Dangers of Feminism

[Misty77]

Instead of turning overly hostile and defensive and retreating into feminist ideology and denial why not INSTEAD address the data in an objective empirical way.

Start with this MIT report I used in my last post: http://economics.mit.edu/files/8754

And I'll tell you something else, even though "Belmont" women are going to escape many of the severe negative consequences their "Fishtown" counterparts suffer with respect to what liberal feminism is about to finally bring about in this next generation; all these newly minted male Libertarian pro-men's rights advocates in the upper middle class are going to have a measurable effect on them too before this is over.

Personally, I don't have a big dog in this fight. I'm happily unmarried and never have been married, adjusted to Christian celibacy, don't have any children to worry about, have a good education, have a good church, have rewarding friendships, am a sole proprietor, etc...

In other words, feminism can't really hurt me because I'm not in a position of vulnerability to which any female or female legislated ideology can hurt me directly or indirectly lol.

Sure I have my independent conservative Christian bias but I'm somewhat uniquely in a place where I can simply sift through the data and paraphrase it without any great emotion.

As Jeremy Disher once said, "Don't hate the player, hate the game."

My frustration is that this thread and others like it are describing unfairness and blaming it on women. Unfairness is the fault of the people doing it, not an entire gender. Take responsibility for your own situation, and stop blaming others.

 

[presidente]

Unmarried women outnumber men 2 to 1 in American Christendom. If you can't polish yourself up enough to get just one of them interested, then dude, that is your problem. But it's harder to admit that maybe you need to work on a few things to make yourself datable, so it's easier to slander you sisters in Christ, build up this straw woman of feminism (it exists, but not everywhere you think it is), and whine about American women being evil and out to castrate the world. "Gird up now thy loins like a man" (Job 38:3, 40:7).

Maybe I'm getting my poster's confused, but I don't recall AgeofKnowledge making posts about all American women being bad potential wives. His posts are about social trends. The way you write this, it looks like you are attacking him personally. You have no way of knowing whether he has or had trouble finding a woman.

These type of comments come off to me as being disrespectful to men. Maybe I don't care for posts where women tell men to 'be a man' publically, but it just isn't right to do that when you don't really know the person and have no evidence to back up your implication that he is lacking in that area? And I do think the feminist movement has created an environment where women are comfortable posting such things toward men. It also seems that women who embrace the modern feminist mindset are more likely to say or type such things.

That last paragraph was just rude, and it illustrates one of the problems with feminism in our society and in the church.

 

[presidente]

My frustration is that this thread and others like it are describing unfairness and blaming it on women. Unfairness is the fault of the people doing it, not an entire gender. Take responsibility for your own situation, and stop blaming others.

Follow your own advice. Is AgeofKnowledge blaming all women? Your comments may make sense if you are talking to another poster. But if you are lumping all anti-feminist males in the group together and characterizing them all the same way, that's very similar to the very thing you are criticizing.

 

[AgeofKnowledge]

You shouldn't internalize what others are saying simply because you don't speak for all women nor all feminists. Really, you just speak for yourself same as me.

That said, I don't think one has to NOT be taking responsibility for themselves and their own situation to point out and discuss gender inequality, feminism, or the men's rights movement that's finally beginning to gain steam.

I would state it like this Misty77, there's other factors having a negative impact on men that don't deserve to be attributed to feminism. An example would be free trade. The offshoring and outsourcing of American jobs, capital investment, and invention/innovation overseas that's hurt men in the domestic labor market (and often the women they are married to) has little to nothing to do with feminism.

And blaming women who aren't involved in legislating liberal feminism is wrong on every level. It's intellectually, logically, ethically, and morally wrong to do that.

BUT, studies show that about 70% of U.S. women support feminism in the voting booth even though less than half of them claim they do. So reality matters.

And reality simply will not permit one to wave it away with a "take responsibility for your own situation and stop blaming others" assertion. It continues to exist anyways.

My frustration is that this thread and others like it are describing unfairness and blaming it on women. Unfairness is the fault of the people doing it, not an entire gender. Take responsibility for your own situation, and stop blaming others.

 

[AgeofKnowledge]

And just for the record, I am very concerned about what women and children are going to experience in the next two generations because of modern liberal "progressive" feminism. These types are stating that men do not matter to women, to the household, to the raising of children, or to society. They only exist to donate sperm and to send money to "Fishtown" women. This is what they are teaching and directing their efforts to influence legislatures toward. And they are doing this in the face of a mountain of data that states the exact opposite.

Remember that symbiotic relationship between men and women I stated exists? It really does exist. I assert that these liberal feminists have created a socio-political environment that is going to materially hurt the next generation of women.

It won't just be single mothers raising boys who didn't come out like feminists expected them to (look at the juvenile delinquency statistics with regards to fatherless boys and you'll see it's already through the roof) that end up hurting women but also a large scale socio-economic political male reaction against women rooted in the pain, poverty, belittlement, fatherlessness, and chaos liberal feminists have legislated that is coming into fruition in the next two generations. Now compound that with serious economic difficulties yet unseen.

The result is that NOBODY wins except the feminist on the government or the university payroll. Men, women, boys, and girls in general are going to LOSE. And that means society and the nation loses because they are only as good as the people that comprise them.

There is NO way I'm happy about ANY of THAT but rather I am very concerned about all of it.

 

[presidente]

The result is that NOBODY wins except the feminist on the government or the university payroll. Men, women, boys, and girls in general are going to LOSE. And that means society and the nation loses because they are only as good as the people that comprise them.

I wonder how many of the feminist academics go home to celebrate their victories with a house full of cats.

 

[biscuit]

And just for the record, I am very concerned about what women and children are going to experience in the next two generations because of modern liberal "progressive" feminism. These types are stating that men do not matter to women, to the household, to the raising of children, or to society. They only exist to donate sperm and to send money to "Fishtown" women. This is what they are teaching and directing their efforts to influence legislatures toward. And they are doing this in the face of a mountain of data that states the exact opposite.

Remember that symbiotic relationship between men and women I stated exists? It really does exist. I assert that these liberal feminists have created a socio-political environment that is going to materially hurt the next generation of women.

It won't just be single mothers raising boys who didn't come out like feminists expected them to (look at the juvenile delinquency statistics with regards to fatherless boys and you'll see it's already through the roof) that end up hurting women but also a large scale socio-economic political male reaction against women rooted in the pain, poverty, belittlement, fatherlessness, and chaos liberal feminists have legislated that is coming into fruition in the next two generations. Now compound that with serious economic difficulties yet unseen.

The result is that NOBODY wins except the feminist on the government or the university payroll. Men, women, boys, and girls in general are going to LOSE. And that means society and the nation loses because they are only as good as the people that comprise them.

There is NO way I'm happy about ANY of THAT but rather I am very concerned about all of it.

I am not the least concerned about it because feminists and their supporters are getting the worst of the deal. If these feminists' supporters are that dumb to see that the total picture really leave them hanging by the thread, then it is a death sentence for them. Except for a small, progressive class of women, they are really getting the burnt of the pain & punishment. Many of the recent graduates can find jobs, didn't leave school with a potential husband, living with parents, massive school debts, children they barely can support, accepting food stamps, living in poverty, on unemployment compensation, facing divorce, losing their homes. I have never seen so many 30-50 year old women living alone without partners. I can go on & on. Sure they won a few battle but they are getting slaughter in the war. Men should avoid them at all cost and pursue the better foreign women, especially in college. As long as American men avoid those women who have a feminists' attitude, it will be a stake in the heart of feminism because they will having problems procreating for those future feminists who wish to carry the torch. In 2014, American men should know better to mate with them because it is really a death sentence.

 

[AgeofKnowledge]

I don't relish any of it biscuit. If I could, I'd normalize all of it to happy functioning nuclear Christian families with husbands and wives that love and respect each other and treat each other exactly how they want to be treated.

I find the whole discussion distasteful and disturbing and only joined it to input information that I believe Christians need to know moving forward.

 

[biscuit]

Without doubt many of the professors who are teaching course works such as "social inequalities" and the likes are lesbians. I have no qualms with them because many of them were well qualified and knew their stuff. Received an A+ from one them and permission to use my final exam paper (25 page paper) for her pending book.

 

[biscuit]

I don't relish any of it biscuit. If I could, I'd normalize all of it to happy functioning nuclear Christian families with husbands and wives that love and respect each other and treat each other exactly how they want to be treated.

I find the whole discussion distasteful and disturbing and only joined it to input information that I believe Christians need to know moving forward.

I totally understand you 100% and agree with you. But at the same time, we must understand that the forces of good vs. evil plays into the equation and God is in control no matter how distaste it can get. I can only do my part by avoiding these women and warning these young men about their destructive capabilities. I was very fortunate not to fall into the traps because I learned at a very young age (10 y.o.) how evil women can be. My mother would entertain the neighborhood women and I got more than an earful on how evil they were. So I wasn't fooled like most of my male friends and men in general when I reached adulthood. Men will have learn about the opposite sex before engaging them.

 

[TheAristocat]

I fail to see how your essay related to my statement of love, respect, and responsibility. If everybody treated each other well, especially within marriage, we wouldn't have the problems that lead to divorce, new wave feminism, or misogyny.

I think the underlined above was my point. Or at least that feminism has little to do with love. IMO. The statistics listed also do not teach us any sort of special lesson, since we have no clear knowledge as to why the statistics are the way they are. You can say, "There are far more male power lifters than female!" But maybe that just means men like power lifting more than women? In the same way you can't just say, "There are far more male CEOs than female!" and expect to garner support for feminism. Maybe most women aren't ENTJ personalities and don't like to lead big corporations? I don't know what your personality is specifically, but I'm sure not all women share the same interests.

Take for example one woman that I knew of. While not speaking directly to me, she did say something interesting. She was annoyed that feminists often looked down on the stay-at-home mom figure, because that was the life style she enjoyed.

Pull up your big-boy britches and deal with it.

Your above quote is what I've come to expect from feminists. That's why in my previous post I stated, "At the risk of potentially giving those who are [mistrustful of] men more ammunition to throw at them [...]" and "Should men just 'man up?'" And I concluded that of course we can and should. But that doesn't necessitate we marry a feminist. Personally, I'd rather man up with another woman who treats me like a man instead of her chew toy. I can treat her like a lady and avoid entangling myself with a woman who has an inherent distrust of men and who uses emotional manipulation.

 

[ZD]

Agree with that

 

[kayem77]

So....basically from this discussion: Years and years of abuse from men in the past led to Feminisn, which at first just wanted equal rights for women when it comes to inheritance, political affairs (suffrage) and the workplsvr. Now this turned into the New Wave Feminism which reverted the roles and now oppresses men, and denies their significance and worth in society. I predict this will lead to yet another movement to counter this New Wave Feminism (Men's Rights Movement?) which in turn will probably overcorrect( just like Feminism did) the problem and then it's going to be a never ending cycle of Movements started by men and women who want to be treated fairly.

Solution: Christ. Love,respect one another, and recognize the roles of both men and women in society.

 

[AmberGardner]

Woman is the New N-Word: The VIOLENT Face of COMPLIMENTARIANISM
[video=youtube_share;ypYm-6JAjlU]http://youtu.be/ypYm-6JAjlU[/video]

 

[AgeofKnowledge]

Sorry, but I tuned the boring rambling feminist out after two minutes. I find that sort of thing uninteresting.

[video=youtube_share;W8vnmCVZhpQ]http://youtu.be/W8vnmCVZhpQ[/video]

Woman is the New N-Word: The VIOLENT Face of COMPLIMENTARIANISM

 

[jeremyPJ]

I found it interesting in my marriage, how my wife (now Ex) used to say I never took the lead, never earned her respect. Funny though, that every time I attempted to, she did what she wanted anyway. And after I complained of it for years, she would instead of just doing things her way, say "I've thought about it, and I'm going to do (it her way)."

So really there is a true double standard here. What it amounted to was, she wants the respect of her female friends by bossing me around in front of them, while giving props to her friends' alpha male buddies.

ie, She has her power(cake) and eats it too. To me excessive feminism is way too harsh to be acceptable. It sets a dangerous standard for our children to see this.

 

[AgeofKnowledge]

If I went to a church and a rabid rebellious feminist "teacher" like the woman in the video AmberGardner posted came onboard, I'd make it my mission to publicly refute her every false teaching (with the help of my Christian attorney friends, of course, to make sure it's done lawfully) .

Been there done that and I'd do it again for the simple fact that I REALLY don't like false teachers.

Now, I am reading online that she's teaching heresy. I have a habit of attaching myself to such people and refuting their heresy.

It will be entertaining, I'm sure, if we ever cross paths.

 

[AgeofKnowledge]

"Before the fall into sin, man and woman lived in covenant mutuality and solidarity before God. In partnership they rebel against God and rend that harmony with Adam blaming his wife and God (Gn. 3:12) and the woman blaming the serpent (Gn. 3:13).

God’s judgment now fits the crime, as always (Rom. 1:24, 26, 28); sin becomes its own reward. Solidarity is to be replaced by struggle, tyranny and the desire for domination by one partner over the other (Gn. 3:16b). The battle of the sexes is begun, the woman’s desire to control the husband, the man’s to master her (cf. Gn. 4:7b). Mutuality turns to superiority and inferiority.

This sexual power struggle had developed into theological heresy by New Testament times. Forms of Gnosticism spoke of systems of intermediate beings who bridged the gap between God and man. Some spoke of women as these intermediaries and of Eve as the bringer of both light and life, the mediatrix who brought divine enlightenment to mankind. Some even embellished the Genesis accounts and sometimes gave Eve a prior existence in which she consorted with the celestial beings.

Paul’s prohibition against women teachers in 1 Tim. 2:11–15 probably had such groups in mind. The heretics had led astray ‘weak-willed women’ (2 Tim. 3:6), even forbidding marriage (1 Tim. 4:3).

In opposing them, Paul reminds the whole church, not just women, of the sole mediatorship of Christ (1 Tim. 2:5–9). Adam, he continues, was created first rather than Eve; and Eve, far from being an instrument of light, was deluded (1 Tim. 2:13–14). No-one, he argues, has a privileged position with God on the basis of gender.

The restoration of covenant mutuality in Christ

In Christ the curse on marriage is lifted and complementarity restored (1 Cor. 11:11). The husband’s role of headship (1 Cor. 11:3; Eph. 5:23) and the wife’s role of submission are reaffirmed but radically altered. Submission becomes a mutual calling (Eph. 5:21), transforming male headship from authoritative control to responsible care.

Its paradigm is now modelled after the self-sacrificial death of Jesus for the church (Eph. 5:25–33); and its purpose is not to crush but to liberate. Submission on the part of the wife is transformed from servility and subordination to respect (Eph. 5:33) voluntarily given, and to ‘the unfading beauty of a gentle and quiet spirit’ (1 Pet. 3:4). In traditional patriarchy, the husband was a despot and the wife a virtual slave. In Christ-centred covenant mutuality, each complements the other in their transformed roles."

Ferguson, S. B., & Packer, J. (2000). New dictionary of theology (electronic ed.) (257–258). Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press.

 

[biscuit]

If I went to a church and a rabid rebellious feminist "teacher" like the woman in the video AmberGardner posted came onboard, I'd make it my mission to publicly refute her every false teaching (with the help of my Christian attorney friends, of course, to make sure it's done lawfully) .

Been there done that and I'd do it again for the simple fact that I REALLY don't like false teachers.

Satan has his disciples everywhere, especially the church. Again, I can't stress enough how important it is for the average churchgoer to be thoroughly knowlegeable in the scripture. BTW, did you know that there are feminist bibles authored by feminists? There is no limit as to what Satan will do to destroy mankind, especially the institution of marriage, created by God.

 

[presidente]

Biscuit,

I think your posts are too extreme, extreme about the way women are, especially the way American or non-foreign women are. You make too many blanket statements. Also, I haven't really listened to much the red-headed woman in the clip teaches, but some people who are in error are Christians who are in error and not 'disciples of Satan.' Paul wrote a lot in his epistles to correct error among genuine disciples of Christ.