Women need to shut up and sit down

reply to post by LDragonFire


i was going to post what all of that really meant but i can see now no matter what i say you are going to contridict it and i will probably be accused of covering it up... but one thing i would like to point out is in Ephesians 5:22-24 submit is not used in the terms as slave but as a supporter and if you read on it says"25husbands, love your wives, just as Crist also loved the church and gave Himself for her." and it goes on telling men to love their wife that he who loves his wife loves himself. to cherish her and be as one. you are interrpreting things as it is writen. if you read romeo and juliet you need to see the reason bheind what they are saying.
i dont want any responses i just wanted to say this. and if anyone does respond i wont just for the sake that my own words are used against me

[edit on 29-11-2008 by bellla198]

reply to post by LDragonFire




thank you for these references

we must not blame Islam entirely for treating women this way when its in the Bible too

suffice to say - I am not interested in any religion that says that women have to be submissive and I doubt that god would give me intellect that is equal to, and sometimes better than, men and then demand that i use none of that intellect and instead - allow men who have little wisdom to boss me around

Originally posted by worldwatcher
It's not just the bible and Christianity that portrays women in a subservient role, Islam and Hinduism does the same. Hindu scriptures even calls for a married woman to throw herself on her husband's funeral pryre

Funny how we Hindus, men and women alike can worship a female deity, yet treat women as second class citizens.

There is definitely a conspiracy in most major religions to silence and shut down the woman.

[edit on 10-10-2007 by worldwatcher]

so does that mean women are somehow dangerous? that men fear women who are given equality? or were sacred books wrotten by men for men?

Originally posted by Copernicus

Originally posted by Alexander the o.k.
There is crap in all religions.
But the biggest load of crap is the way the original intent is perverted, misquoted, and bastardized by humans with an agenda.

The title of this 'piece' is one example.

Feel free to enlighten the rest of us what was really meant by those words. How do you mean they are taken out of context?

Here is another one on the same subject:

Genesis 3:16 (New International Version)
I will greatly increase your pains in childbearing;
with pain you will give birth to children.
Your desire will be for your husband,
and he will rule over you.

I agree that it very much sounds like men wrote the bible. Not only is God really a nice bloke to increase the pain of childbearing, but he also says women are meant to be ruled by men.

Well, excuse me if I dont fall over in my admiration of these wise words...





[edit on 10-10-2007 by Copernicus]

ok then what was the original intent of all the religious books telling women to be subservient?

um this is america and its not a conspiracy that women believe in the bible. its their religion and in the USA we have the freedom to be christians and accept one true god. Here in the usa it can be strange for outsiders to be able to comprehend our achievements such as the internet or the space shuttle but to call it a conspiracy is unfounded.

Originally posted by elaine
The Bible can't be taken literally. Alot of it was written by Man for his own personal agenda.

Don't get me wrong though. I think some parts of it are very wise and true.

But most American women would be going straight to hell if they were judged on what they wore when they got up to the "pearly gates" or whether they obeyed their husbands all the time.

Personally I don't think God cares what I wear as long as try to be a loving and good person.

God also gave women their own minds to question and judge things for themselves.

If he'd wanted us to be so submissive as what's described in the Old Testament. I think he would've designed us to be more along the lines of being "stepford wives".

[edit on 10-10-2007 by elaine]

would not this god have to make men wise enough?

I mean - where I work - i am so damn effcient that within 2 months the boss fired the male supervisor and put me in charge and i have been doing a super efficient job and bossing male subordinates around

in many areas of life women are better at it so why should women be subordinate to males ordering them around when they are wiser than the males?

in animal societies it is the female who is the one depended on for many things - for instance rabbits - bucks dont dig - does do all the digging but without the warrens there would be no protection for the bucks

in cat society - the male cat is not as efficient hunter as a female cat because the female cat has to provide for her off spring

in human sociely these days many women have to manage on their own and do a marvellous job - so why should women EVER be subservient to males?

pwerhaps this philosophy comes form a time when women did not live long - they married at age 9 and had a baby every year till they died by the age of 20 and so the males were wiser because they had life experience and no females lived long enough to gain life experience

Originally posted by Boogiman
I used to be a pretty religious person.

I got rid of religion recently.

Now I see the kind of crap I was blindly following.

Madness.

reminds me of a great quote

having abandoned my search for truth I am now after a good fantasy!

Originally posted by Kacen

Originally posted by parrhesia
reply to post by Kacen

 

I see your point, but is the rejection of today's so-called femininity, or even the femininity of yesteryear better when it is substituted for so-called masculine clothing an/or behaviour?

Isn't that sexism still in action? Isn't that still reinforcing gender roles and values?

I was merely stating my personal preference in a spouse, well one of them.

But still, really, it just sickens me how it's all just designed to feminize them...but yeah it is kinda reverse. I guess it's pushing the pendulum in the other direction.

Personally, I hope we can eliminate all stereotypical gender roles so people are just who they want to be without subconscious indoctrination.

mens place in society is to serve and service us girls!

my husbands always end up doign ALLLLL the housework for me - I would not have it any other way!

O.K. Religion in general dis-allows women to teach to the congragation. You think christianity is "bad", take a look at judism, islam, hinduism. Only in the christian are women teaching in the congragation. Wheather or not we agree with what the bible say is inconsiquecial. It is only natural for a man to take on the leading role in the family. You can't have two leaders in the same household. It won't work. So someone has to be the leader, that is man, and a man feels confident enough to take on this role and a women is comfrotable in her position. I have had pleanty of girlfriends who would have it no other way. As a matter of fact, women find strong men attractive. When was the last time you felt attracted to a woman for her leadership and authority over you? That's not a natural attraction for a man to have unless he is homosexual. So in religion it is written, and in atheism, it is a natural attraction of the sexes. JMHO.


well then i must be doing something wrong because I find that all the males I know are not my intellectual equal - I am better at making decisions about everything

Originally posted by AshleyD
reply to post by LDragonFire

 

34women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the Law says. 1 Corinthians 14:34

If you celebrate Thanksgiving, Christmas, or any other major family holiday, I want you to look at what the females do for these days verses what the men do. The women do the cooking, inviting the guests, organizing the events, and do the cleaning up while the men show up, eat, then crash on the couch to watch the game.

It is in the female's personality to take over social events while it is in the male personality to take over career responsibility. The men typically went to work in that day while women took care of EVERYTHING else. This instruction was to place the responsibility of church leadership on the men to get them involved.

.

nope - i let hubby do all that - he cooks and cleans

i work and earn the money. I dont like the stuff that constitutes 'women's work' so i refuse to do it - simple!

Originally posted by 123143
Women need to shut up and sit down

We will just as soon as you boys stop screwing up the planet.

excellent - well said - thank you

The bible was written by men for men. Women throughout pre-bible eras across the globe have held powerful cultural positions. Power and authority were stripped away with the invention of religion.

One thing i know for sure, is that female intution is rubbish, and its why males are priests in the church. Not me saying this, but man have i found that the female side with regard to this is soo poor.

I can see why the church only use males, and its probably to do alot with the occult.

I wonder how many ceo's of big successful companies also are run by women, probably none, if any.

Originally posted by bellla198
reply to post by LDragonFire

 

i was going to post what all of that really meant but i can see now no matter what i say you are going to contridict it and i will probably be accused of covering it up... but one thing i would like to point out is in Ephesians 5:22-24 submit is not used in the terms as slave but as a supporter and if you read on it says"25husbands, love your wives, just as Crist also loved the church and gave Himself for her." and it goes on telling men to love their wife that he who loves his wife loves himself. to cherish her and be as one. you are interrpreting things as it is writen. if you read romeo and juliet you need to see the reason bheind what they are saying.
i dont want any responses i just wanted to say this. and if anyone does respond i wont just for the sake that my own words are used against me

[edit on 29-11-2008 by bellla198]

but, then, it is quite possible that it was the law of the land at the time...
at least in Isreal.
there was a king long ago in Isreal that got a little peeved off at his wife for not making an appearance at the king's party so he could "show her off", what can I say, she had her own party going on. and well, he got peeved off enough to make women's obedience to their husband a law!

the love was a new concept though....but let me ask you something, if you love someone who is in a lesser posistion in society, do you really want to rule over them? or would you be more apt to bring them up to your standard in society?

lords/servants....rule/submit doesn't require any love whatsoever....but it demands obedience. love on the other hand doesn't require a ruler, or any obedience...but it does require that one alway act in a way that benefits the other person, even if it means not doing what they say.

reply to post by dawnstar

i said i wasnt going to reply but i guess i will
it says this in the bible for god knew it was hard for man to love his wife and it was hard for the women to be submitive, as in saying to be supportive.
deuteronomy 22:5women must not wear anything that pertains to a man,nor shall a man put on a women's garment, for all who do so are an abomination to the Lord your God.
this actually means that in a marriage the man shall not take the roll of the women and the women take the roll of the man.

Originally posted by megabyte
nope - i let hubby do all that - he cooks and cleans

i work and earn the money. I dont like the stuff that constitutes 'women's work' so i refuse to do it - simple!

Talk about missing the point. Yes, there are households that have 'role reversal.' However, my previous comment explained a possible reason why the task was placed on men to be church leaders. Just because you have a different situation personally doesn't change tradition and gender instincts.

reply to post by AshleyD



Well put! I think people see the exceptions to the rule and automatically they want the exception to be the rule.

There are certainly cases in the Bible where women were used, but in the majority of the cases, she was used w/in her natural instinct boundaries. The only time that I can think of that would have been exception is when Debra was appointed to be a judge because there was not a man fit to fill the role in the way it needed to be filled.

I think for anyone who has faith in God, the best thing that can be done is to stop arguing a view point that is obviously based on self interest and trust that if God needs you to step outside of what he commanded, he will let ya know and he will lay it on the hearts of others of like faith to understand and accept it as his will for your life.

It is those that argue for self interest that turn so many off to God. *shrugs* may be the unpopular thing to say, but this isn't highschool and you are adults and should be able to handle the truth. If you accept a part of the Bible, to have full effect in your life for the testimony to others, you should accept it all and trust God on the rest. (this is applicable to men as well as to women).

I have no conclusions on God and the books that are claimed to be his, however, I see the sense in many of the values put forth if applied. Values (that being what should already be instinctive) over self interest is the way to go and it does say in the bible that the person who applies these values even w/out believing in the divine appointing of them is the wise man in his community.

I see the sense in being submissive to one's partner... and God will provide a way to maintain this submissiveness w/out having to comprimise your human worth if you trust him. (This coming from a non christian too. lol)

When I read this post I assumed, correctly, that the replies would take the stance that this Scripture was simply another plot by MAN to keep WOMAN subjugated. There are several facts to consider.

The first is that IF you believe that the Scriptures are the divine Word of Elohime, then they are not MAN'S words as concieved by MAN. The term Divinely Inspired means that Elohime put these words into man's mind, who then wrote them down. They are the word of Elohime.

The second fact is that yes, in MAN'S rebellion to Elohime, to do his own thing, interepets various Scripture to mean what he wants it to mean, thus justifiying his own actions. This is why there appear to be parts of Scripture that seem to contradict each other, because man has given his own meaning to it.

The third fact is that yes, Elohime has created the universe with a certain order. Part of this order is the family structure. Elohime placed MAN at the head of the family, with the women in subjugation.

You may not like, or believe this, but denial does not change the facts. If you do NOT believe that Scripture is the divine Word of Elohime, then, you are lost, because unless you accept Yeshua as your savior, and know and obey Elohime's scommandments, there can be no SALVATION for you.

..yet the Elohime are niether male or female. If you were truly correct that man changed things to his own convenience.. he would not have felt the need to make god a "him".

reply to post by dawnstar


Dawnstar,

I don't think that is quite correct. I don't believe the king you mentioned is an Israelite King. I think he was a Persian king. As I recall the Israelites were in Captivity some seven times for disobedience to God. This may have been in one of their periods of captivity. King Ahasuerus seems to come to mind and I think he was a Persian King.

Megabyte,

suffice to say - I am not interested in any religion that says that women have to be submissive and I doubt that god would give me intellect that is equal to, and sometimes better than, men and then demand that i use none of that intellect and instead - allow men who have little wisdom to boss me around

In reading your various posts here ..I am thinking that you also know that intellect and wisdom are not the same thing. I wonder if many of the readers out here know this too. I am sure you can explain to them the difference.

perhaps this philosophy comes form a time when women did not live long

This type of time warp technique is not wisdom...for anyone knowing any history knows that both men and women did not live long back in the time warp era. Men still died off at earlier ages than did most of the women.
They still do...so who is the "victim" here?? Or do we just cant the viewfinder so that no one quite notices the history. Especially if they were never taught except from a television viewfinder.
I mean to tell you Megabyte ...and others ..there are some stupid men on these boards not to see this one miles away. The men here need to pull their heads out of Hooters and the swimsuit edition and do some real thinking. A tall order for some of us I will admit.
It is very easy for women like you to pull this one over on them in mute silence. Congratulations. It is still not wisdom. It is a con job.

mens place in society is to serve and service us girls!

my husbands always end up doing ALLLLL the housework for me - I would not have it any other way!

I am thinking you are being facetious here...but just in case...

I know what you mean. Being a woman of intellect...and believing in equality ..I am sure you also help your man with his traditional male chores...to lighten the drudgery of his burden...You know...after doing the housework..his days are full of drudgery...and "victimization." You don't mind pitching in and helping him with his traditional male chores he does in addition to the housework.
You know what I mean...like Ellen Goodman is complaining about here.
You know...equality and all that stuff...In addition to earning the moneys.

www.postwritersgroup.com...

I am sure that as a woman of intellect you believe in this type of equality..verses ..self promotion. Hmmm...is that wisdom???

Nintendo,

You actually make some sense in your post on page 18. I think that the fast food lane of life has made a lot of stress in the transplanted artificial expectations/beliefs of marriage by defining the marriage by what one can consume and the race to acquire such. Not often realizing that in the process we are consuming each other.....male and female. In this manner or pattern we have become cursed indeed...by shallow and artificial lifestyles.

Justamom,
Also from page 18. My apologies for not getting back to this thread in awhile. I too am not talking about abusive partners. I have seen this abuse both male and female. I have little use for a lot of fast food lane values around me. I especially don't like drunkards...male or female...nor drug users et al. I also consider a lot of television thinking/beliefs/expectations to be drug use as well...artificial belief systems. As far as I am concerned ..a lot of television is the perfect drug to control unthinking people who mostly need to emote their way through life. It is very effective on many. One can often tell this in many of the posts on here.

Thanks,
Orangetom


[edit on 30-11-2008 by orangetom1999]