples too. You probably meant apostles.

I think Jesus chose male apostles because they would be our Bishops and priests who would act in the person of Christ. One might say then, “Why did God choose our savior to be a man instead of a woman?”

Perhaps because God wants us to know Him as our Father and Jesus was one of the three persons of God, therefore, had to be a man so we could better understand the Father. Also, Jesus was the new Adam as Mary was the new eve.

So then the question becomes…Why was a male the first human created? And is there a correlation between this and gender roles throughout hisory?

 

[AlanFromWichita]

I think Jesus chose male apostles because they would be our Bishops and priests who would act in the person of Christ. One might say then, “Why did God choose our savior to be a man instead of a woman?”

At the time of Jesus, people had certain ideas of role models. Jesus went through the pain, and was our knight in shining armor.

I don’t know what women think of knights in armor, but I can appreciate that what He did saved my soul. He fought the battle and took the heat. Is that a little bit like a spouse (man or woman, you pick one) fighting the battle for another spouse?

How about men battling savages at work to bring home the bacon? How do women feel about that? How would we feel differently is women did that? We don’t know, but we have an example of women fighting a battle that brings us precious spoils in the form of children. So we fight a battle and we both benefit from it. I can see that concept working both ways.

So it’s partly about how abstract you get when looking for commonality of viewpoints.

Alan

 

[FNDRB58]

Good point. How many men died in wars and battles? I wonder if women would want to trade raising the kids and cooking the meals for being one of those clan warriors on the battlefield in Braveheart. :stretcher:

 

[jamanne]

At the time of Jesus, people had certain ideas of role models. Jesus went through the pain, and was our knight in shining armor.

I don’t know what women think of knights in armor, but I can appreciate that what He did saved my soul. He fought the battle and took the heat. Is that a little bit like a spouse (man or woman, you pick one) fighting the battle for another spouse?

How about men battling savages at work to bring home the bacon? How do women feel about that? How would we feel differently is women did that? We don’t know, but we have an example of women fighting a battle that brings us precious spoils in the form of children. So we fight a battle and we both benefit from it. I can see that concept working both ways.

So it’s partly about how abstract you get when looking for commonality of viewpoints.

Alan

My mother used to tell me " Forget about a knight in shining armour its; only something else you have to polish"

 

[AlanFromWichita]

My mother used to tell me " Forget about a knight in shining armour its; only something else you have to polish"

http://bestsmileys.com/lol/5.gif

Thank you for your viewpoint. I wouldn’t have thought of it, but now that you mention it is seems embarrassingly obvious.

Also I highly recommend a song by Harry Chapin, called “Why do little girls” and explores the societal expectations of gender roles and how that might manifest itself.

Lyrics example:
Harry Chapin:

Why were the little girls all frightened
To be just what they are
The boys were told to ask themselves
How high how far

The girls were told to reach the shelves
While the boys were reaching stars
That’s why little girls were frightened
To be just what they are

Alan

 

[1ke]

I mean, i just wonder how men may feel if this is how things were. If the roles were reversed. What if all the passages in the bible about womens’ submission, male roles, etc were backwards? So I am just curious, what is your (men or woman’s) reaction to the above? Does imagining it make you at all uncomfortable? Do you think you would not be disappointed for that to be the case, but fully embrace whatever God’s will is for you the way women do? Would you feel, at all, inferior? Does the above sound just “silly” or “nonsensical”? I am interested in any thoughts!

I’m a woman and I don’t relate to what you are saying AT ALL. Yes, I think it’s silly.

 

[icamay]

Good point. How many men died in wars and battles? I wonder if women would want to trade raising the kids and cooking the meals for being one of those clan warriors on the battlefield in Braveheart. :stretcher:

My husband is in the infantry. I can guarantee you that he would not be the same if I went into battle and never came home, but I fully prepare myself for having to endure that sacrifice of him. I do believe that God made us different, but not unequal. Mary watched her son die on a cross after being beaten and tortured, and she never got angry with God. Men have physical strength, women have spiritual strength. Personally, I prefer being on this side of things!

 

[purplesunshine]

There is something very beautiful in feminity that builds a man.

It does not make women weaker…it means we’re different.

I can’t run as fast as my brothers, but they come to me and my mom when they need TLC…not to eachother

In the military they’ve found that women are FAR better as lookouts and medics. Women just DO better at those things. Men are better at infantry and patrol.

God designed women and men to work together for a reason. Many times society and religion, have been used to denegrate women.

But really, in places without any christian influence…without “gender roles” by the big bad church, men were men. They hunted they dressed up as warriors and went out and faught. Women cooked, cleaned and cared for little ones. Even in the Amazon tribes where women called the shots the men STILL were the ones running around fighting and defending.

 

[Barbkw]

My mother used to tell me " Forget about a knight in shining armour its; only something else you have to polish"

 

[CentralFLJames]

I sometimes wonder why so many don’t understand why some women may become a bit demoralized by the passages in the bible that refer to us. Put yourself in this world, in the world that women live in. Imagine that this is how things were, not that you WERE a woman, but a man, in this situation.

Perhaps you are only seeing the things you want to see or which someone has coached you to see?

Genesis 30:13 Then Leah said, “How happy I am! The women will call me happy.”

Luke 1:48 From now on all generations will call me blessed.

What man or woman ever complained that no man will never attain to the spiritual rank of Mary as Queen of all of Heaven?

---

You are married to a wonderful woman (you took her last name). You have a couple of great kids. After your wife had them, she went back to work, for she is the breadwinner. Your primary role is to be the father…

You kind of put the whole life-experience in secular terms and into a western social context here. I’d hate to feel locked into either gender role in the way you stated it - how boring and sterile a life that would be if life was as narrow as you described it in your social template. What about all the stuff that goes on below the talking-points? What man can ever relate to his child to the depth a woman can knowing it from its first moments that it announced its presence with kicking motions in the womb and then experiencing the maternal bond of the child drawing nourishment from her own body? We men are just not equipped to be able to share in that joy and special relational bond. How blessed you women are to be “life bringers”. We are protectors - different roles.

As for the passages that look demeaning or limiting to women such as “it is a shame for the woman to speak at church” you need to understand the historical context and the events of the time. For example, this passage was given at a time when the Church was first establishing itself from its Judaic roots. There were not yet established norms in the new Christian Church and there was a lot of commotion, excitement and formation going on. Paul was simply addressing a local problem at one of the churches and wanted to establish more reverence and order in the assembly of Christians. He would have taken as much exception to men speaking out from the assembly or for upsetting the formative liturgical proceedings. This is the role of presbyters, elders and deacons to keep the worship of all (men, women and children) focused on Christ. In the day the men were much more learned than women and it would not be pragmatic for women (or men) to speak up and interrupt the entire assembly to ask questions as if it was a school class. At that time as to this day, scriptural teaching was always authoritative from the lecturer (presbyter). Scripture and the homiletic were never given in a two-way exchanges to and from the congregation (except perhaps by body language if the congregation looked confused by a certain teaching). Not even a modern day secular college really operates this way except for brief rhetorical questions and brief question and answer sessions or projects.

With respect to finding fault in attitudes about gender roles in scripture I really think that you are getting to caught up by the zeitgeist of the day and being coaxed by the liberal-feminist perspective to probe too literally. You are being anachronistic in cross-mixing cultural norms and conventions. You are looking for reasons to find repression of women in general that does not nor ever did really exist in the sense you seem to believe. Modern feminism is still advancing to overcome the the more recent errors of liberal feminism which hijacked the womens suffrage movement in the west/USA. It is more balanced and good and recognizes the healthy and complimentary gender role differences as desirable. The whole “man holds women down” thing of course has some basis in truth since that is the effect of original sin (women have their faults too). But apostolic Christianity has NEVER condoned the degradation of women and has been at the vanguard of recognizing the dignity of Christ in all races and both genders. That’s the very essence of “Catholic” - universal - all peoples/genders. Catholicism is inclusive to all humanity.

That is my reaction to your reversed vignette.

I am not uncomfortable at all with it since if the roles were reversed I intellectually also know that I would not feel the natural draw to be protector and provider; rather, I’d be in the female role of nurturer, life bringer and receiver. So its an pretty “outside of my nature” except for the general principals of justice and fairness. But since it is not my nature I really can’t closely imagine how I’d feel if I was re-cast those different inner desires and roles a woman has.

Let me ask you this. Do you really want to be a provider and protector and reverse the roles? Do you really have that inner desire to be more like a man or is someone trying to sell you on the idea that you can’t be all you can be unless you can do it all yourself independent of a man? Do you feel trapped and limited by your gender?

There’s a lot of single women (with and without kids) out there who bought into that bad idea (or fell into it by social circumstance) and are now being overwhelmed and becoming miserable being alone. And there’s a lot of single men who are lacking a purpose in life and finding no satisfaction merely living the secular life of making money and rather than spending it on a family they don’t have - “living life with all the gusto” one can stand in the bars and singles cruises that always leave you going home alone.

I really think those who attack the gender roles are really dissatisfied with the western way of life more than anything. The church just happens to be a convenient thing to vent at.

 

[benidict]

I sometimes wonder why so many don’t understand why some women may become a bit demoralized by the passages in the bible that refer to us. Put yourself in this world, in the world that women live in. Imagine that this is how things were, not that you WERE a woman, but a man, in this situation.

---

You are married to a wonderful woman (you took her last name). You have a couple of great kids. After your wife had them, she went back to work, for she is the breadwinner. Your primary role is to be the father. So when she goes off to work, you stay home with the children.

The whole family goes to church together on Sundays. You listen to the female priest give the sermon, because in this world the bible is clear that the church is domain of the woman, and the church is “her” husband. After all the bible states “let your men be kept silent in churches : for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the law. And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their wives at home: for it is a shame for men to speak in the church.” It is not god’s will that men be ordained, because after all, Jesus picked only women apostles.

You are not bitter about this, though, because you know that men and women have different roles. Women are called to the church and to be the head of the family (“the head of ever woman is Christ, and the head of the man is the woman” and “for the woman is not of the man, but the man for the woman. Neither was created for the man, but the man for the woman” as is seen in the bible) and men are called to the family and to be fathers. You are equal, but just have different roles.

You and your wife have a pretty equal partnership, but as the bible commands you to do, you allow her to make the big decisions and head the family. "Let the men learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a man to teach, nor to usurp authority over the woman, but to be in silence. For Eve was first formed, then Adam.” Because of the many passages like this, you accept that sometimes you must submit to her.

---

I mean, i just wonder how men may feel if this is how things were. If the roles were reversed. What if all the passages in the bible about womens’ submission, male roles, etc were backwards? So I am just curious, what is your (men or woman’s) reaction to the above? Does imagining it make you at all uncomfortable? Do you think you would not be disappointed for that to be the case, but fully embrace whatever God’s will is for you the way women do? Would you feel, at all, inferior? Does the above sound just “silly” or “nonsensical”? I am interested in any thoughts!

WOW! C.S. Lewis could not have done this better. I am reminded of trying to read the Screwtape Letters. Are you an Author? Honestly, you have given me alot of food for thought. Thank you. Peace and prayers for you and yours. And please keep your chin up.

 

[Lilybean11]

Thanks for your (name removed by moderator)ut!

It just feels like this “different but equal” stuff that always get thrown at women who have difficulty making sense of passages like those is just a way of waving one’s hand. Like “yeah yeah, you’re TOTALLY equal, now get back in your place and accept it.” I don’t see the equality. I try, I really do. Men are head of the church AND head of the family. What are women called to be the head of? I am called to be a mother in my family, but my husband is called to be the head of me. I am equal, yet subject of submission under my husband? How is that equality?

And how would men, who are comfortable knowing that they can do anything they want, be it father, priest, lawyer, stay at home dad, truly feel if it appeared to be God’s will that they be the silent helpers of women. That is how I feel sometimes, and it deeply hurts. Like I am here to be quiet, support “my man”, and raise my children. And there is nothing wrong with the last two, but it feels so limited. Men can have careers, lead a congregation, etc, AND be family men and raise the children. It’s just… what are the limits of men? I know they can’t have babies, but that is a biological difference, not a social and religious construct that purposefully excludes them.

I don’t even know what I am saying or how to word it. I just feel very demoralized to read some passages in the bible. They hurt. I want to be someone who the Lord would be proud of, but sometimes I feel that, knowing what thoughts are in my head, that he is horribly disappointed. Disappointed, simply with who I am. That I question these things. That they anger me. That I cannot understand. And dealing with that perceived disappointment is one of the most hurtful things of all.

 

[benidict]

Thanks for your (name removed by moderator)ut!

It just feels like this “different but equal” stuff that always get thrown at women who have difficulty making sense of passages like those is just a way of waving one’s hand. Like “yeah yeah, you’re TOTALLY equal, now get back in your place and accept it.” I don’t see the equality. I try, I really do. Men are head of the church AND head of the family. What are women called to be the head of? I am called to be a mother in my family, but my husband is called to be the head of me. I am equal, yet subject of submission under my husband? How is that equality?

And how would men, who are comfortable knowing that they can do anything they want, be it father, priest, lawyer, stay at home dad, truly feel if it appeared to be God’s will that they be the silent helpers of women. That is how I feel sometimes, and it deeply hurts. Like I am here to be quiet, support “my man”, and raise my children. And there is nothing wrong with the last two, but it feels so limited. Men can have careers, lead a congregation, etc, AND be family men and raise the children. It’s just… what are the limits of men? I know they can’t have babies, but that is a biological difference, not a social and religious construct that purposefully excludes them.

I don’t even know what I am saying or how to word it. I just feel very demoralized to read some passages in the bible. They hurt. I want to be someone who the Lord would be proud of, but sometimes I feel that, knowing what thoughts are in my head, that he is horribly disappointed. Disappointed, simply with who I am. That I question these things. That they anger me. That I cannot understand. And dealing with that perceived disappointment is one of the most hurtful things of all.

My dear Sister. Not one man, in history could have done what Mary did. Not one man in history could have done what Esther did. Not one man in history, could have done what Judith did. Not one man could have done what Deborah did. I could never do what you do. I could never have a child. Men are wimps, we couldnt take the pain. I think women hold a higher honor than men in his view. You are representative of the grace and kindness of the Creator! God Bless you. Some of us guys are in Awe of women. In what you have accomplished throughout history, your intellect etc. Not one of us could have been here, without you. The last person a mortally wounded soldier will cry out for on a battle field is his Mother! You who are female are deep in our hearts and minds. Dont ever feel down, about who you are. Peace and prayers for you and yours.

 

[PennyinCanada]

Those things that you find demoralizing don’t faze me at all. I don’t even notice them, they aren’t on my radar.

Both my husband and I have to put in effort to become saints, and it’s an effort to take up my cross every day and follow Christ. It’s a temptation to look at others and think that they enjoy some kind of privilege that I should be envious about. Many times they have heavier crosses than I do to carry but they are hidden from my sight.

You could just as easily ask, Why do I get to enjoy vision when so many are blind? I have my hearing intact and look how many are deaf and are isolated because they can’t talk to people since they use sign language. (Imagine going to a doctor’s appointment, what a struggle it would be to communicate!) How many are in wheelchairs and I enjoy mobility? I have a roof over my head and good food in the fridge. Many don’t have those things today.

Gratitude is my remedy for envy so when I start to notice someone’s privileges, I quickly go to gratitude and praise, and those other things can’t get a hold of my heart.