Should man rule over women for women’s own good?

Should man rule over women for women’s own good?


Scriptures, and other myth’s, say that God determined that men should rule over women. This gives form, --- in a demographic sense, ---- to our common and society, and says that our demographic pyramid should have a hierarchical shape and or form. This initiates tension and has God demonizing woman, as well as any notion of female equality with man.

His motive must be for the good of women. Somehow!
After all, sanctity of the family is one of the main points of morality.

God was arguably right for his time. Think in the barbaric way. Below the belt. Thank God that time is almost past. Women in our modern world do not need man’s dubious ape like help. I hope you agree. Be honest now with yourself be you male or female.

Men have dominated women long enough I think. To give them equality would be justice.

What do you think?
What would real men do?
What would real women demand?
Do men and women have what it takes to be free?

Justice under law should be gender and age neutral, with limits, but with a good spirit of assuring equality. We do not administer that justice. We only give it lip service. Men are not walking their talk. Neither are women.

In Gods timocracy, a place of government in which love of honor is the ruling principle. All honors go to the Queen and her children. A king’s first responsibility is to insure the veneration of his queen. Honor demands it. He accepts this burden and pleasure wisely. The Queen, as the Beta archetype is the life of the kingdom. The archetypal king’s duty is to raise woman’s position. That means that all men have the same duty. That of not denying women equality and elevating her.

Men. Be good kings. You are making good just men look bad. Step up.
God wills it.

Women. Be good queens and demand what is yours.

www.youtube.com...

www.youtube.com...


Regards
DL

Short and sweet - the answer is NO!

If women ruled over Men - there's be no wars and killing - end of.

You also do realise that Woman was portrayed as a Harlet in the Bible - this was a deliberate intention in order that Man would be enabled to rule over Women - well guess what:

It's 2012 and life have moved on - women are now coming into their own at last - trouble with this is, men don't like it as they now have to get off their butts.

Young men nowadays are off their Butts and should be proud of themselves but this has only come about by women refusing to be the Door Mats and substitute Mothers any longer.

gotta love religion. it treats everyone so fair and equally..a real man would use his logic and reason as his guidelines and not some book written by a bunch of bigoted ,ignorant hate mongers.

if women ruled men there would be LOTS of wars.
women are very emotional.
man and women should be equal and stop caring only about sex.
just let everyone help themselves and see who is better.
only to tell you.....men can now cook, better then women even.

Originally posted by quedup
Short and sweet - the answer is NO!

If women ruled over Men - there's be no wars and killing - end of.

Lol no

www.cracked.com...

if women like Margaret thatcher are anything to by then having them rule wouldnt lead to a peaceful society at all.

Though no men shouldn't rule over women at all. The notion is ridiculous.

reply to post by Greatest I am


There is some debate over the possiblity that Mary was the person who was supposed to lead the church...

She was apparently Jesus' favorite disciple... But obviously the men wouldn't have it...

I believe Christianity would be an entirely different religion if she was the original leader...

Perhaps even an actual peaceful religion as they claim.... as opposed to the reality of what we have today and in the past.

Originally posted by Greatest I am
Should man rule over women for women’s own good?


Scriptures, and other myth’s, say that God determined that men should rule over women. This gives form, --- in a demographic sense, ---- to our common and society, and says that our demographic pyramid should have a hierarchical shape and or form. This initiates tension and has God demonizing woman, as well as any notion of female equality with man.

His motive must be for the good of women. Somehow!
After all, sanctity of the family is one of the main points of morality.

God was arguably right for his time. Think in the barbaric way. Below the belt. Thank God that time is almost past. Women in our modern world do not need man’s dubious ape like help. I hope you agree. Be honest now with yourself be you male or female.

Men have dominated women long enough I think. To give them equality would be justice.

What do you think?
What would real men do?
What would real women demand?
Do men and women have what it takes to be free?

Justice under law should be gender and age neutral, with limits, but with a good spirit of assuring equality. We do not administer that justice. We only give it lip service. Men are not walking their talk. Neither are women.

In Gods timocracy, a place of government in which love of honor is the ruling principle. All honors go to the Queen and her children. A king’s first responsibility is to insure the veneration of his queen. Honor demands it. He accepts this burden and pleasure wisely. The Queen, as the Beta archetype is the life of the kingdom. The archetypal king’s duty is to raise woman’s position. That means that all men have the same duty. That of not denying women equality and elevating her.

Men. Be good kings. You are making good just men look bad. Step up.
God wills it.

Women. Be good queens and demand what is yours.

www.youtube.com...

www.youtube.com...


Regards
DL

Do you feel women aren't of equal worth?

As far as religious texts giving men authority over women, no surprise there. Who do you think wrote and interpreted the texts?

Personally, I believe women have the same intellectual capacity as any man. But having said that, I do believe there are certain strengths one gender has over the other.

Speaking very generally here, but men tend to be physically stronger and more aggressive. My father always said it was the man's job to protect his family. I kinda agree with that. It doesn't mean I'm a helpless ninny who must rely upon my husband for everything; but it's nice to know he's there.

There are certain things that women tend to do better than men: namely, women are gentler, more empathetic and compassionate. Women also are great nurturers.

Having stated the above, I want to be very clear: I have NO problem with men or women blurring these roles. I know I would make a horrible soldier, but that's me. There are women out there who would excel at combat, and so long as they can meet the physical requirements then I say go for it.

I for one would like to see the women take control of the helm - Unfortunately you would be taking over a shipwreck.

And before you say "Margaret Thatcher / Julia Gillard etc etc and they didn't do any good" - thats because they were not allowed out of the corporate/political kitchen"

I mean women at every power level in every country - damn I for one would welcome the day.

Guarantee life would get a little better.

Go the Chicks

For anyone who thinks men should "rule" over women:

There are many countries in the world where this occurs. Please move to one of them.

Thanks.

When men rule over women it is normally because they don't have self control or feel men should have self control. They then subjugate the women out of a fear that because they have an urge to be unfaithful other men will want their women. Then they cloister the women (keep them in the house) and don't let them mingle with men who the male fears have the same uncontrollable urges they do.

Arranged marriage is a byproduct of men being raised not to have self control. The woman is forcibly assigned to a man for the purpose of sex. She frequently resents the man who she must submit to and he knows it. Then the male worries even more that she will stray because he knows his fellow men can not control themselves when it comes to sex.

When a woman is free to choose her mate, the male must control himself and behave in a civil manner to get the woman. If he is harsh with her, she can easily leave him. Therefore, he has to be nice to her to get sex.

It is a lose, lose when either rules over the other for society, marriages and families.

When all parties hold equal power they must all behave civilly toward each other and that extends beyond the family. Each must learn to respect the other and have self control so as to not be shunned by the other.

Women and men need to respect each other equally. Each family is then free to choose its own lifestyle. Housewife/househusband, both work, whatever works best for the individuals involved. Each must control their sexual urges and by exercising self control in this area learn self control in the rest of life, extending out into society.

Omg can you imagine all women leaders??

There would be rhetoric once a month for a few days that would make Iran - US rhetoric look like nothing. The cycles would eventually match up because they are always meeting at their G20 and G8 summits and UN meetings. Someone would get the carpet beside the one of their hotel pools wet, and that would be it! All out nuclear war!

Originally posted by Sublimecraft
And before you say "Margaret Thatcher / Julia Gillard etc etc and they didn't do any good" - thats because they were not allowed out of the corporate/political kitchen"

so the system made Margaret a war monger? It just wasn't you know ......her natural butt holishness?

Originally posted by SublimecraftI mean women at every power level in every country - damn I for one would welcome the day.

Guarantee life would get a little better.

Go the Chicks

How can you guarantee this. What proof do we have that a gender offers something particularly unique that would benefit government?

reply to post by paganini

so the system made Margaret a war monger? It just wasn't you know ......her natural butt holishness?

Where did I say or infer "warmonger"? - I was talking about running a country so get war and butt jokes off your mind my friend.

How can you guarantee this.

MY guarantee comes from the wisdom of my mother, the love of my wife, the awesomeness of my sister and the unconditional love of my daughter, amongst other women that I hold in high esteem.

What proof do we have that a gender offers something particularly unique that would benefit government?

The only proof, and 2000+ years of it, that I have to offer regarding a particular gender "benefiting" government, is the dismal state of affairs we currently find ourselves discussing resultant from male dominated government therefore when only 2 genders exist, and only one of them run government and no benefit exists, its time to give the other gender complete control. Failing that a 50/50 share comes to mind.

As we say here in Australia - don't knock it until you have tried it.

NB: You have a superiority complex - keep it in check on this site please. If you cannot respond with full dignity don't bother responding at all.

Originally posted by SublimecraftWhere did I say or infer "warmonger"? - I was talking about running a country so get war and butt jokes off your mind my friend.

Yes but people bring up women like thatcher to specifically point out that women in power were just as ruthless and unsavory as their male counter parts

Originally posted by SublimecraftMY guarantee comes from the wisdom of my mother, the love of my wife, the awesomeness of my sister and the unconditional love of my daughter, amongst other women that I hold in high esteem.

Compare that number of women to the billions running around on the planet. It would be illogical to profess that the qualities of those women are a reflection on the gender as a whole. By your logic myself or other people here who had male friends and family of impressive character could assume that these qualties extend to men in general as well. Would that be a wise choice? No.

Originally posted by SublimecraftThe only proof, and 2000+ years of it, that I have to offer regarding a particular gender "benefiting" government,

The absence of women from these 2000 years doesn't go in their favor for making an valid argument for women having complete control. preforming at a satisfactory level in government that would surpass men would.since we have yet to see that happen you stating that your moms great and all proves little in regards to a sensible argument.

Originally posted by SublimecraftNB: You have a superiority complex - keep it in check on this site please. If you cannot respond with full dignity don't bother responding at all.

I have been polite enough . I merely expect a rational argument for your statements.

reply to post by Greatest I am


Let's look at this in a different way. Men have ruled over women for the past several thousand years. How has this benefited women? They were bought and sold as chattel. They lacked basic human rights, such as testifying in court or means to escape abusive situations. Some were beaten, others ignored.

Violence against women is glorified in the rap music of the day, where every other word is a deragatory slur. Women are still victims of the sex slave industry.

Yeah....men have done an excellent job of looking out for women.

reply to post by Greatest I am


Everyone does this...everyone... God said woman should serve man, then in the next bloody paragraph, he says that man should treat his wife with all respect and love. She should be treated as a queen, just as much a woman should treat her man like a king. It's a respect thing, not a dominace thing. It always gets twisted by those that don't read one line ahead of what got em in a twist. Read the whole book, not just those paragraphs that upset you.

You guys don't get it do you?

The whole thing boils down to intercourse and the claim on progeny.

Men who can't control their own sexual urges project that onto women and "protect" the women to insure the progeny are theirs. They also don't wan't "sloppy seconds" from the mother of their children but love to get in the pig sty with other women. They then assume that their wives want to play in the sty too because they want it so badly.

It is my observation that the more a man wants to "protect" a woman the less self control he has and the more irrational and violent his thought patterns.

Women would certainly do a much better job ruling the world, but men won't allow it because it makes them feel out of control and castrated.

reply to post by Greatest I am

Originally posted by Wonders

Originally posted by Greatest I am
Christians are always trying to absolve God of moral culpability in the fall by whipping out their favorite "free will!", or “ it’s all man’s fault”.

An explanation for why Eve would even have the nature of "being vulnerable to being easily swayed by a serpent" and "desiring to eat a forbidden fruit" must lie in the nature God gave Eve in the first place. Hence God is culpable for deliberately making humans with a nature-inclined-to-fall, and "free will" means nothing as a response to this problem.

If all sin by nature then, the sin nature is dominant. If not, we would have at least some who would not sin.
Evil is our responsibility.
First, let us eliminate what some see as evil. Natural disasters. These are unthinking occurrences and are neither good nor evil. There is no intent to do evil even as victims are created.

Evil then is only human to human.
As evolving creatures, all we ever do, and ever can do, is compete or cooperate.
Cooperation we would see as good as there are no victims created. Competition would be seen as evil as it creates a victim. We all are either cooperating, doing good, or competing, doing evil at all times.

Without us doing some of both, we would likely go extinct.
This, to me, explains why there is evil in the world quite well.
This is how things are and should be.

I am not trying to change anything except the perception that evil is not useful to us while realizing we can reduce it's impact.
FYPOV, why else would God create it? So that man would not go extinct. Your perception is wrong if you see evil growing. It is shrinking.

I do not think we have no free will. We do have free will. I even have a test to prove it.

Eve was not deceived. You spout dogma and not fact and point to why the church will not give woman equality with men and says that man is to rule aver woman. Then again, most Christians do not admit to denigrating and discriminating against women without just cause.

"there actually ARE some people who DO NOT sin. "

That is not what your bible says. Then again, it lies quite often as you indicate if you do not believe we are all sinners.
You can never eliminate evil from your life. You can be aware of it though and reduce it's impact by more cooperation. You, as most of us, are just not aware that when you compete, you add to evil somewhere.
Regards

Lets look through the bible shall we?
Genesis 2:15-18
The Lord God placed the man in the Garden of Eden to tend and watch over it. But the Lord God warned him, “You may freely eat the fruit of every tree in the garden— except the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. If you eat its fruit, you are sure to die.”
Then the Lord God said, “It is not good for the man to be alone. I will make a helper who is just right for him.”

Did God command Eve not to eat? She was not even made yet.

Genesis 3:12-14
The man replied, “It was the woman you gave me who gave me the fruit, and I ate it.”
Then the Lord God asked the woman, “What have you done?”
“The serpent deceived me,” she replied. “That’s why I ate it.”
Then the Lord God said to the serpent,
“Because you have done this, you are cursed
more than all animals, domestic and wild.
You will crawl on your belly,
groveling in the dust as long as you live.

Did God tell Eve, "No, you were not decieved."?
To whom did God say, "Because you have done this,"?

Genesis 3:15-16
And I will cause hostility between you and the woman,
and between your offspring and her offspring.
He will strike your head,
and you will strike his heel.”
Then he said to the woman,
“I will sharpen the pain of your pregnancy,
and in pain you will give birth.
And you will desire to control your husband,
but he will rule over you.”

When did God curse Eve with an insatiable desire to control Adam?
Was this rulership over Eve granted before eve was decieved? No.

ATS
The problem here is that people think that sin is imputed through the birth canal, it isn't.
Ecclesiastes 7:29 But I did find this: God created people to be virtuous, but they have each turned to follow their own downward path."
Genesis 4:6-76 Then the Lord said to Cain, “Why are you angry? Why is your face downcast? 7 If you do what is right, will you not be accepted? But if you do not do what is right, sin is crouching at your door; it desires to have you, but you must rule over it. ”
When someone is a "bride of Christ", noone has rulership over them but they honor their Father, that is why Jesus said not to fear those who can kill the body, they can not destroy the soul.
Ignorance leads to deception, Satan can not lead others on the downward path if he doesn't know the difference between right and wrong, he knows scripture and even tried to use it against Jesus in the wilderness. Jesus told others to beware of the teachings of the pharisees, be aware of what Satan is trying to accomplish, do not be ignorant of what the enemy is trying to accomplish, hate and indifference and ignorance are what he wants of each of us. Jesus does not want us to sin, sin is lawlessness, beware of those who say they believe in God but don't believe in God's law. Love is the sum of the law, we are still under the law. Where there is no law, there is no freedom, but as we have seen in the 40 years of wilderness, freedom can not be given to those who prefer slavery to death.

Only through mutual respect and admiration can we truely be successful. No gender should rule over another because no gender is superior to the other.
Those who feel that one should rule over the other are nothing but sexist, small minded, bigoted, egotistical ...expletives....
Those who scribed the Bible were in a male dominated society, they were male, so what they wrote favored the male. In other cultures, women were in charge and the religions and beliefs reflected that.
Both the male and the female are responsible for protecting one another. In most cases, the male is physically stronger due to biology. The female is usually emotionally stronger due to psychology. Together, they are stronger than either one is separately and should embrace that, not try to dismantle it by choosing "who is in charge".