Men of CC, I have questions...(Women can weigh in too)

  • 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.
Sonflower

Sonflower

Senior Member
#61
Jan 30, 2016
850
147
43
#61
The paragraph below is what I said word for word in response to his opinion that no fault divorce wasn't needed. "Are you" is what I technically said. I'm not sure if sounds any better. I'm not sure if you all read the questions in context. In any case, my intent was never to be accusatory. I was trying to understnsd how he could believe no fault divorce was only needed if there was no reason for a divorce. Even though I thought I was careful how I worded it (I even changed the questions because I didn't want them to sound accusatory) I guess I'll be more careful next time. :/

"1. When no fault divorce started it was because women were abused. Some men abused their wives and prior to no fault women needed proof to get the divorce. Proof that couldn't always be shown. That was needed....then. Now, it is a different story. Why is there no personal responsibility for men? Are you saying that men have been nothing but good to women? Are you saying women weren't secretly and openly abused? Are you saying women weren't treated unfairly? I'm willing to admit women have failed in taking advantage of the system. Women have failed in their treatment of men in today's western culture. Women have failed but so have men. BOTH genders share the weight of the ugliness of it all."
 
A

Adstar

Senior Member
#62
Jul 24, 2016
7,585
3,616
113
#62
tourist said:
Sonflower is definitely not trying to set you up for condemnation. She is a long time member who has a lot of wisdom and is respectful of others. If you put her on ignore that will be your loss. Sometimes things get misconstrued in the forums but I am sure that she meant you no harm personally. She is worth getting to know better.
Click to expand...
The topic was and is MGTOW what it is, and why it is.. It was not a topic about the abuse of woman.. There was absolutely no reason for her to first complain that i had not mentioned woman abuse and then pose those questions as an indirect way to attack me because she did not like my reply describing MGTOW..

I have been a member of online forums for over 16 years and i have seen this tactic so many times.. I decided to nip it in the bud before it got started.. That's the only way to deal with people who start up their character assassination efforts..

If Sunflower wanted to discuss historical abuse of woman she could have started a thread on that issue asking for input.. But no she focused her insinuations upon me as indirect effort in character assassination.. So now there will be no further discussions between me and her because i have her on ignore... End of discussion..
 
Dino246

Dino246

Senior Member
#63
Jun 30, 2015
25,490
13,797
113
#63
Adstar said:
The topic was and is MGTOW what it is, and why it is.. It was not a topic about the abuse of woman.. There was absolutely no reason for her to first complain that i had not mentioned woman abuse and then pose those questions as an indirect way to attack me because she did not like my reply describing MGTOW..

I have been a member of online forums for over 16 years and i have seen this tactic so many times.. I decided to nip it in the bud before it got started.. That's the only way to deal with people who start up their character assassination efforts..

If Sunflower wanted to discuss historical abuse of woman she could have started a thread on that issue asking for input.. But no she focused her insinuations upon me as indirect effort in character assassination.. So now there will be no further discussions between me and her because i have her on ignore... End of discussion..
Click to expand...
Your loss. Maybe get that chip removed from your shoulder.
 
Lynx

Lynx

Folksy yet erudite
#64
Aug 13, 2014
27,418
9,404
113
#64
Adstar said:
The topic was and is MGTOW what it is, and why it is.. It was not a topic about the abuse of woman.. There was absolutely no reason for her to first complain that i had not mentioned woman abuse and then pose those questions as an indirect way to attack me because she did not like my reply describing MGTOW..

I have been a member of online forums for over 16 years and i have seen this tactic so many times.. I decided to nip it in the bud before it got started.. That's the only way to deal with people who start up their character assassination efforts..

If Sunflower wanted to discuss historical abuse of woman she could have started a thread on that issue asking for input.. But no she focused her insinuations upon me as indirect effort in character assassination.. So now there will be no further discussions between me and her because i have her on ignore... End of discussion..
Click to expand...
Alright, I'll connect the dots for you.

MGTOW was a reaction to women taking advantage of mens current legal and social vulnerability.
Mens current legal and social vulnerability is caused by the feminist movement.
The feminist movement was started because women were tired of being abused by men.

That is how abuse of women became part of the topic and why it BELONGS in this thread. It is very germane to the topic at hand.

And yeah, what he said about the shoulder chip.
 
preacher4truth

preacher4truth

Senior Member
#65
Dec 28, 2016
9,171
2,719
113
#65
Feminism, feminist movement is all about divisiveness and equality which is nothing less than marxist terminology.

We only find true equality in Christ, not in movements of men or women. Men and women have specifically defined roles in Christ.

I suppose I'm not hoodwinked enough to see that this marxist ideology is "good."

As for the MGTOW movement? No thanks.
 
A

Adstar

Senior Member
#66
Jul 24, 2016
7,585
3,616
113
#66
Lynx said:
And yeah, what he said about the shoulder chip.
Click to expand...
Ok so.. I respond to a questioning thread and give a good and detailed answer that even you commented was an answer that you thought was accurate.. and now this....

I don't come online to put effort in to be then attacked and denigrated by people.. So if anyone else wants to join in the attack upon me please put forward your shoulder ship comments so i know who else to put on ignore..

I will be damned if i will face such abuse for giving an honest answer to a question...
 
PennEd

PennEd

Senior Member
#67
Apr 22, 2013
13,586
9,104
113
#67
Lynx said:
Alright, I'll connect the dots for you.

MGTOW was a reaction to women taking advantage of mens current legal and social vulnerability.
Mens current legal and social vulnerability is caused by the feminist movement.
The feminist movement was started because women were tired of being abused by men.

That is how abuse of women became part of the topic and why it BELONGS in this thread. It is very germane to the topic at hand.

And yeah, what he said about the shoulder chip.
Click to expand...
Feminism was NOT started because men were abusing women. That's ridiculous. Especially if we're, and I think we are, talking about second wave feminism, which I still contend is just as big a disaster for women as it has been for men.
 
tourist

tourist

Senior Member
#68
Mar 13, 2014
42,598
17,062
113
69
Tennessee
#68
Adstar said:
The topic was and is MGTOW what it is, and why it is.. It was not a topic about the abuse of woman.. There was absolutely no reason for her to first complain that i had not mentioned woman abuse and then pose those questions as an indirect way to attack me because she did not like my reply describing MGTOW..

I have been a member of online forums for over 16 years and i have seen this tactic so many times.. I decided to nip it in the bud before it got started.. That's the only way to deal with people who start up their character assassination efforts..

If Sunflower wanted to discuss historical abuse of woman she could have started a thread on that issue asking for input.. But no she focused her insinuations upon me as indirect effort in character assassination.. So now there will be no further discussions between me and her because i have her on ignore... End of discussion..
Click to expand...
Sonflower is just simply a nice person and I would leave it at that and not make a federal case on what you think she meant. There was no tactic involved so therefore nothing to nip in the bud. There is absolutely no need for paranoia on your part. I wonder if Jesus has put anyone on 'ignore'.
 
A

Adstar

Senior Member
#69
Jul 24, 2016
7,585
3,616
113
#69
tourist said:
Sonflower is just simply a nice person and I would leave it at that and not make a federal case on what you think she meant. There was no tactic involved so therefore nothing to nip in the bud. There is absolutely no need for paranoia on your part. I wonder if Jesus has put anyone on 'ignore'.
Click to expand...
Jesus puts those who blaspheme the Holy Spirit on ignore...
 
A

Adstar

Senior Member
#70
Jul 24, 2016
7,585
3,616
113
#70
PennEd said:
Feminism was NOT started because men were abusing women. That's ridiculous. Especially if we're, and I think we are, talking about second wave feminism, which I still contend is just as big a disaster for women as it has been for men.
Click to expand...
Indeed feminism in the long run has been very abusive towards woman... It's tastes like honey on their lips but is bitter when it reaches their belly..
 
Lynx

Lynx

Folksy yet erudite
#71
Aug 13, 2014
27,418
9,404
113
#71
PennEd said:
Feminism was NOT started because men were abusing women. That's ridiculous. Especially if we're, and I think we are, talking about second wave feminism, which I still contend is just as big a disaster for women as it has been for men.
Click to expand...
No, first wave feminism was started by women who decided not to put up with abuse any more. Second wave was started by a lot of women who said "Woohoo, it's our time now!" and jumped on the bandwagon for fun and profit.
 
Sonflower

Sonflower

Senior Member
#72
Jan 30, 2016
850
147
43
#72
preacher4truth said:
Feminism, feminist movement is all about divisiveness and equality which is nothing less than marxist terminology.

We only find true equality in Christ, not in movements of men or women. Men and women have specifically defined roles in Christ.

I suppose I'm not hoodwinked enough to see that this marxist ideology is "good."

As for the MGTOW movement? No thanks.
Click to expand...
Just to clear something up....I don't think a single person, including myself, on this thread has said feminism or Marxist ideology is good. I agree completely men and women have specifically designed roles created by God for our good.
 
PennEd

PennEd

Senior Member
#73
Apr 22, 2013
13,586
9,104
113
#73
Adstar said:
Indeed feminism in the long run has been very abusive towards woman... It's tastes like honey on their lips but is bitter when it reaches their belly..
Click to expand...
Satan is STILL whispering to Eve. And Adam is just as complicit as ever.

"Why does your husband get to leave his kids and be free to go off to work!?" "Why is it only men can have sex with NO repercussions"

And Eve of the 1960s is like 'Yeah! I want to leave my kids and join the workforce and be whatever I want to be!" "Yeah! I want to burn my bra and have sex with whoever I want with NO repercussions!"

And Adam joined in thinking "Wouldn't that extra money be great!" " Hey! The more sex the better!"
 
Sonflower

Sonflower

Senior Member
#75
Jan 30, 2016
850
147
43
#75
preacher4truth said:
There was nothing to clear up as in there was no such assertion made...
Click to expand...
Ahh. I wasn't sure.....you said,

" I suppose I'm not hoodwinked enough to see that this marxist ideology is "good." "

That sentence implies someone is hoodwinked... maybe you meant other people in general are hoodwinked? In any case, that's why I wanted to clear it up.
 
N

NoNameMcgee

Guest
#76
#76
Sonflower said:
Ahh. I wasn't sure.....you said,

" I suppose I'm not hoodwinked enough to see that this marxist ideology is "good." "

That sentence implies someone is hoodwinked... maybe you meant other people in general are hoodwinked? In any case, that's why I wanted to clear it up.
Click to expand...

im pretty sure he just meant by any "movement" in general.... that's how i saw it
 
preacher4truth

preacher4truth

Senior Member
#77
Dec 28, 2016
9,171
2,719
113
#77
Sonflower said:
Ahh. I wasn't sure.....you said,

" I suppose I'm not hoodwinked enough to see that this marxist ideology is "good." "

That sentence implies someone is hoodwinked... maybe you meant other people in general are hoodwinked? In any case, that's why I wanted to clear it up.
Click to expand...
Ok, not sure why you felt any connection to my statement, but that's not my fault.

Now I'm going to address this again with what I thought it initially appeared to be when you came in to defend yourself and the crowd of others you mixed in.

When you came in to defend yourself, just in case, then spoke for any others in this thread to defend "them" as well I have to say that is a bit strange and I believe subtly divisive.

It's like an attempt to draw ire on me, to assert things I've not stated, and draw others in as if the alleged but non-existent assertion included others. "Look what a terrible accusation he has made on us!"

Let's not assume any longer especially when the assumption I've mentioned is unsubstantiated. Obviously you took it personally and I never quoted nor mentioned you. Hmmmm...
 
PennEd

PennEd

Senior Member
#78
Apr 22, 2013
13,586
9,104
113
#78
Can we please get back to why boys rule and girls drool!?


Or.... is it the other way round?
 
N

NoNameMcgee

Guest
#79
#79
PennEd said:
Can we please get back to why boys rule and girls drool!?


Or.... is it the other way round?
Click to expand...


God bless you bro



(i would normally say girls drool... but if you put a steak in front of me......)
 
JosephsDreams

JosephsDreams

Senior Member
#80
Dec 31, 2015
4,313
468
83
#80
I don't know if one can make a blanket statement that feminism is no good. While some (probably many, actually) of the actors may be bad players, Gloria Steinem is a great example of this, the germ of the ideal had quite a few valid arguments. Woman were in need of more equal treatment, and probably more so, just some good old fashioned respect.
It's human nature to take things to far, especially once a little momentum gets the ball rolling, thanks to many factors; like greed, selfishness, power, etc.
Organizations and lobbyists have to validate their reason for being, so once one battle is won, it's on to the next. Eventually there may be nothing else to fight for, but to keep it in the public conscience, and to keep raking in the money, they just keep going.
Feminism is just a reflection of where society is at, and society holds up a mirror to feminism.
There is a good possibility that the historically shameful treatment of woman in most cultures has some of it's roots in the fall of Adam and Eve story.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.