D
Debora123
Guest
I hear ya buddy.I guess I shouldn’t feed the troll
But its hard to resist sometimes.
- Status
B
BlueEyedLady
Guest
The problem with Edwest’s outlook is that he frequently confuses the idea of a woman wanting control over herself and her own life with wanting control over men. He’s said time and time again that a woman’s family should play a strong role in choosing her husband, and in the thread I mentioned earlier he was upset about a woman rejecting her family’s tradition by refusing an arraigned marriage. These women do not seek to control men, only to control themselves.
D
Debora123
Guest
Sooo you think In Spiration is right in thinking women are inherently dumber than men?
Also, I’m not sure how the pope’s quotes you posted are supposed to back up that claim. I agree 100% with those quotes, but am far from agreeing with you in regards to a lot of your views on women.
D
Debora123
Guest
Well didn’t you know?
Refusing to marry someone you don’t like = radical, man hating, feminism.
Right…
B
BlueEyedLady
Guest
Go check out the thread. It’s in popular media under ‘Brave, a reflection of an agenda’. One of the scariest I’ve seen on CAF. I would link it but my phone doesn’t do so well with that.Well didn’t you know?
Refusing to marry someone you don’t like = radical, man hating, feminism.
Right…
D
Debora123
Guest
Just skimmed through it. Luckily, the people who were actually condemning the movie seemed to be in the vast minority.
Can’t wait to see it myself though, I love pixar!
S
Serap
Guest
You’re right; I’m sorry.
S
Serap
Guest
I have to see that movie!!! I’m taking my daughter to see it.
E
edwest2
Guest
S
Serap
Guest
ohhhh Ed! :nope: I hope deep down you value women’s contribution to the world. We do a heck of a lot and we are just as smart and capable as any other person.
E
edwest2
Guest
“scary” A common word to get others to be in your personal emotional boat. I stand by what I wrote.
Peace,
Ed
S
Serap
Guest
See I don’t see it that way. She is voicing an opinion.
S
sweetpetunia
Guest
Quotes or it didn’t happen. I went back to look for it, and as far as I can tell, Ed doesn’t say anything about arranged marriages in that thread. At all. The two issues he mentioned that he does not like was the girl slashing a family heirloom tapestry and an old man “mooning” someone. The only people who mentioned arranged marriages were the ones attacking him for his viewpoint, and trying to put words in his mouth. Sorry, but you undermine your own credibility.
D
Debora123
Guest
Well then you’re not making any sense. You claim In Spiration is “right” about men being smarter than women, but you don’t think men are smarter than women? Hmm.
D
Debora123
Guest
He was condemning the character for going against “tradition.”
The tradition being to marry someone of her parent’s choosing.
As for the man mooning someone, well, that type of humor is right down my alley. I never grew out of bathroom jokes.
S
Serap
Guest
I just wish that men and women respected eachother.
These threads would be unnecessary.
These threads would be unnecessary.
A
AngryAtheist8
Guest
Quote:
Originally Posted by AngryAtheist8
Originally Posted by In Spiration
The “Catholic Feminism” may not necessarily be (overtly) atheistic, but it does indeed derive from principles that presume necessary skepticism re: absolutes, the supernatural, the Good, etc. I think the feminism of many Christians is probably more tied to an implicitly assumed egalitarianism that they likely picked up through the culture at large. Their main concerns seem to be in promoting “freedom,” which, according to liberal theory, is not defined as the ability to do good, but instead as mere autonomy. So the goal becomes simply to maximize the total amount of choice for individuals with different-but-equal values (which, for women who believe all male dominance is oppression, amounts to female-centered egalitarianism, or “feminism”). Egalitarian liberalism is in part an attempt to achieve neutrality through tolerant non-judgment. It ends up reducing goodness to preference, or the “freedom” to maximize the pursuit of one’s hyper-individualized preferences in a fundamentally atomistic society. (I’m summing up complex theories and history pretty briefly here, so please permit the simplifications I’ve made in this short post.)
A lot of Catholics find feminism harmless due to the fact its costs are hidden. But make no mistake – we pay for all forms of feminism in one way or another. Nothing is free. The cost is a gradual loss of civilization (after demographic winter), and the currency is artificial contraception and abortion. (Men will then try to recover their losses through other means, including pornography and avoidance of marriage – see: Japan.) Feminism simply would not be feasible if women were in large, fruitful, truly Catholic families, and the majority of them would be if they couldn’t sinfully satisfy their sexual urges “without any [explicit] consequences”. One could argue that feminism is effectively an attempt to shift the costs of women’s bad “choices” onto children, men, or the State.
Thus we sacrifice human souls so that we can sustain the “liberation” of women from the terrible life of having many children while their husbands work hard to support them.
And we think human sacrifice is a thing of the past. . . as the abortion death toll approaches one billion worldwide.
In Spiration argued with me for pages in another thread, advocating the idea that women are stupid.
Why should we take his opinions on Feminism seriously?
Originally Posted by AngryAtheist8
Originally Posted by In Spiration
The “Catholic Feminism” may not necessarily be (overtly) atheistic, but it does indeed derive from principles that presume necessary skepticism re: absolutes, the supernatural, the Good, etc. I think the feminism of many Christians is probably more tied to an implicitly assumed egalitarianism that they likely picked up through the culture at large. Their main concerns seem to be in promoting “freedom,” which, according to liberal theory, is not defined as the ability to do good, but instead as mere autonomy. So the goal becomes simply to maximize the total amount of choice for individuals with different-but-equal values (which, for women who believe all male dominance is oppression, amounts to female-centered egalitarianism, or “feminism”). Egalitarian liberalism is in part an attempt to achieve neutrality through tolerant non-judgment. It ends up reducing goodness to preference, or the “freedom” to maximize the pursuit of one’s hyper-individualized preferences in a fundamentally atomistic society. (I’m summing up complex theories and history pretty briefly here, so please permit the simplifications I’ve made in this short post.)
A lot of Catholics find feminism harmless due to the fact its costs are hidden. But make no mistake – we pay for all forms of feminism in one way or another. Nothing is free. The cost is a gradual loss of civilization (after demographic winter), and the currency is artificial contraception and abortion. (Men will then try to recover their losses through other means, including pornography and avoidance of marriage – see: Japan.) Feminism simply would not be feasible if women were in large, fruitful, truly Catholic families, and the majority of them would be if they couldn’t sinfully satisfy their sexual urges “without any [explicit] consequences”. One could argue that feminism is effectively an attempt to shift the costs of women’s bad “choices” onto children, men, or the State.
Thus we sacrifice human souls so that we can sustain the “liberation” of women from the terrible life of having many children while their husbands work hard to support them.
And we think human sacrifice is a thing of the past. . . as the abortion death toll approaches one billion worldwide.
In Spiration argued with me for pages in another thread, advocating the idea that women are stupid.
Why should we take his opinions on Feminism seriously?
The 2 highlighted sentences directly contradict one another.
A
AngryAtheist8
Guest
That has been my impression too.
E
edwest2
Guest
Respect? If I may Parody.
You can’t trust a man, any man. Respect is for fools, because the enemy (men) is always trying to take advantage of women. The solution? Power. Power to force men to do whatever we ask.
Had I not seen and heard the Women’s Libbers on TV myself during the 1970s then I would have less to say. So, What, exactly, did they want to be liberated from?
We need:
Self-respect.
Respect for our neighbor.
Respect for the opposite sex.
Respect for parents.
But no, now we’re living through too much radical individualism that has only one goal in mind: “Hey man. If it feels good, do it.”
Pure 100% selfishness means getting all the “fun” without needing to really respect anybody. Men and women just use each other for an evening, and relieve themselves like going to the bathroom. Disgusting.
And we’re having the rotten fruit shoved into our faces all day, every day.
Respect means loving God, your neighbor and yourself, in that order.
Peace,
Ed
D
Debora123
Guest
What are you talking about??
No one here thinks that way. NO ONE. And neither is that the point we “feminists” are arguing.
- Status