-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
I am of the firm belief that there is nothing new under the sun. The outward display of our sin may change through the generations, but the root sin IS THE SAME. Humans struggle with selfishness, greed, control, power, pride and idolatry the SAME WAY they struggled with all of those things a hundred years ago, and a thousand years ago. Only the methods used to gain those ends have changed through the years.
So, you can (and do) often lament about how much better women were 50-100 years ago (or in other cultures), but I believe perhaps their faults and problems back then (or in other cultures) were probably just flying under your particular radar Biscuit, while the faults of women today obviously target your "hot button" issues.
That which has been is that which will be, And that which has been done is that which will be done. So there is nothing new under the sun. Is there anything of which one might say, "See this, it is new "? Already it has existed for ages Which were before us.… (Ecclesiastes 1:9-10)
So, you can (and do) often lament about how much better women were 50-100 years ago (or in other cultures), but I believe perhaps their faults and problems back then (or in other cultures) were probably just flying under your particular radar Biscuit, while the faults of women today obviously target your "hot button" issues.
That which has been is that which will be, And that which has been done is that which will be done. So there is nothing new under the sun. Is there anything of which one might say, "See this, it is new "? Already it has existed for ages Which were before us.… (Ecclesiastes 1:9-10)
I suppose I'm playing devil's advocate.
We shall indeed. It isn't often you and I agree even remotely on anything, but it's good to see the older generation recognizing, perhaps even condoning, young males' current apathy for marriage. If I were as staunch a liberal as you sometimes think me, AgeOfKnowledge, I'd be telling you now some spiel about how the breakdown in marriage is because of the natural progression towards polyamory, or that human nature is quintessentially one of temporary infatuation for the duration of rearing a child. There's some credence to those arguments if your entire philosophy has foundations, deep in its basement, of antithesis to everything that may, thus will, be considered 'patriarchal', even when the correlations made do not imply causation at all, but I'm not, because it's wrong.
While I don't agree that a man should rule a woman, I agree much less that a particular party, providing there has been no abuse, should have practically unrestricted means and rights to exclude the other parent from any meaningful part in a child's life. Certainly, the dowry-marriage-ownership model of commitment is utterly obsolete, as are its customs (after all, if man no longer owns woman, who is there a dowry to pay to? Who shall own her? What purpose does the contract serve if not only to entrap both parties in litigation, which nowadays benefits women to a degree far more than men?), but that realization of its obsoleteness, for me, only provides an opportunity for the collective human psyche to examine what commitment and parenthood should be when they are without force, without legal obligation, and without legal enforcement.
Such a thought brings me to the conclusion that such commitment should be sincere, should be thought out, should be intrinsically binding in a way that requires no judge and gavel, no family court, and no prenuptual agreement. The radical feminist would argue similarly, but her ends are toward polyamory, matriarchy, walking marriage and sexual liberation bordering on rampant rutting, where mine are for the introspection that leads to a fundemental insight about male-female relations in society as an entire being; the whole cannot be happy if one half of it is not.
The issue with marriage, AgeOfKNowledge, it seems to me is not so much deriving from the breakdown of a man's dominion over his wife so much as a breakdown of the respect within which true commitment is forged; the kind of commitment that needs no enforcer at all. But for women of this generation to respect us, they need to first understand what we're going through, and reading a book, I'm afraid, provides no smells, or tastes, or lonely meals on Sunday afternoons.
While I don't agree that a man should rule a woman, I agree much less that a particular party, providing there has been no abuse, should have practically unrestricted means and rights to exclude the other parent from any meaningful part in a child's life. Certainly, the dowry-marriage-ownership model of commitment is utterly obsolete, as are its customs (after all, if man no longer owns woman, who is there a dowry to pay to? Who shall own her? What purpose does the contract serve if not only to entrap both parties in litigation, which nowadays benefits women to a degree far more than men?), but that realization of its obsoleteness, for me, only provides an opportunity for the collective human psyche to examine what commitment and parenthood should be when they are without force, without legal obligation, and without legal enforcement.
Such a thought brings me to the conclusion that such commitment should be sincere, should be thought out, should be intrinsically binding in a way that requires no judge and gavel, no family court, and no prenuptual agreement. The radical feminist would argue similarly, but her ends are toward polyamory, matriarchy, walking marriage and sexual liberation bordering on rampant rutting, where mine are for the introspection that leads to a fundemental insight about male-female relations in society as an entire being; the whole cannot be happy if one half of it is not.
The issue with marriage, AgeOfKNowledge, it seems to me is not so much deriving from the breakdown of a man's dominion over his wife so much as a breakdown of the respect within which true commitment is forged; the kind of commitment that needs no enforcer at all. But for women of this generation to respect us, they need to first understand what we're going through, and reading a book, I'm afraid, provides no smells, or tastes, or lonely meals on Sunday afternoons.
A
God certainly agrees with you Human that a man shouldn't rule over a woman as if she was his property but then the opposite is also true. Because most young men are now connecting to this smoldering issue to one degree or another: it is going to get white hot in Western Civilization before it's all said and done. Wait for it...
I'm just glad I have the benefit of God's special revelation (e.g. God's Word) to guide me.
I'm just glad I have the benefit of God's special revelation (e.g. God's Word) to guide me.
S
This thread is officially off the rails, so I'm going to save the long winded post I had about this for another time. I do have some answers for you though. You said you want a man who leads, so I won't sugar coat this.
No man worth his salt thinks of himself as a stallion. Your word choice leads me to believe you want some rare specimen of a man who's over idealized. A normally assertive man is still going to see some red flags here.
A man who's in control is going to budget his time. He's going to make decisions based upon past experiences. This saves time and aggravation. Past interactions with said man need to be positive.
Now, this may sound harsh, but hear me through. Your words were that you were "not going to be easy." It may seem like being chased to the ends of the earth is romantic, but for a guy it's exhausting. A man who's on top of things is going to look for some kind of feedback in verbal form (flirting is definitely fun, but it's not always enough to go on). Feedback
So don't be hard, be easy and approachable. Just let your guard down and talk normally. Steer conversations towards what the guy you're interested in likes. Let him know you're worth serious consideration simply based upon your approachable manner and ability to assimilate into his world and he'll slowly start to let you into it bit by bit.
Do that and it takes longer at the outset to see the results you want, but the end result is you have either found a guy who will start deciding to give back to you what you've given - and tenfold at that, or you found a false Christian who is only out for himself (but you run that risk regardless of what you do, and that's when you dump said guy and find another one).
I'm just not sure what to make of this comment here.
Women are approaching half the work force. That means men are in direct competition with women for jobs. Average household income hasn't magically skyrocketed with two parties working, and there's a good reason for that. A lot of very good men cannot support a family on their own any more, regardless of how hard they work.
And a man isn't going to want to talk about money if he does have it because it's a touchy subject. It's one that needs to be discussed prior to a marraige, but it needs to be done later on in a relationship, not at the outset. It's a discussion that only polarizes things and makes him worry you're dating him for the wrong reasons.
No man worth his salt thinks of himself as a stallion. Your word choice leads me to believe you want some rare specimen of a man who's over idealized. A normally assertive man is still going to see some red flags here.
A man who's in control is going to budget his time. He's going to make decisions based upon past experiences. This saves time and aggravation. Past interactions with said man need to be positive.
Now, this may sound harsh, but hear me through. Your words were that you were "not going to be easy." It may seem like being chased to the ends of the earth is romantic, but for a guy it's exhausting. A man who's on top of things is going to look for some kind of feedback in verbal form (flirting is definitely fun, but it's not always enough to go on). Feedback
So don't be hard, be easy and approachable. Just let your guard down and talk normally. Steer conversations towards what the guy you're interested in likes. Let him know you're worth serious consideration simply based upon your approachable manner and ability to assimilate into his world and he'll slowly start to let you into it bit by bit.
Do that and it takes longer at the outset to see the results you want, but the end result is you have either found a guy who will start deciding to give back to you what you've given - and tenfold at that, or you found a false Christian who is only out for himself (but you run that risk regardless of what you do, and that's when you dump said guy and find another one).
I'm just not sure what to make of this comment here.
Women are approaching half the work force. That means men are in direct competition with women for jobs. Average household income hasn't magically skyrocketed with two parties working, and there's a good reason for that. A lot of very good men cannot support a family on their own any more, regardless of how hard they work.
And a man isn't going to want to talk about money if he does have it because it's a touchy subject. It's one that needs to be discussed prior to a marraige, but it needs to be done later on in a relationship, not at the outset. It's a discussion that only polarizes things and makes him worry you're dating him for the wrong reasons.
I don't see what's wrong in making a man responsible for the child he himself has reproduced - whether out of marriage or not.
The fact that a man could shirk the responsibility of his own child just because he wasn't married is sickening.
I am very glad that the western world follows such a model and I hope that India follows suit. We don't have a child support system but hopefully we can move in this positive direction.
Rather than a reward system, it is about accountability. If a man goes around sleeping with a woman, and gets a child in the process, he should be made accountable!
If he is unwilling to marry the woman, then why did he sleep with her in the first place?
Children themselves are a blessing as God states, and a reward in themselves. [Psalm 127:3-5]
A wise Christian man will prayerfully seek a woman who is like-minded and then proceed towards creation of a family. Even in cases of divorce, there is a court of Law and a justice system.
Many parents have won rights of visitations in the event of one parent trying to prevent that.
Having a child support system is actually a good levy against men who think they can get away with just going around "sowing their wild oats."
Yes, it is, but it is misused by women in Western society as a meal ticket and an excuse to oust men from their homes. That was the point. Nobody is defending 'sewing the wild oats' without responsibility, what we are defending is a mans' right, providing he has not been abusive or broken the law, to be part of his child's life.
Ok triple post in this thread! ( Triple threat? )
Responding to the OP, about men not stepping up.
Anyway, about this, whole thing, it's somewhat easier to talk about child support and what not, then this. My postulates are like so-
Human beings are always driven by a want vs need conundrum.
I see it this way - if someone likes you, if they really like you, when the want vs need coalesce into one, then they will go all out to pursue you.
If a woman really wants someone, and she feels she needs him, then why shouldn't she be bold and seek out what she wants? How does that take away anything from a man?
Are we princesses locked up in a tower waiting for a man to rescue us?
God himself has given us freedom and we're not bound by things that the world makes up as standards.
Colossians 2:20-23
Therefore, if you died with Christ from the basic principles of the world, why, as though living in the world, do you subject yourselves to regulations— [SUP]21 [/SUP]“Do not touch, do not taste, do not handle,” [SUP]22 [/SUP]which all concern things which perish with the using—according to the commandments and doctrines of men? [SUP]23 [/SUP]These things indeed have an appearance of wisdom in self-imposed religion, false humility, and neglect of the body,but are of no value against the indulgence of the flesh.
Also how can anything work if the person in question doesn't reciprocate your feelings and meets you across halfway at the bridge, for both genders?
I think of Ruth. Here she was - a foreigner, a widow who had the courage to follow after the God of her mother in law. When she obeyed Naomi to go and sleep at Boaz' feet, how bold could she get?
When Boaz woke up to find her, she bravely asked him to take her under his wing and to marry her.
Boaz then praised her as a virtuous woman, and the Bible says He did not rest until he settled the matter to marry her.
So once she showed her interest, he met her halfway through. [Ruth 3]
Also upon reading posts by some of the men, who talked about women rejecting them even when they were willing to go all out for them, reminds me of another issue.
Human beings don’t appreciate the things that are right in front of them and so easy to find.
Reminds me of this verse – “The stone the builders rejected has become the cornerstone; [Psalm 118:22]
Isn’t it just like salvation? So easy and freely given, but people stumble upon this. Likewise I see people stumbling on this block of availability and desire.
We want the unattainable things – things that are not so easily found.
There are women who complain about men not stepping up and there are women who complain about stalkers and creepers.
Frankly at the end of the day, it’s all about God and His will in our lives.
I firmly believe, however cliché it comes across, that when we submit our wants and desires to Him, we’d have more peace about things.
So I won’t worry about who’s stepping up or who’s not. We only allow people the privilege of entering our lives, and if they’re not worthy of it, then they can leave.
Responding to the OP, about men not stepping up.
Anyway, about this, whole thing, it's somewhat easier to talk about child support and what not, then this. My postulates are like so-
Human beings are always driven by a want vs need conundrum.
I see it this way - if someone likes you, if they really like you, when the want vs need coalesce into one, then they will go all out to pursue you.
If a woman really wants someone, and she feels she needs him, then why shouldn't she be bold and seek out what she wants? How does that take away anything from a man?
Are we princesses locked up in a tower waiting for a man to rescue us?
God himself has given us freedom and we're not bound by things that the world makes up as standards.
Colossians 2:20-23
Therefore, if you died with Christ from the basic principles of the world, why, as though living in the world, do you subject yourselves to regulations— [SUP]21 [/SUP]“Do not touch, do not taste, do not handle,” [SUP]22 [/SUP]which all concern things which perish with the using—according to the commandments and doctrines of men? [SUP]23 [/SUP]These things indeed have an appearance of wisdom in self-imposed religion, false humility, and neglect of the body,but are of no value against the indulgence of the flesh.
Also how can anything work if the person in question doesn't reciprocate your feelings and meets you across halfway at the bridge, for both genders?
I think of Ruth. Here she was - a foreigner, a widow who had the courage to follow after the God of her mother in law. When she obeyed Naomi to go and sleep at Boaz' feet, how bold could she get?
When Boaz woke up to find her, she bravely asked him to take her under his wing and to marry her.
Boaz then praised her as a virtuous woman, and the Bible says He did not rest until he settled the matter to marry her.
So once she showed her interest, he met her halfway through. [Ruth 3]
Also upon reading posts by some of the men, who talked about women rejecting them even when they were willing to go all out for them, reminds me of another issue.
Human beings don’t appreciate the things that are right in front of them and so easy to find.
Reminds me of this verse – “The stone the builders rejected has become the cornerstone; [Psalm 118:22]
Isn’t it just like salvation? So easy and freely given, but people stumble upon this. Likewise I see people stumbling on this block of availability and desire.
We want the unattainable things – things that are not so easily found.
There are women who complain about men not stepping up and there are women who complain about stalkers and creepers.
Frankly at the end of the day, it’s all about God and His will in our lives.
I firmly believe, however cliché it comes across, that when we submit our wants and desires to Him, we’d have more peace about things.
So I won’t worry about who’s stepping up or who’s not. We only allow people the privilege of entering our lives, and if they’re not worthy of it, then they can leave.
Last edited:
A
It's inevitable that most women and the establishment will continue to view this from their present politically correct feminist perspective. The problem they have moving forward; however, is that the shelter the traditional valued culture provided for them to grow as fast and far as they have (and that's a topic worth discussing in and of itself) is rapidly disappearing and what will be left in its place is a nation of young men whom have been culturally and socio-economically devalued and disenfranchised to a material degree by feminism and that are no longer willing to accept the society feminists created for them.
They want a different one and have finally come to the point where they're willing to fight to gain the levers of government and institutional power to get it.
And why not? When push comes to shove, and the romance is over, men find they've been reduced to powerless human wallets who, for entertainment, get to watch themselves ridiculed nightly in the media too.
It's so bad that Pew Research Center now asserts that 1 in 4 young males will NEVER marry during their lifetimes... a voluntary choice they are making and the highest share in modern history. And, of course, that number continues to rise.
Don't expect the vast majority of women to put their viewpoint aside though and seek to understand yours. If they did, the situation wouldn't even exist and it certainly does exist. Change will have to be forced, exactly with the same vigor and commitment the liberal and radical feminists forced theirs through I'm afraid. Interestingly, perusing the statistics, studies, and polling data, it appears that your generation is motivated to take up the challenge.
They want a different one and have finally come to the point where they're willing to fight to gain the levers of government and institutional power to get it.
And why not? When push comes to shove, and the romance is over, men find they've been reduced to powerless human wallets who, for entertainment, get to watch themselves ridiculed nightly in the media too.
It's so bad that Pew Research Center now asserts that 1 in 4 young males will NEVER marry during their lifetimes... a voluntary choice they are making and the highest share in modern history. And, of course, that number continues to rise.
Don't expect the vast majority of women to put their viewpoint aside though and seek to understand yours. If they did, the situation wouldn't even exist and it certainly does exist. Change will have to be forced, exactly with the same vigor and commitment the liberal and radical feminists forced theirs through I'm afraid. Interestingly, perusing the statistics, studies, and polling data, it appears that your generation is motivated to take up the challenge.
B
Sorry, the system doesn't work because Westerners are footing the bill for tens of millions of illegitimate children whom many will either grow up hoodlums, thugs, gang members, prostitutes and sex service employees. These are so saturated & overflowing that the results are choking healthy economy to death. It has also sent massive number of women with their children into poverty with no way out. There are two pieces of this equation and women are paying a HEAVY PRICE for ignoring their responsibilities as a woman .... but God hasn't.
I suggest you go back and read your post again because it has and always had a flair of "feminism" in it. Remember! there are two parties to these increasing problems: male & female but in your post it is the male that created this problem. "Oh really!!!" I can easily say "Stop Giving Up the Free Ice Cream." Will that solve the problem? of course.
Stop blaming men for this problem that women help created equally. What will be yours and other Christian women excuse when God unleashing His fury during The Tribulation Period onto those who reject Him. Do you believe these women will be getting a free pass during the Tribulation Period.
I suggest you go back and read your post again because it has and always had a flair of "feminism" in it. Remember! there are two parties to these increasing problems: male & female but in your post it is the male that created this problem. "Oh really!!!" I can easily say "Stop Giving Up the Free Ice Cream." Will that solve the problem? of course.
Stop blaming men for this problem that women help created equally. What will be yours and other Christian women excuse when God unleashing His fury during The Tribulation Period onto those who reject Him. Do you believe these women will be getting a free pass during the Tribulation Period.
Last edited by a moderator:
In my broad circle of friends, that figure -- that one in four men won't get married -- is a gross underestimate. Perhaps one in four of us will get married. It's unfortunate, surely, but this is what will happen. There is a line becoming more visible between what men and women collectively want on a deeper level and what, it sometimes seems, the radical feminist paradigm of thought pushes many women to try to get away with. That line, the more it defines itself, will become an awful cause of cognitive dissonance for a vast number of women who will fail to understand the reason their beliefs stop aligning nicely with their reality. When the push for female superiority at the expense of mens' respect towards women, with all the added benefits the so far patient male population provide women, inevitably meets a world without sufficient numbers of men still willing to be taken advantage of, the realization will dawn on women that the war against all things male has only one possible end; the witholding by men of any effort at affinity, warmth, amity and companionship with them.
As that is, in Colombia, Cuba and Venezuela, few have realized "love" is bought or traded and, the moment unloyal ladies get bored of their husbands, these tried to experiment "adventures" with other men, while their legitimate husbands pay the toll, their bills and that money is also used to bribe those lovers those ladies might have encountered.
Of course, these men feel the abandoned and try to lure young ladies some other place, to feel the still have something to draw a girl (and no doubt it is money) so, in the long run, our society behaves like that of monkies, where the younger one leads and has sexual access to adult females, similarly to lions loosing their females and "the bond" co-exists for economic needs, for social conventions like religion and other conveniences. To my confort I have seen there are real love bonds, but I have seen the other side of the coin, it is not solely feminism trading, it is sin and that human selfishness I didn´t know existed when I was too young to look at things closely, because I use to talk to young and old people, I know from them and observe life around and, the more I know the less I risk.
Of course, these men feel the abandoned and try to lure young ladies some other place, to feel the still have something to draw a girl (and no doubt it is money) so, in the long run, our society behaves like that of monkies, where the younger one leads and has sexual access to adult females, similarly to lions loosing their females and "the bond" co-exists for economic needs, for social conventions like religion and other conveniences. To my confort I have seen there are real love bonds, but I have seen the other side of the coin, it is not solely feminism trading, it is sin and that human selfishness I didn´t know existed when I was too young to look at things closely, because I use to talk to young and old people, I know from them and observe life around and, the more I know the less I risk.
