What's with all the anti women threads recently??

[VeritasLuxMea]

Great this is turning into an anti women thread already. You can’t even bring up women without the whole thread going south.

I fear this is actually quite true, LucyLight.

Here’s one of the numerous examples of this behavior: I started THIS thread, as a man, to discuss some of the ways in which women help men (or wives help husbands), and to offer our appreciation for it.

As you can see, the thread degenerated into such fighting and bickering that it had to be closed. Again, it was a thread with no agenda at all and a very simple premise: let’s give thanks to the women in our lives.

There was a thread that was dedicated to my fellow men, and that thread had no such fighting, if I recall…

 

[Calliso]

That site is offensive.

Quite frankly, it is people like you who cause women to instinctively flinch, whenever they hear the word submission. If you need manipulated data to tell you how many women are seriously killed or die because of domestic violence, I feel sorry for you and any daughters you might have or will have.

You can be proud to be a man because God created you to be a man. You do not need to tout men’s rights or demean women to be a man.

I think I’ll save my opinions for the next submission thread.

No way am I going to be arguing on the same side as a crazie.

Yeah though to be fair compared to some stuff I have seen that site is actually really tame. I mean early someone linked to a thread where Inspiration was apparently arguing that women are less intelligent then men.

 

[Debora123]

I must I say, am always fascinated when a Catholic refers to themselves as a Feminist.

Well, the Blessed JPII referred to himself as a feminist, so I’d say it’s about time you get over it.

 

[Crescentinus]

Well… thats the point isn’t it? Radical Feminism has induced the Men’s Rights movement to coalesce.

It is becoming a matter of self defense. They abort our children which we** -hello! -** helped make. They transform us from fathers to ‘bio daddies’ or worse, to mere ‘donors’. Many of the Feminists view Christian matrimony as *enslavement *despite the role model of St. Joseph. Believe me. We have been changed from 'Father Knows Best" to 'Homer Simpson." I could go on and on… Such is not the core of this thread tho-- or is it?

What I’ve observed is that misogyny can never be cured with misandry.

 

[Debora123]

I fail to see the logic of the presented exegisis in the quote

I’m sorry you are incapable of seeing the logic in “Submit to one another out of reverence for Christ (Ephesians 5 21)” to mean that spouses must submit to each other. Not sure how much more clearly it can be stated, but I’m sorry you don’t understand.

 

[Debora123]

For a bit of context.

In Spiration and I got into a long debate over whether or not women are intellectually inferior (to men) in an earlier thread. With In Spiration arguing the* women are stupid *position in the thread.

There’s a link to the old thread if anyone is curious:
forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=530819&highlight=In+Spiration&page=6

LOL, wow…

 

[TrueLight]

So a wife is not to love her husband in such a fashion?

Let’s read that entire section of Ephesians again.

Yeah let’s.

21 Submit to one another(AI) out of reverence for Christ.

22 Wives, submit yourselves to your own husbands(AJ) as you do to the Lord.(AK) 23 For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church,(AL) his body, of which he is the Savior. 24 Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their husbands(AM) in everything.

25 Husbands, love your wives,(AN) just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her(AO) 26 to make her holy,(AP) cleansing** her by the washing(AQ) with water through the word, 27 and to present her to himself(AR) as a radiant church, without stain or wrinkle or any other blemish, but holy and blameless.(AS) 28 In this same way, husbands ought to love their wives(AT) as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself. 29 After all, no one ever hated their own body, but they feed and care for their body, just as Christ does the church— 30 for we are members of his body.(AU) 31 “For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh.”c 32 This is a profound mystery—but I am talking about Christ and the church. 33 However, each one of you also must love his wife(AW) as he loves himself, and the wife must respect her husband.**

If everyone were to follow that model - the whole thing and not pick and choose, then it would be a beautiful model indeed.

The first line, “submit to one another” would do away with the chauvinistic attitudes.

But it doesn’t stop there.

Seriously why would I not want to submit to the leadership of man with a sound mind, who loves God and who loves me as Christ loved the Church!

At the same time, because we submit to one another, we make decisions together. But he is still the head of the household.

 

[TrueLight]

I forgot I wasn’t going to come back to this particular thread.

 

[VeritasLuxMea]

Yeah let’s.

If everyone were to follow that model - the whole thing and not pick and choose, then it would be a beautiful model indeed.

The first line, “submit to one another” would do away with the chauvinistic attitudes.

But it doesn’t stop there.

Seriously why would I not want to submit to the leadership of man with a sound mind, who loves God and who loves me as Christ loved the Church!

At the same time, because we submit to one another, we make decisions together. But he is still the head of the household.

If you can explain what this means, you probably should… because you seem to be saying several contradictory things.

For example,

Seriously why would I not want to submit to the leadership of man with a sound mind, who loves God and who loves me as Christ loved the Church!

Replace “man” with “woman.”

 

[BlueEyedLady]

She was in favor of Eugenics but did not believe in killing anyone? Did you just say that? Isn’t that just a wee bit of an oxymoron eh? I reiterate! You are aware you are on a Catholic Forum - right? You are aware of our principles - right? Negative eugenics. Simply stopping the “feeble minded” from reproducing. Sterilization of the severely retarded. But yes, she did make it clear that once a person was here they deserved to live out their lives. And before you even think of twisting my words I would like to make it clear that I do not agree with that.

Please! Do tell me exactly just what she was *right *on?Birth control, the need to prevent and eliminate back alley abortions, educating women on their bodies and reproductive organs, etc

She did not tolerate racism in her clinics or her staff? What in the world is this? Have your even read her statement about the aboriginies? Good Grief! Do your research will ya? I know what statement you’re referring to and you’re right, it isn’t a good one. But that has nothing to do with what I said. Although she believed whites to be superior she had people of every color working in her clinics, and she did not tolerate them being treated any differently. Same with the clients.

I **am **sorry. I feel you have just left the -]planet/-] realms of rationality. At this juncture I feel I must refrain from continuing this discussion with you as it is just not profitable for either of us. We shall just have to disagree agreeably.I hope you aren’t this rude and uncharitable in person.

Simply put- your statements, IMHO, **clearly **highlight the *nescessity *for a Men’s Rights Organization and a need to politically militate via the democratic process against such dreadful thinking. Huh? You need a men’s rights movement because I know some basic facts about a historical figure that anyone could find out from a history book or a quick Google?

Sorry.

There’s a reason most men’s rights sites are classified as hate sites by the southern poverty law center.

 

[Debora123]

Yeah let’s.

If everyone were to follow that model - the whole thing and not pick and choose, then it would be a beautiful model indeed.

The first line, “submit to one another” would do away with the chauvinistic attitudes.

But it doesn’t stop there.

Seriously why would I not want to submit to the leadership of man with a sound mind, who loves God and who loves me as Christ loved the Church!

At the same time, because we submit to one another, we make decisions together. But he is still the head of the household.

I don’t think I’m picking and choosing anything. The whole thing is about mutual submission, and this was explained to me and my peers in great depth at my university’s Catholic Student Association.

21 Submit to one another(AI) out of reverence for Christ.

22 **Wives, submit yourselves to your own husbands(AJ) as you do to the Lord.(**AK) 23 For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church,(AL) his body, of which he is the Savior. 24 Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their husbands(AM) in everything.

25 Husbands, love your wives,(AN) just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her(AO) 26 to make her holy,(AP) cleansing** her by the washing(AQ) with water through the word, 27 and to present her to himself(AR) as a radiant church, without stain or wrinkle or any other blemish, but holy and blameless.(AS) 28 In this same way, husbands ought to love their wives(AT) as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself. 29 After all, no one ever hated their own body, but they feed and care for their body, just as Christ does the church— 30 for we are members of his body.(AU) 31 “For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh.”c 32 This is a profound mystery—but I am talking about Christ and the church. 33 However, each one of you also must love his wife(AW) as he loves himself, and the wife must respect her husband.**

-The first part states that spouses need to submit to each other,
-The second part explains how wives must submit to their husbands,
-And the third part explains that husbands must “love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her.” Jesus died for the Church. How much more submissive can you be than being willing to give your very life to someone??

Ephesians 5 is about mutual spousal submission, through and through.

Yes, the man is the head of the family, but this doesn’t mean he is somehow the “boss” and the woman is the “servant.” This does not mean he is the “dominant” while the woman is the “submissive.” What being the head of the family actually means, is that the man is to step up in the role as the spiritual leader, and has the greater responsibility in being the one to guide the family into heaven. Which, in regards to the husband’s duties to his wife, is why Ephesians ALSO says this: “make her holy, cleansing her by the washing with water through the word, and to present her to himself as a radiant church, without stain or wrinkle or any other blemish, but holy and blameless.”

My husband and I actually opted to have Ephesians 5 read and explained by our priest at our wedding. It really is a beautiful demonstration of spousal love and commitment.

 

[Crescentinus]

I don’t think I’m picking and choosing anything. The whole thing is about mutual submission, and this was explained to me and my peers in great depth at my university’s Catholic Student Association.

-The first part states that spouses need to submit to each other,
-The second part explains how wives must submit to their husbands,
-And the third part explains that husbands must “love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her.” Jesus died for the Church. How much more submissive can you be than being willing to give your very life to someone??

Ephesians 5 is about mutual spousal submission, through and through.

Yes, the man is the head of the family, but this doesn’t mean he is somehow the “boss” and the woman is the “servant.” This does not mean he is the “dominant” while the woman is the “submissive.” What being the head of the family actually means, is that the man is to step up in the role as the spiritual leader, and has the greater responsibility in being the one to guide the family into heaven.

^This, had just wrecked radical feminism’s approach on marriage.

 

[Debora123]

^This, had just wrecked radical feminism’s approach on marriage.

Good. NO ONE here is a radical feminist. Neither does anyone here support radical feminism in any way shape or form.

If “feminism” is about giving honor and dignity to the female gender (which is what it’s supposed to be), then radical feminism is actually NOT very feminist at all.

 

[Calliso]

LOL, wow…

Yeah I have been reading that debate and wow is probably an understatement.

 

[Crescentinus]

Good. NO ONE here is a radical feminist. Neither does anyone here support radical feminism in any way shape or form.

If “feminism” means to honor and give dignity to the female gender (which is what it’s supposed to mean), then radical feminism is actually NOT very feminist at all.

Agreed. Sadly, since radical feminism had hijacked mainstream feminism, most would equate radical feminism with mainstream feminism.

 

[Debora123]

Agreed. Sadly, since radical feminism had hijacked mainstream feminism, most would equate radical feminism with mainstream feminism.

True, but we are all smarter than that here on CAF.

 

[The_Bucket]

Agreed. Sadly, since radical feminism had hijacked mainstream feminism, most would equate radical feminism with mainstream feminism.

Agreed. And that’s part of the reason I think at least some posters are talking cross-purposes here. They’ve got definitions of feminism locked into their heads that good, Catholic female posters do not have in their heads when they’re writing. That can easily cause confusion.

My wife calls herself a feminist because she’s a fiercely independent person when it comes to many things. She hates asking people for favors and insists that she can handle anything the world throws at her. And she can! But she also needs me as I need her. After all, we’ve been one flesh for nearly five years now. Despite that label, however, you’d never mistake her for a 1970s-style bra-burning “woman.” She’s as proud of her role as wife and mother as she is of being a community and church leader and a volunteer that helps immigrant families.

 

[Crescentinus]

Agreed. And that’s part of the reason I think at least some posters are talking cross-purposes here. They’ve got definitions of feminism locked into their heads that good, Catholic female posters do not have in their heads when they’re writing. That can easily cause confusion.

My wife calls herself a feminist because she’s a fiercely independent person when it comes to many things. She hates asking people for favors and insists that she can handle anything the world throws at her. And she can! But she also needs me as I need her. After all, we’ve been one flesh for nearly five years now. Despite that label, however, you’d never mistake her for a 1970s-style bra-burning “woman.” She’s as proud of her role as wife and mother as she is of being a community and church leader and a volunteer that helps immigrant families.

Your wife, is one of the people who can lift feminism out of the quicksand of radical feminism.

 

[Debora123]

Yeah I have been reading that debate and wow is probably an understatement.

The sad part is that most of these posters seem to be arguing against AngryAtheist, even though the person on the opposite side is making some astounding claims that women are dumber than men. It’s all just very biased. People here are always going to argue against the Atheist even if it’s on a topic where she/he happens to be right.

 

[TrueLight]

I don’t think I’m picking and choosing anything. The whole thing is about mutual submission, and this was explained to me and my peers in great depth at my university’s Catholic Student Association.

-The first part states that spouses need to submit to each other,
-The second part explains how wives must submit to their husbands,
-And the third part explains that husbands must “love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her.” Jesus died for the Church. How much more submissive can you be than being willing to give your very life to someone??

Ephesians 5 is about mutual spousal submission, through and through.

Yes, the man is the head of the family, but this doesn’t mean he is somehow the “boss” and the woman is the “servant.” This does not mean he is the “dominant” while the woman is the “submissive.” What being the head of the family actually means, is that the man is to step up in the role as the spiritual leader, and has the greater responsibility in being the one to guide the family into heaven. Which, in regards to the husband’s duties to his wife, is why Ephesians ALSO says this: “make her holy, cleansing her by the washing with water through the word, and to present her to himself as a radiant church, without stain or wrinkle or any other blemish, but holy and blameless.”

My husband and I actually opted to have Ephesians 5 read and explained by our priest at our wedding. It really is a beautiful demonstration of spousal love and commitment.

I don’t think anyone who has a proper understanding would disagree with anything you said here. Which is my point.

But your post incorpirated the whole passage, which is what it is about. It’s not about knee jerk responses and declarations of feminism and it’s not about misogynistic definitions of a woman’s role.