Catholic Info

Traditional Catholic Faith => Catholic Living in the Modern World => Topic started by: Vintagewife3 on January 04, 2019, 11:40:42 AM

Title: Detoxing feminist thinking
Post by: Vintagewife3 on January 04, 2019, 11:40:42 AM
Could all of you help list things that would be feminist thinking? I think it would greatly help me detox, and help further pull me to the correct behavior as a women. I’ve always embraced my feminine side, and loved it. But that being said I’m sure I’ve soaked to long in the secular nonsense that my thinking may be muddled on some things.
Title: Re: Detoxing feminist thinking
Post by: Quid Retribuam Domino on January 04, 2019, 01:04:11 PM
Obvious things:

- contentiousness
- contraception/abortion
- short hair
- wearing pants, shorts and sleeveless shirts
- smoking
- working a paid job or unpaid voluntary work while married
- doing the more physical labors of household / homestead maintenance while the husband is able-bodied

Subtle things:

- belittling the husband or other men through "innocent" humor or idle talk with other people. This is a deliberate psychological campaign to attack the dignity of men and husbands that is ubiquitous in commercials, TV shows and movies. Women and men, alike, are easily influenced by it, and, usually, men are too asleep or soy to recognize it and stop it cold in its tracks.

- involvement in any type of public awareness or event that is exclusively focused on females
- equal say in household affairs
- equal power over finances
- wife discouraging sons from taking on physical hardships or anything that helps them become men.
- wife encouraging daughters to compete with boys or teaching them they're "equal to boys"

I know I'm missing some good examples. I'm sure there are some real good examples out there that other people can give...
Title: Re: Detoxing feminist thinking
Post by: Vintagewife3 on January 04, 2019, 01:44:31 PM
Obvious things:

- contentiousness
- contraception/abortion
- short hair
- wearing pants, shorts and sleeveless shirts
- smoking
- working a paid job or unpaid voluntary work while married
- doing the more physical labors of household / homestead maintenance while the husband is able-bodied

Subtle things:

- belittling the husband or other men through "innocent" humor or idle talk with other people. This is a deliberate psychological campaign to attack the dignity of men and husbands that is ubiquitous in commercials, TV shows and movies. Women and men, alike, are easily influenced by it, and, usually, men are too asleep or soy to recognize it and stop it cold in its tracks.

- involvement in any type of public awareness or event that is exclusively focused on females
- equal say in household affairs
- equal power over finances
- wife discouraging sons from taking on physical hardships or anything that helps them become men.
- wife encouraging daughters to compete with boys or teaching them they're "equal to boys"

I know I'm missing some good examples. I'm sure there are some real good examples out there that other people can give...
So I guess I’ll ask here, but why is wearing pants wrong? I mean I know clothes have specific genders, but if but if they aren’t tight, or jeans. Why are they not allowed? Does the church teach on this?
Title: Re: Detoxing feminist thinking
Post by: Brennus on January 04, 2019, 02:30:42 PM

Vintagewife3,

I am a lurker (lector?) who used to post more, but now mostly just read this forum.  

If you are honest in your request for help in detoxing, you will not stir up the old pants debate. It has been argued out over and over again elsewhere.

I have a suggestion. Keep wearing the pants, if you like, but take a look at the first thing on that Quid fellow's list, "contentiousness." Focus on that bit and, if you get that one down, then maybe a discussion about pants would be in order. 

I do not think you are genuine. I think you are a troll, Madame.   
Title: Re: Detoxing feminist thinking
Post by: Pax Vobis on January 04, 2019, 02:34:27 PM
Giuseppe Cardinal Siri 
Genoa
June 12, 1960

To the Reverend Clergy
To all Teaching Sisters,
To the Beloved Sons of Catholic Action,
To Educators intending truly to follow Christian Doctrine. 


I. The first signs of our late arriving spring indicate this year a certain increase in the use of men’s dress by girls and women, even mothers of families. Up until 1959, in Genoa, such dress usually meant the person was a tourist, but now there seems to be a significant number of girls and women from Genoa itself who are choosing, at least on pleasure trips, to wear men’s dress (men’s trousers). 

The spreading of this behavior obliges us to give serious consideration to the subject, and we ask those to whom this Notification is addressed to kindly give this problem all the attention it deserves, as befits those aware of being answerable to God. 

We seek above all to give a balanced moral judgment upon the wearing of men’s dress by women. In fact, our thoughts bear solely upon the moral question. 
Firstly, when if comes to covering of the female body, the wearing of men’s trousers by women cannot be said to constitute as such a grave offense against modesty, because trousers certainly cover more of woman’s body that do modern women’s skirts.
 
Secondly, however, to be modest clothes need not simply cover the body but must also not cling too closely to the body. Now it is true that much feminine clothing nowadays clings closer than do some trousers, but trousers can be made to cling closer, and, in fact, generally do; hence, the tight fit of such clothing gives us no less grounds for concern than does exposure of the body. So the immodesty of men’s trousers on women is an aspect of the problem which is not to be left out of an over-all judgment upon them even if it is not to be artificially exaggerated either. 

II. However, there is another aspect of women wearing men’s trousers which seems to us the gravest. 

The wearing of men’s dress by women affects firstly the woman herself, by changing the feminine psychology proper to women; secondly, it affects the woman as wife of her husband, by tending to vitiate relationships between the sexes; thirdly, it affects the woman as mother of her children by harming her dignity in her children’s eyes. Each of these points is to be carefully considered in turn. 

A. Male Dress Changes the Psychology of Woman. 
In truth, the motive impelling women to wear men’s dress is always that of imitating, nay, of competing with the man who is considered stronger, less tied down, more independent. This motivation shows clearly that male dress is the visible aid to bringing about a mental attitude of being ‘like a man’. Secondly, ever since men have been men, the clothing a person wears conditions, determines and modifies that person’s gestures, attitudes and behavior, such that from merely being worn outside, clothing comes to impose a particular frame of mind inside. 

Then let us add that a woman wearing men’s dress always more or less indicates her reacting to her femininity as though it were inferior [to masculinity] when in fact it is only diverse. The perversion of her psychology is clearly evident. 

These reasons, summing up many more, are enough to warn us how wrongly women are made to think by the wearing of men’s dress. 

B. Male Dress Tends to Vitiate Relationships Between Women and Men. 
In truth when relationships between the two sexes unfold with the coming of age, an instinct of mutual attraction is predominant. The essential basis of this attraction is a diversity between the two sexes which is made possible only by their complementing or completing one another. If then this diversity becomes less obvious because one of its major external signs is eliminated and because the normal psychological structure is weakened, what results is the alteration of a fundamental factor in the relationship. 

The problem goes further still. Mutual attraction between the sexes is preceded both naturally, and in the order of time, by that sense of shame which holds the rising impulses in check, imposes respect upon them, and tends to lift to a higher level of mutual esteem and healthy fear everything that those impulses would push onwards to uncontrolled acts. To change that clothing which by its diversity reveals and upholds nature’s limits and defenses, is to level the distinctions and to help pull down the vital defenses of the sense of shame. 

It is at least to hinder that sense. And when the sense of shame is hindered from applying the brakes, then do relationships between man and women sink degradingly to pure sensuality, devoid of all mutual respect or esteem. 

Experience teaches us that when woman is de-feminized, defenses are undermined and weakness increases. 

C. Male Dress Harms the Dignity of the Mother in Her Children’s Eyes. 
All children have an instinct for the sense of dignity and decorum of their mother. Analysis of the first inner crisis of children when they awaken to life around them, even before they enter upon adolescence, shows how much the sense of their mother counts. Children are as sensitive as can be on this point. Adults typically leave all that behind them and think no more on it. But we would do well to call to mind the severe demands that children instinctively make of their own mother, and the deep and even terrible reactions roused in them by observation of their mother’s misbehavior. Many lines of later life are here traced out -- and not for good -- in these early inner dramas of infancy and childhood. 

The child may not know the definition of exposure, frivolity or infidelity, but he possesses an instinctive sense to recognize them when they occur, to suffer from them, and be bitterly wounded by them in his soul. 

III. Let us think seriously on the import of everything said thus far, even if a woman’s appearance in men’s dress does not immediately give rise to the same disturbance caused by grave immodesty. 

The changing of feminine psychology does fundamental and -- in the long run -- irreparable damage to the family, to conjugal fidelity, to human affections and to human society. True, the effects of wearing unsuitable dress are not all to be seen within a short time. But one must think of what is being slowly and insidiously worn down, torn apart, perverted. 

Is any satisfying reciprocity between husband and wife imaginable, if feminine psychology be changed? Or is any true education of children imaginable, which is so delicate in its procedure, so woven of imponderable factors in which the mother’s intuition and instinct play the decisive part in those tender years? What will these women be able to give their children when they will so long have worn trousers that their self-esteem is determined more by their competing with the men than by their functioning as women? 

Why, we ask, ever since men have been men -- or rather since they became civilized -- why have men in all times and places been irresistibly borne to differentiate and divide the functions of the two sexes? Do we not have here strict testimony to the recognition by all mankind of a truth and a law above man? 
To sum up, wherever women wear men’s dress, it is be considered a factor, over the long term, in disintegrating human order. 

IV. The logical consequence of everything presented thus far is that anyone in a position of responsibility should be possessed by a sense of alarm in the true and proper meaning of the word, a severe and decisive alarm. 

We address a grave warning to parish priests, to all priests in general and to confessors in particular, to members of every kind of association, to all religious, to all nuns, especially to teaching Sisters. 

We ask them to become clearly conscious of the problem so that action will follow. This consciousness is what matters. It will suggest the appropriate action in due time. But let it not counsel us to give way in the face of inevitable change, as though we are confronted by a natural evolution of mankind, and so on! 

Men may come and men may go, because God has left plenty of room for the ebb and flow of free-will; but the substantial lines of nature and the no less substantial lines of the Eternal Law have never changed, are not changing and never will change. There are bounds beyond which one may stray as far as he pleases, but to do so ends in death. Empty philosophical fantasizing may let one mock or trivialize these limits, but they constitute an alliance of hard facts and of nature which chastises anyone who oversteps them. Certainly history has taught -- with frightening proofs from the life and death of nations -- that the reply to all violators of this outline of ‘humanity’ is always, sooner or later, catastrophe. 

Since the dialectic of Hegel, we are fed what amounts to nothing but fables, and by dint of hearing them so often, many people end up acquiescing to them, even if only passively. But the reality of the matter is that Nature and Truth, and the Law bound up in both, go their imperturbable way, and cut to pieces the simpletons who, upon no grounds whatsoever, would believe in radical and far-reaching changes in the very structure of man. 

The consequences of such violations are not a new outline of man, but rather disorders, harmful instability of every kind, the frightening dryness of human souls, a shattering increase in the number of human castaways driven out from among us, left to live out their decline in boredom, sadness and rejection. On the beach of this intentional shipwreck of the eternal norms are found broken families, hearths and homes grown cold, lives cut short before their time, the elderly cast aside, our youth willfully degenerate and -- at the end of the line -- souls in despair and taking their own lives. All of this human wreckage gives witness to the fact that the ‘line of God’ does not give way, nor does it admit of any adaptation to the delirious dreams of the so-called philosophers! 

V. We have said that those to whom the present Notification is addressed are asked to take serious alarm before the problem at hand. Accordingly they know what they have to say, starting with little girls on their mother’s knee. 

They know that without exaggerating or turning into fanatics, they will need to strictly limit how far they tolerate women dressing like men, as a general rule. 

They know they must never be so weak as to let anyone believe that they turn a blind eye to a custom which is slipping downhill and subverting the moral standing of all institutions. 

They, the priests, know that the line they have to take in the confessional, while not holding women dressing like men to be automatically a grave fault, must be sharp and decisive. 

Everybody will kindly give thought to the need for a united line of action, re-enforced on every side by the co-operation of all men of good will and all enlightened minds, so as to create a veritable dike to hold back the flood. 

Those of you responsible for souls in whatever capacity understand how useful it is to have for allies in this campaign men of the arts, the media and the crafts. 

The position taken by fashion design houses, the brilliant designers and the clothing industry, is of crucial important in the whole question. Artistic sense, refinement and good taste meeting together can find suitable but dignified solutions as to the dress for women to wear when they must use a motorcycle or engage in this or that exercise or work. What matters is to preserve modesty together with the eternal sense of femininity which, more than anything else, all children will continue to associate with the face of their mother. 

We do not deny that modern life sets problems and makes requirements unknown to our grandparents. But we state that there are values more in need of protection than fleeting experiences, and that for anyone of intelligence there is always good sense and good taste enough to find acceptable and dignified solutions to problems which arise. 

Moved by charity we are fighting against a leveling debasement of mankind, against the attack upon those differences on which rests the complementarity of man and woman. 

When we see a woman in trousers, we should think not so much of her as of all mankind, of what it will be when women will have masculinized themselves for good. Nobody stands to gain by helping to bring about a future age of vagueness, ambiguity, imperfection and, in a word, monstrosities. 

This letter of ours is not addressed to the public, but to those responsible for souls, for education, for Catholic associations. Let them do their duty, and let them not be sentries caught asleep at their post while evil crept in.  

Giuseppe Cardinal Siri
Archbishop of Genoa
Title: Re: Detoxing feminist thinking
Post by: Jaynek on January 04, 2019, 02:43:20 PM
So I guess I’ll ask here, but why is wearing pants wrong? I mean I know clothes have specific genders, but if but if they aren’t tight, or jeans. Why are they not allowed? Does the church teach on this?

There is a line near the end of Cardinal Siri's letter that is quite prophetic: "When we see a woman in trousers, we should think not so much of her as of all mankind, of what it will be when women will have masculinized themselves for good.  Nobody stands to gain by helping to bring about a future age of vagueness, ambiguity, imperfection and, in a word, monstrosities."

But I agree with Brennus that other matters are more important.  I think the pants issue just naturally falls into place when a woman is ready for it.
Title: Re: Detoxing feminist thinking
Post by: Mithrandylan on January 04, 2019, 02:46:46 PM
There are lots of behavioral steps one can take-- dressing modestly, avoiding near occassions of sin as well as company who buy into feminist thinking, being selective and discerning in the media one consumes, etc. 

But to build an intellectual defense (which is needed in order for the behavioral steps to take root), read Pope Pius XI's Casti Connubii. http://www.papalencyclicals.net/pius11/p11casti.htm
Title: Re: Detoxing feminist thinking
Post by: Vintagewife3 on January 04, 2019, 02:54:55 PM
Edit
Title: Re: Detoxing feminist thinking
Post by: Vintagewife3 on January 04, 2019, 02:57:44 PM
I ask about pants because I believe all the things he listed are good points, but if I don’t understand why something is wrong. I’m going to ask for clarification. Mithrandylan, and pax have been very helpful. When explaining to my husband while I’ll need to buy a few skirts those post will be quite helpful.

Brennus, thank you for pointing out that I need to work on that, but it is something I am quite aware of. I grew up in a family were wives always picked fights with husbands, and it is something I fight against. Thank you for your opinion of me :)
 
I don’t think it’s fair to assume I’m looming for a fight when asking questions. How am I supposed to know what pants are a hot button here? 
Title: Re: Detoxing feminist thinking
Post by: Jaynek on January 04, 2019, 02:58:10 PM
Obvious things:

- contentiousness
Do people here think that participating in forum debates fosters contentiousness?  Is it something that a woman ought to avoid?
Title: Re: Detoxing feminist thinking
Post by: Jaynek on January 04, 2019, 03:03:31 PM
When explaining to my husband while I’ll need to buy a few skirts those post will be quite helpful.

When I switched from pants to skirts I was able to find a lot of skirts in thrift stores.  I was also able to make a skirt by converting two pairs of pants.  I have pretty minimal sewing skills so it isn't very hard.  Changing over does not have to be expensive, if that is going to be a concern for your husband.
Title: Re: Detoxing feminist thinking
Post by: Vintagewife3 on January 04, 2019, 03:17:00 PM
When I switched from pants to skirts I was able to find a lot of skirts in thrift stores.  I was also able to make a skirt by converting two pairs of pants.  I have pretty minimal sewing skills so it isn't very hard.  Changing over does not have to be expensive, if that is going to be a concern for your husband.
No, but he likes a reason. You know? It also helps stop be from buying things I don’t need.
Title: Re: Detoxing feminist thinking
Post by: Quid Retribuam Domino on January 04, 2019, 03:35:07 PM
No, but he likes a reason [switching from pants to skirts]. You know? It also helps stop be from buying things I don’t need.

Here is one good reason: you'll be even more attractive by wearing long skirts rather than pants. What rational, Catholic husband wouldn't like his wife to be more attractive in a feminine and modest way?
Title: Re: Detoxing feminist thinking
Post by: Nadir on January 04, 2019, 03:36:39 PM
Pants draw the eye to the woman's crutch and accentuate the buttocks even when they are not tight. A good book to read is Dressing with Dignity.
Title: Re: Detoxing feminist thinking
Post by: Quid Retribuam Domino on January 04, 2019, 03:41:05 PM
Do people here think that participating in forum debates fosters contentiousness?  Is it something that a woman ought to avoid?

Presentation and motivation is key. I think there are a number of Catholic women on this forum who engage in these debates for the right reasons, and their presentations are great, some excellent. This is obviously not being contentious. For contentiousness, just look at female dialogues in the real world or TV. It's everywhere. Not hard to find. Of course, CathInfo, also, has its contentious female fiends, too.
Title: Re: Detoxing feminist thinking
Post by: Vintagewife3 on January 04, 2019, 04:11:27 PM
Here is one good reason: you'll be even more attractive by wearing long skirts rather than pants. What rational, Catholic husband wouldn't like his wife to be more attractive in a feminine and modest way?
Lol I wish that he would understand that, but I don’t think so.
When improving on being contentious. How does a women control her emotions? Say my husband says something, or makes a comment I take offense too. How does one work around that?
My husband also wants our son to play touch football in the league near us once he reaches age. It terrifies me, and I don’t feel supportive of it at all. Would this be discouraging my son from manly activities in the future? This is just an example I’m using as a base for all future thinking. 
Title: Re: Detoxing feminist thinking
Post by: Pax Vobis on January 04, 2019, 04:27:19 PM
Quote
When improving on being contentious. How does a women control her emotions? Say my husband says something, or makes a comment I take offense too. How does one work around that?
Try to bite your tongue, count to 10 and respond calmly or less emotionally.  It's not easy for anyone, man or woman.

Quote
My husband also wants our son to play touch football in the league near us once he reaches age. It terrifies me, and I don’t feel supportive of it at all. Would this be discouraging my son from manly activities in the future? This is just an example I’m using as a base for all future thinking. 
Touch football is super safe.  Even tackle football, in an organized league with gear/helmets, is wimpy compared to my childhood when we played touch football in a parking lot and tackle on a rough field.  It's part of learning to be a man, to be courageous, to conquer your fears, to play with people bigger than you and to trust in your abilities, to get hurt and to toughen up.  Your son needs to do this, absolutely.
Title: Re: Detoxing feminist thinking
Post by: Quid Retribuam Domino on January 04, 2019, 04:51:48 PM

When improving on being contentious. How does a women control her emotions? Say my husband says something, or makes a comment I take offense too. How does one work around that?

Don't take offense to it, but if you do, then remain quiet. In the grand scheme of things, his comment (whether truthful or erred) doesn't matter, but your emoting and potential disruption of your marital course, because you take offense, does matter. One by one, you only tear away fibers of your family's cohesion with each of your objections. Focus on whatever preserves and nourishes your family. Strong, Catholic families build and sustain civilization. It's all for the glory of God. It's not really about ourselves.

Quote
My husband also wants our son to play touch football in the league near us once he reaches age. It terrifies me, and I don’t feel supportive of it at all. Would this be discouraging my son from manly activities in the future? This is just an example I’m using as a base for all future thinking.

Your son isn't going to get hurt playing touch football. LOL ... Yes, it would be discouraging or, at the least, delaying your son from taking on manly activities in the future.  Please read the following article. Notwithstanding it's written by a Novus Ordo priest, it's an excellent read on the human condition of men and the proper disposition of men.

https://www.crisismagazine.com/2013/the-christian-boxer

Quote
The Christian Boxer
Fr. George W. Rutler

When our Lord says turn the other cheek, He speaks of a spiritual strategy to humble the self and then perhaps, to win other souls to Him.  Not all the proud are shamed by humility and it seems pretty clear that those who smote the One who offered them salvation did not turn their hearts to him when He turned His cheek to them.  Saint John Cantius won the hearts of some bandits when he called them back to take some money they had overlooked, but that is an instance rare enough to have become the lore of hagiography.  Sane moralists insist that neglect of self-defense can be moral dereliction.  Glad tidings of peace are not lighthearted pacifism, and even the Good Shepherd brought news to the poor and brokenhearted carrying a rod along with a staff.  I learned the wisdom of this when I was briefly knocked unconscious by a man I had caught breaking into my church’s Poor Box.  It was then that I began instruction in boxing, which I still try to keep up about once a week.

My first coach was an African who hesitated to punch me. I told him I could never learn unless he punched me. He explained that in his homeland, superstitious people thought it bad luck to strike a priest. That is a superstition lacking in my own country.

The amateur boxer learns three things immediately. First, few activities are as physically demanding and, at least in my case, one three minute round can be more exhausting than running five miles.  Second, boxing is highly intellectual, requiring so much quick reasoning and psychology, that of all sports, it is the one rightly validly called the “Sweet Science.”  Third, the immediate instinct to punch someone who has punched you, issues in a thrill when you do so.  When it is done gratuitously in sport, it can make one even less eager to do it in retributive anger. No one is disinterested in you, once you have punched him, and so boxing with strangers can even create bonds of friendship.

That is not always the case, as we known from Ali’s acid behavior toward Frazier outside the ring, and the famous brawl between Larry Holmes and Trevor Berbick who later was murdered by his nephew, poignantly, in a church. Yet the saints themselves must have delighted in the way Gene Tunney and Jack Dempsey became lifelong friends after the notorious Long Count in 1927. Tunney’s profits from the ring along with a beneficial marriage, by the way, enabled him to study literature, which he had not been able to do when poverty deprived him of school.  The autodidact Tunney came to know Thornton Wilder and Ernest Hemingway and he became the best of friends with George Bernard Shaw, once a bantamweight boxer himself. Tunney lectured on Shakespeare at Yale in its bright days.

 
Other sports such as baseball, tennis and squash racquets have their place, but their common drawback is that their players get to strike each other only inadvertently.  Football is as cerebral as boxing, but banging into one another is not as graceful as using fists. Then there are activities like shuffleboard, badminton, and billiards (and its outdoor variant: golf).  As they have the advantage of being able to be played in a state of physical neglect or advanced pregnancy, they are games and not sports. Swimming is superb for health, of course, but the water required for it conceals any evidence of exertion. Fencing may match boxing for mental elegance, but the use of protective devices has made it a shadow of ancient duels. Wrestling is the only real competition for boxing and is almost as ancient.  While Cain boxed Abel with fatal results, wrestling only put Jacob’s hip out of joint. If it is shockingly true that Greco-Roman and freestyle wrestling is to be dropped from the next Olympic games, which inexplicably include curling, ping pong and beach volley ball, then the degradation of our culture has entered its fin de siecle phase of the Decadents.

Among sports, bullfighting is too rarified to be considered here, though it has not escaped the attention of holy eyes. Pope Saint Pius V condemned it in 1567, but this may in part have been a reaction to the appetites of his Spanish Borgia antecedent.  In 1597, Pope Clement VIII only forbade the clergy from attending or participating in bull fights, but this was little different from the policy against clerics attending the opera, which was still on the books right up to the reign of Pope John XXIII, whose benevolent charisms did not include physical agility.  Bullfighting as condemned by Pius V was quite different from the present form, which was stylized only in the eighteenth century. The preponderant opinion of theologians is that the present form is morally licit, as the bullfighter’s brains make him even with the bull’s brawn. Just as the Council in Trullo stopped the clergy from going to horse races, the Fourth Lateran Council forbade clerics to engage in hawking and clamorous hunting (that would be riding with the hounds to the sound of brass horns), but this had nothing to do with the killing of animals. Pope Julius II was a keen hunter and in more modern times, Pope Leo XII shot birds in the Vatican gardens for relaxation.  The Council’s strictures were really against wasteful consumption of time. Today the equivalent of hawking and hunting as languorous misuses of time by clerics obviously would be golf.

There is a real moral doubt about professional boxing, no less today than in the days of bare knuckles and even John L. Sullivan’s compromise with two-ounce gloves. This is based both on its deliberate intent to inflict serious injury and on the corruption of promoters, which has figured in the decline of its popularity.  I tend to consider “professional sports” almost a contradiction in terms anyway, and would no more watch others play than I would pay to watch others eat.  Two minutes of listening to commentators on one of the sports channels is sheer mental anesthesia.  Because of physical danger in professional boxing, especially in the heavyweight class, it is only reasonable to require careful monitoring. There are more concussions, orthopedic injuries and neurological damage in football than in boxing, and the life expectancy of an NFL player is less than that of a professional boxer.  Remarkably, cheerleaders in the NFL reported four times more injuries than did the players.  Amateur boxing, of which I sing, ranks 71st in sports injuries, far below even baseball and soccer.

In a fallen world there always will be excesses and in my book Coincidentally, I described Mike Tyson biting off the ear of Evander Holyfield.  I now can add to that because just one hour before I began to write this, I ran into a bartender walking along Park Avenue who had served a non-alcoholic drink to Tyson at the start of his career and prophetically called him “Champ.” Brute violence seems to be going mainstream with the rise of Mixed Martial Arts, which should be banned for its incitement of bloodlust.

Holyfield’s robe was inscribed with the text: “I can do all things through Christ who strengthens me. (Philippians 4:13)” Little did he know that he was about to become another Malchus.  Saint Paul may very well have been a boxer. He refers to the races and boxing in 1 Corinthians 9: 24-27.  The “corruptible crown” was a reference, not to the Olympian games of Athens, but to the Isthmian games of Corinth, which had been restored by Julius Caesar in 44 B.C.  Long before the victor’s wreath was of ivy, the Isthmian wreath had been of fast-wilting celery leaves.  Pindar even mentioned it: “I sing the Isthmian victory with horses, not unrecognized, which Poseidon granted to Xenocrates, and sent him a garland of Dorian wild celery for his hair, to have himself crowned….”

The Apostle to the Gentiles did not consider the Way of the Lord Jesus a spectator sport. “Well, I do not run aimlessly, I do not box as one beating the air; but I pommel my body and subdue it, lest after preaching to others I myself should be disqualified.”  No young man should venture into the larger world without having sparred with his peers, and boxing should be required of every seminarian who would preach like Paul.  The writer to the Hebrews (12:4-13) quite likely took counsel from the Apostle when he wrote:

    In your struggles against sin you have not yet resisted to the point of shedding your blood… Suffering is part of your training… God is treating you as his sons.  Has there ever been any son whose father did not train him? If you were not getting this training, as all of you are, then you would not be sons but bastards… Of course, any punishment is most painful at the time, and far from pleasant, but later, in those on whom it has been used, it bears fruit in peace and goodness.  So hold up your limp arms and steady your trembling knees and smooth out the path you tread; then the injured limb will not be wrenched, it will grow strong again.
Title: Re: Detoxing feminist thinking
Post by: Vintagewife3 on January 04, 2019, 05:09:15 PM
You both must think I’m ridiculous lol. After clarifying with my husband he apparently wants him to play both touch, and tackle. Tackle was the one I’m worried about.


And another question. Is it feminist behavior to want to have girls night? Like you got out with friends to one of those picture painting stores where you drink wine, and paint. Or even out to dinner sans kids and husband? Or are things like that ok as long as husband approves? I always have in laws telling me I need to get out more....
Title: Re: Detoxing feminist thinking
Post by: Quid Retribuam Domino on January 04, 2019, 05:27:23 PM
You both must think I’m ridiculous lol. After clarifying with my husband he apparently wants him to play both touch, and tackle. Tackle was the one I’m worried about.

From the above article:

Quote
No young man should venture into the larger world without having sparred with his peers, and boxing should be required of every seminarian who would preach like Paul.  The writer to the Hebrews (12:4-13) quite likely took counsel from the Apostle when he wrote:

    In your struggles against sin you have not yet resisted to the point of shedding your blood… Suffering is part of your training… God is treating you as his sons.  Has there ever been any son whose father did not train him? If you were not getting this training, as all of you are, then you would not be sons but bastards… Of course, any punishment is most painful at the time, and far from pleasant, but later, in those on whom it has been used, it bears fruit in peace and goodness.  So hold up your limp arms and steady your trembling knees and smooth out the path you tread; then the injured limb will not be wrenched, it will grow strong again.
Title: Re: Detoxing feminist thinking
Post by: Pax Vobis on January 04, 2019, 05:28:35 PM
Quote
You both must think I’m ridiculous lol. After clarifying with my husband he apparently wants him to play both touch, and tackle. Tackle was the one I’m worried about.
There's not much tackling in tackle football anyways (before high school).  Ha ha.  Mostly blocking and falling down or tripping over someone else who fell down.  He'll be fine, he'll have a BLAST and he'll get to hang out with a bunch of other boys.  He needs to do this.


Quote
And another question. Is it feminist behavior to want to have girls night? Like you got out with friends to one of those picture painting stores where you drink wine, and paint. Or even out to dinner sans kids and husband? Or are things like that ok as long as husband approves? I always have in laws telling me I need to get out more....
It would be feminist if the group was female AND MALE friends.  If female only, this should be encouraged.  Everyone needs a break from family.
Title: Re: Detoxing feminist thinking
Post by: Vintagewife3 on January 04, 2019, 05:39:26 PM
From the above article:
I’ll read it! I just am still trying to get through what mithrandlyn posted, and cooking dinner 😁
Title: Re: Detoxing feminist thinking
Post by: SusanneT on January 04, 2019, 05:41:17 PM
So I guess I’ll ask here, but why is wearing pants wrong? I mean I know clothes have specific genders, but if but if they aren’t tight, or jeans. Why are they not allowed? Does the church teach on this?
Put simply trousers / pants are not modest because they draw attention to all the wrong parts of the body. 
They are also not exclusively feminine and represent a rejection of femininity in exchange for a masculine utilitarianism. 
Title: Re: Detoxing feminist thinking
Post by: Vintagewife3 on January 04, 2019, 05:51:27 PM
I actually think the easiest thing for me is the pants.


I’ve definitely learned I have more feminist tendencies than I originally thought, and much to learn. So, I’ve come to realize I need to watch my mouth here, and in the real world. Listen more, and talk less. 
Title: Re: Detoxing feminist thinking
Post by: Nadir on January 04, 2019, 08:44:20 PM
My husband also wants our son to play touch football in the league near us once he reaches age. It terrifies me, and I don’t feel supportive of it at all. Would this be discouraging my son from manly activities in the future? This is just an example I’m using as a base for all future thinking.
Trust your husband in this.
.
What is it that you are terrified by? This is a genuine question which interests me.
.
I once had it explained to me like this. Baby boys and baby girls both identify from birth with their mother rather than with their father. That makes it easier for girls to identify with the right sex. But a boy has an extra and harder task, and that is to move their identification from the mother to his father to become a healthy balanced male. That is why boys must have not only a father, but a strong father, to latch onto for his idendity. Observe how fathers act differently to their boy babies than to their girl babies. You will observe them roughing up their boys, as an intro to toughening them.
I don't believe that many men think about this because it is something instinctive just as it is instinctive for all babies to first identify with their mothers' breast.
.
Be careful not to undo the work of the father by being too soft on your boy., and more especially by doubting that he knows what he is doing. Your son will pick up the subtle or maybe not so subtle nuances even in your thoughts, and their may create a sense of unease.
.
He will need a certain amount of toughening to survive in this world. 
.
Title: Re: Detoxing feminist thinking
Post by: Nadir on January 04, 2019, 11:30:23 PM
...trousers / pants ... represent a rejection of femininity in exchange for a masculine utilitarianism.

Quote
Quote from: Vintage Wife
(https://www.cathinfo.com/index.php?topic=50920.msg638360#msg638360)I actually think the easiest thing for me is the pants.

That is the epitome of utilitarianism.
Title: Re: Detoxing feminist thinking
Post by: Vintagewife3 on January 05, 2019, 03:44:28 AM
I’ll clarify: I mean switching from pants to skirts will be the easiest thing for me. Some of the others on the list will be retraining bad habits. So, those will be harder for me.


I’m worried about him playing because of concussion issues, or getting hurt. But I’m definitely going to have to just be quiet about it, and let my husband take the lead.
Title: Re: Detoxing feminist thinking
Post by: Nadir on January 05, 2019, 04:52:51 AM
Thank you for the clarification, vw. I get it now.
Title: Re: Detoxing feminist thinking
Post by: Endeavor on January 05, 2019, 09:53:46 AM
Don't take offense to it, but if you do, then remain quiet. In the grand scheme of things, his comment (whether truthful or erred) doesn't matter, but your emoting and potential disruption of your marital course, because you take offense, does matter. One by one, you only tear away fibers of your family's cohesion with each of your objections. Focus on whatever preserves and nourishes your family. Strong, Catholic families build and sustain civilization. It's all for the glory of God. It's not really about ourselves.

Your son isn't going to get hurt playing touch football. LOL ... Yes, it would be discouraging or, at the least, delaying your son from taking on manly activities in the future.  Please read the following article. Notwithstanding it's written by a Novus Ordo priest, it's an excellent read on the human condition of men and the proper disposition of men.

https://www.crisismagazine.com/2013/the-christian-boxer
Very good advice Quid
Title: Re: Detoxing feminist thinking
Post by: forlorn on January 05, 2019, 11:13:09 AM
You both must think I’m ridiculous lol. After clarifying with my husband he apparently wants him to play both touch, and tackle. Tackle was the one I’m worried about.


And another question. Is it feminist behavior to want to have girls night? Like you got out with friends to one of those picture painting stores where you drink wine, and paint. Or even out to dinner sans kids and husband? Or are things like that ok as long as husband approves? I always have in laws telling me I need to get out more....
What's wrong with him playing tackle football? The chance of any permanent injury is vanishingly small, but if you over-protect him the chances of him growing up to be weak both of body and mind are quite high. Millions of boys play football without any harm done to them, and attain fitness, strength, teamwork, perseverance, and wonderful memories from it. 
Title: Re: Detoxing feminist thinking
Post by: Vintagewife3 on January 05, 2019, 12:09:06 PM
It’s definitely something I have work on!
Title: Re: Detoxing feminist thinking
Post by: SusanneT on January 06, 2019, 10:20:08 AM
I’ll clarify: I mean switching from pants to skirts will be the easiest thing for me. Some of the others on the list will be retraining bad habits. So, those will be harder for me.
It is an easy switch to make, your husband will appreciate it and you will find that it changes your attitude to a far greater extent than you might expect. 
Fathers must be allowed to lead boys in their masculinity and even though it is difficult for a mother we have to accept them taking risks.  
Title: Re: Detoxing feminist thinking
Post by: Ladislaus on January 06, 2019, 11:59:41 AM
By far the most important thing is always to have RESPECT, DEFERENCE, and OBEDIENCE towards your husband, no matter what ... even if outwardly he doesn't seem to live up to it, just as one would have respect for a priest even if he's not measuring up to his state in life.

As for football, most leagues today are KEENLY aware of the potential for injury and concussions in particular.  Probably within 5-10 years we'll have only touch football being played at the High School level.  They're working on developing helmets to prevent concussions.

In the case of a disagreement, you can make your opinion heard, but you must still RESPECT your husband's decision and defer to it.  Not just "keep silent" while stewing over it inside, but, as is the case with, say, the Magisterium, give a true internal assent.  That true internal assent owed to the Magisterium is the same type of attitude that a wife must have to her husband, and not just outward lipservice.  Once you develop that habit, feminism will very quickly be uprooted at the core.  Of course, the limit is that if the husband were to command something immoral or contrary to the laws of God or contrary to justice, but even then, instead of losing respect, ask a priest to intervene and set him straight.

And, as Quid mentioned, NEVER EVER ridicule or poke fun of your husband.  Women tend to get together in groups and deride their husbands as if they were idiots.  Steer clear of the company of such women, and even object when the conversation turns in that direction.  You see all kinds of TV programs and commercials where the husband is always the idiot and the buffoon who must be "set straight" by his wife.  That's deliberate social engineering intended to upset the natural order created by God.
Title: Re: Detoxing feminist thinking
Post by: Ladislaus on January 06, 2019, 12:04:07 PM
It is an easy switch to make, your husband will appreciate it and you will find that it changes your attitude to a far greater extent than you might expect.
Fathers must be allowed to lead boys in their masculinity and even though it is difficult for a mother we have to accept them taking risks.  

Here's the thing about pants.  Women LOOK MUCH BETTER in dresses and skirts than in pants.  My wife looks beautiful in skirts and dresses, and I never tire of complimenting her when she wears them.  If you realize how much prettier and more feminine you look wearing a dress, you'll avoid going out in pants any more than you would go out in public with sweats and looking like you just rolled out of bed.  Guys, that, by the way, is the key, to winning pants-wearers over to wearing dresses and skirts.  Always notice and compliment exuberantly, "Wow, you look great in that dress."  That is the #1 way to motivate a woman ... rather than just getting all preachy about pants.  And my compliments to my wife are absolutely genuine, not just a tactic being used disingenuously.  So, men, properly develop your own sensibilities, and those of your wife will undoubtedly follow.

And, laides, Susanne is right on target.  Men will notice it, and that respect that's programmed by God into man's nature with regard to all things feminine, will manifest itself.  I bet that without even thinking it, a man will start treating a wife who wears dresses and skirts with much more respect, and his chivalrous attitudes toward her will increase.  Watch a man who had rarely done so before suddenly start holding doors for his wife.
Title: Re: Detoxing feminist thinking
Post by: Vintagewife3 on January 06, 2019, 12:11:43 PM
I’m rather short, and long skirts are hard to walk in lol is knee length, or calf length still modest? Obviously anything over the knees is just not to be worn.
Title: Re: Detoxing feminist thinking
Post by: Ladislaus on January 06, 2019, 12:15:18 PM
I’m rather short, and long skirts are hard to walk in lol is knee length, or calf length still modest? Obviously anything over the knees is just not to be worn.

Church's standard has long just been that they cover the knee.

Padre Pio demanded a few inches longer, but I'm guessing that this was because women were trying to abuse the rules and going as short as they felt they could get away with ... treating it as some kind of legalistic technicality.  You sometimes see women yanking them down an inch or two to be in compliance temporarily, and then they ride up again quickly above their knees.
Title: Re: Detoxing feminist thinking
Post by: SusanneT on January 06, 2019, 05:50:42 PM
I’m rather short, and long skirts are hard to walk in lol is knee length, or calf length still modest? Obviously anything over the knees is just not to be worn.
I think that to be practical and remain modest in day to day life mid-calf is best. Definitely long enough to cover your knees completely when sitting. 
A skirt which just cover your knees standing are not modest when playing with kids on the floor or doing the homework ! 
Title: Re: Detoxing feminist thinking
Post by: Vintagewife3 on January 06, 2019, 05:56:24 PM
I was just thinking that lol I want something long enough too it doesn’t blow up in the wind.... 


I was thinking of just donating my pants, and leggings. But wanted to know if that would be wrong condoning such dress in other women? If I’m not wearing them anymore is seems wasteful to put them in the garbage.
Title: Re: Detoxing feminist thinking
Post by: SusanneT on January 06, 2019, 06:13:49 PM
Personally I think the single biggest and most demonstrative rejection of feminism it the rejection and condemnation of the sin of birth control. 
Title: Re: Detoxing feminist thinking
Post by: Vintagewife3 on January 06, 2019, 06:24:15 PM
I agree. I had hard pregnancies, but there really is nothing better then feeling babies kick.
Title: Re: Detoxing feminist thinking
Post by: magdalena59 on January 06, 2019, 06:25:19 PM
Obvious things:

- contentiousness
- contraception/abortion
- short hair
- wearing pants, shorts and sleeveless shirts
- smoking
- working a paid job or unpaid voluntary work while married
- doing the more physical labors of household / homestead maintenance while the husband is able-bodied

Subtle things:

- belittling the husband or other men through "innocent" humor or idle talk with other people. This is a deliberate psychological campaign to attack the dignity of men and husbands that is ubiquitous in commercials, TV shows and movies. Women and men, alike, are easily influenced by it, and, usually, men are too asleep or soy to recognize it and stop it cold in its tracks.

- involvement in any type of public awareness or event that is exclusively focused on females
- equal say in household affairs
- equal power over finances
- wife discouraging sons from taking on physical hardships or anything that helps them become men.
- wife encouraging daughters to compete with boys or teaching them they're "equal to boys"

I know I'm missing some good examples. I'm sure there are some real good examples out there that other people can give...
I really like this list. I work to fight what I call, "the feminist in me".

Another horrible feminist trait is the, "I can do it myself or I can do it better than my husband."
Title: Re: Detoxing feminist thinking
Post by: Nadir on January 06, 2019, 06:28:11 PM

I was thinking of just donating my pants, and leggings. But wanted to know if that would be wrong condoning such dress in other women? If I’m not wearing them anymore is seems wasteful to put them in the garbage.
Don't put them in the garbage. You could still wear leggings under your skirt to be warm in winter. The fabric in the pants can be recycled. I use jeans to make bags and other crafty things. Waste not - want not!
Title: Re: Detoxing feminist thinking
Post by: Vintagewife3 on January 06, 2019, 06:35:57 PM
Oh that’s a good idea! I didn’t think of that. Glad I asked here first!
Title: Re: Detoxing feminist thinking
Post by: Cera on January 06, 2019, 07:11:23 PM
Keep a pair of baggy pants in case you have an injury that requires you to have physical therapy. You don't want to have PT in a skirt, believe me. You can wear a skirt over if you are able, but when I broke my back it was extremely difficult just to get dressed.

Also, in regard to the original list, I do not agree with no volunteer work. Our chapel would not be able to function were it not for the (married) ladies who teach Catechism, hold dinners, bake sales, garage sales, give their time to the choir,clean the chapel etc.
Title: Re: Detoxing feminist thinking
Post by: Cera on January 06, 2019, 07:13:52 PM
Is contentiousness not a lack of charity? If so, how could it possibly apply only to the gentler sex?
Title: Re: Detoxing feminist thinking
Post by: Ladislaus on January 06, 2019, 07:17:13 PM
Agreed.  There are some reasons that would justify wearing pants ... e.g., injury, work that might be difficult or even hazardous (where you could trip) with a dress on, to wear underneath a dress/skirt in cold weather, etc.  At the seminary, like an idiot, I wore my cassock up on a barn root to redo the steel roofing panels ... could have killed myself.  Pants are not intrinsically evil.  There are even some flowing, more feminine versions of pants out there as well, with the baggy legs so that it's almost impossible to distinguish it from a skirt from a longer distance or even up close if you don't stare at it.
Title: Re: Detoxing feminist thinking
Post by: Ladislaus on January 06, 2019, 07:20:33 PM
Is contentiousness not a lack of charity? If so, how could it possibly apply only to the gentler sex?

It doesn't.  But we're speaking in the context of feminism.  So, for instance, for wife to be contentious (and competitive) with her husband, and men in general, takes on the aspect of feminism.  Contentiousness (as described by St. Paul) would be wrong for men also, but it does not in that context take on the aspect of feminism.

Now, competitiveness (different from contentiousness) is perfectly good and fine between men, but runs counter to and harms the feminine nature.  That is why in workplaces and sports, men deal with competition much better than women.  Women invariably make it PERSONAL, whereas men could duke it out and sincerely shake hands and walk away with respect for their opponent after the fact ... even after losing.  Making things personal is not a defect, but a feminine strength ... since women have a tendency to be personal in their relationships, whereas men can be a little cold and intellectual.  That's needed in a family, especially in the nurturing of children.  But that same nature is ill-suited to situations in public which require disagreement and competition.  Women don't even compete well with other women, but it's even more in line with feminism for women to compete in this way with men.

Title: Re: Detoxing feminist thinking
Post by: MaterDominici on January 06, 2019, 11:46:10 PM
Trust your husband in this.
.
What is it that you are terrified by? This is a genuine question which interests me.
.
I once had it explained to me like this. Baby boys and baby girls both identify from birth with their mother rather than with their father. That makes it easier for girls to identify with the right sex. But a boy has an extra and harder task, and that is to move their identification from the mother to his father to become a healthy balanced male. That is why boys must have not only a father, but a strong father, to latch onto for his idendity. Observe how fathers act differently to their boy babies than to their girl babies. You will observe them roughing up their boys, as an intro to toughening them.
I don't believe that many men think about this because it is something instinctive just as it is instinctive for all babies to first identify with their mothers' breast.
.
Be careful not to undo the work of the father by being too soft on your boy., and more especially by doubting that he knows what he is doing. Your son will pick up the subtle or maybe not so subtle nuances even in your thoughts, and their may create a sense of unease.
.
He will need a certain amount of toughening to survive in this world.
Here's my contrary opinion on the football... I have no problem with boys doing manly activities, but I do have a problem with boys or girls getting involved in activities that (1) have a large social component and (2) are open to the general public.
We certainly do things outside the house, but I generally avoid activities where my children will be interacting with a small, consistent group of other kids. We can barely go to the park without encountering kids who toss about profanities as if they're a normal part of everyday speech. The average public school kid is not the sort of person you want your presumably homeschoooled, Catholic children engaging with on a regular basis. Sure, you'll find some nice families who are exceptions, but there's no way in a team activity that you'll be able to limit interactions to just those exceptions. If team sports were on our radar, I might consider homeschool leagues, but not an open-to-all community league.
Title: Re: Detoxing feminist thinking
Post by: Nadir on January 07, 2019, 12:21:08 AM
Mater, I am curious as to why you quote me and say yours is a contrary opinion, as I said absolutely nothing about sports.
Title: Re: Detoxing feminist thinking
Post by: MaterDominici on January 07, 2019, 12:25:36 AM
Mater, I am curious as to why you quote me and say yours is a contrary opinion, as I said absolutely nothing about sports.
Yours was the last post I read about the football topic. That's really the only reason. "Trust your husband in this" led me to believe you agreed with everyone else about team football being a good idea.
Title: Re: Detoxing feminist thinking
Post by: SusanneT on January 07, 2019, 09:53:48 AM
If you don't already - a very good way of rejecting the feminist mindset is to veil for Mass and prayer generally.
Title: Re: Detoxing feminist thinking
Post by: Cantarella on January 07, 2019, 10:18:52 AM
Stick to being pretty.

And pleasant :)

Cultivate a meek and quiet spirit (Peter 1, 3:4)

Reject all degeneracy.
Title: Re: Detoxing feminist thinking
Post by: Vintagewife3 on January 07, 2019, 01:23:18 PM
I love veiling at church! My oldest does too, my younger daughter doesn’t quite like wearing things on her head. She’s getting there tbough. I’ve veiled since I was young when we still went to the NO mass. 

I’m not sure if you guys have ever seen them, but they make lace infinity scarves that are also veils. That’s my favorite one to wear!
Title: Re: Detoxing feminist thinking
Post by: Vintagewife3 on January 07, 2019, 01:38:29 PM
Stick to being pretty.

And pleasant :)

Cultivate a meek and quiet spirit (Peter 1, 3:4)

Reject all degeneracy.
I love this lol It’s simple, but explains everything. 
Title: Re: Detoxing feminist thinking
Post by: Carissima on January 07, 2019, 03:22:30 PM
Could all of you help list things that would be feminist thinking? I think it would greatly help me detox, and help further pull me to the correct behavior as a women. I’ve always embraced my feminine side, and loved it. But that being said I’m sure I’ve soaked to long in the secular nonsense that my thinking may be muddled on some things.
The definition of feminism from Wiki:

“Feminism is a range of political movements (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_movement), ideologies (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ideologies), and social movements (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_movement) that share a common goal: to define, establish, and achieve political, economic, personal, and social equality of sexes (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender_equality).[1] (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feminism#cite_note-Hawkesworth-1)[2] (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feminism#cite_note-Beasley-2) This includes seeking to establish educational and professional opportunities for women that are equal to those for men.“

VW, if this is not your daily bread and butter and your beliefs are opposite of this statement then you’re not a feminist. Simple as that.

However, if you have many flaws, and sinful bad habits, like most of us woman do, then one of the best things a lady can do in working on improving herself, is to read the Saints, and the Saints on Mary.
To try and imitate Mary and other women Saints is an excellent way of rooting out bad habits and thinking.
Pray and ask Them to help you, They want nothing more than your sanctification too.

My life has forever changed after reading the lives of the Saints. Some of my personal favorites are, Jacinta and Lucia, St Bridget, St Gertrude, St Monica, St Rita, and Mother Mariana de Jesus Torres.
Impossible not to take them and what they say to heart.

An honorable mention is Francisco of Fatima. Not a girl or woman, but next to Jacinta, his life after seeing the Mother of God is the most inspirational life I have ever read. It will humble you like nothing else.
Your children should be inspired by it as well.

Another thing to do is stay away from online mommy blogs. All you get is a bunch of different opinions from random women some of whom really are feminists and don’t know up from down. Even Traditional Catholic ones have problems so pray for discernment on that. Be safe and be sane, stick to the Saints. 






Title: Re: Detoxing feminist thinking
Post by: SusanneT on January 07, 2019, 04:30:14 PM
I love veiling at church! My oldest does too, my younger daughter doesn’t quite like wearing things on her head. She’s getting there tbough. I’ve veiled since I was young when we still went to the NO mass.

I’m not sure if you guys have ever seen them, but they make lace infinity scarves that are also veils. That’s my favorite one to wear!
All the women and girls in our extended family veil as I personally feel all women should. 
Title: Re: Detoxing feminist thinking
Post by: Ladislaus on January 07, 2019, 07:09:04 PM
I want to clarify the "internal assent" comment.  I don't believe that women have to absolutely agree with every decision made by their husband.  What I meant by that is a genuine acquiescence to their decision and a respect for the decision ... without "grumbling" or "murmuring" about it on the inside (while accepting outwardly).
Title: Re: Detoxing feminist thinking
Post by: magdalena59 on January 07, 2019, 07:17:03 PM
Stick to being pretty.

And pleasant :)

Cultivate a meek and quiet spirit (Peter 1, 3:4)

Reject all degeneracy.
I really like this also.
Title: Re: Detoxing feminist thinking
Post by: Ladislaus on January 07, 2019, 07:19:46 PM
Do people here think that participating in forum debates fosters contentiousness?  Is it something that a woman ought to avoid?

I've actually been pondering this question, and after much reflection have come to the conclusion that it is in fact inappropriate for a woman to argue contentiously with men (including on a forum).

So, for instance, I believe it wrong and contrary to nature for a girl to compete against a boy in physical competition ... for a variety of reasons that I'll elaborate upon.  I don't see why intellectual battles with men should be any different.

Would you let your daughter play football against boys?  Of course not.  Girls should not be competitive directly with boys.  It's possible that you'd find a girl here or there who could compete well with boys (athletic and strong, etc.) ... but it's still inappropriate.  It harms both the boys and the girls involved.  And the boy is in an awkward position.  God designed boys to be chivalrous and respectful towards ladies.  So a girl is running at him carrying a football.  How does he react?  Does he hit her with everything he's got?  That's contrary to every male instinct implanted by God.  Does he then "pull his punches" and hold back?  In that case, he's hurting his team and not able to compete the way he's supposed to as a boy/man.

JayneK, I recall once that you objected to how I battled with you, since you are a woman.  But if you were to get into a boxing ring with me and start punching me in the face, isn't that putting me in an unfair no-win situation?  I'm not supposed to hit a lady, of course, but then do I just stand there and take repeated blows to the face?  That also is unmanly to let yourself get beaten up.  So it puts a man into a position of having to do something unmanly.
Title: Re: Detoxing feminist thinking
Post by: Pax Vobis on January 07, 2019, 07:32:35 PM
Agree, 100%.  Having internet conversations and sharing articles with women is fine.  But as soon as women start debating something philosophical/theological, while they might make some good points initially, they usually don't have the drive/stomach to "get into the details" which are needed to come to a conclusion.  So what happens?  They cause men to get frustrated because the women can't continue the conversation they started and keep repeating the entry-level points that have already been made multiple times.  And the women get frustrated because they don't understand why the men don't "validate" their point, not understanding that sometimes many distinctions must be made, depending on circuмstances and that some principles don't apply all the time.

Result?  Both sexes get frustrated, nothing is solved, time is wasted, tempers flare and venial sins are committed through uncharity, impatience and anger.  Women should stay out of the realm of education and higher studies (generally speaking) unless they are somehow trained in it (which is unwomanly and not normal).
Title: Re: Detoxing feminist thinking
Post by: Vintagewife3 on January 07, 2019, 08:02:25 PM
So, what am I supposed to do with this in reguards to my husband? He doesn’t practice, and doesn’t believe everything the church says. I’m the one with the most education when it comes to the church, and why we can’t go to the NO mass even though I tried it with him. Where does that leave me when I’m trying to tell him that’s it’d be beneficial to his soul, and for the good of the family to start participating in religious activities? Is it wrong of me to do so? 
Title: Re: Detoxing feminist thinking
Post by: Nadir on January 07, 2019, 08:23:25 PM
So, what am I supposed to do with this in reguards to my husband? He doesn’t practice, and doesn’t believe everything the church says. I’m the one with the most education when it comes to the church, and why we can’t go to the NO mass even though I tried it with him. Where does that leave me when I’m trying to tell him that’s it’d be beneficial to his soul, and for the good of the family to start participating in religious activities? Is it wrong of me to do so?
VW, I think you have already told him these things, like "it’d be beneficial to his soul, and for the good of the family", so now the next step is pray and beseech Our Lord, his Blessed Mother, his Guardian Angel, the saints, to intercede on your behalf.

Also he will observe the changes practicing the faith and your prayer life have had on you. You have changed remarkably since you came here. If I can see it, he can see it so much more.

The devil will be on the prowl in order to keep him away from God, so pray extra hard for his protection and enlightenment. Many men have been converted by Godly wives. Read the lives of the saints and read them to your children.
Don't be too pushy/anxious with him. Pray, hope and Don't worry.
Title: Re: Detoxing feminist thinking
Post by: Vintagewife3 on January 08, 2019, 07:27:48 PM
I definitely think my plan of action is to just take charge of my and the children. This is a job best done quietly.I mean it took forever for Saint Rita’s husband to convert. If he can I do believe anyone can. Thank you for the support, Nadir!
Title: Re: Detoxing feminist thinking
Post by: ggreg on January 09, 2019, 09:15:55 AM
You could try treating him like a King.  Really treat him well during 2019 and make him feel respected.  He might take it for granted, but some men don't.  They enjoy the largese and feeling like a King and rewarding their wife.  He might find it strokes his ego to allow you to do they things you want, once he thinks it is him allowing them and not you nagging him.




W[size=-1]IND[/size] and the Sun were disputing which was the stronger. Suddenly they saw a traveller coming down the road, and the Sun said: “I see a way to decide our dispute. Whichever of us can cause that traveller to take off his cloak shall be regarded as the stronger You begin.” So the Sun retired behind a cloud, and the Wind began to blow as hard as it could upon the traveller. But the harder he blew the more closely did the traveller wrap his cloak round him, till at last the Wind had to give up in despair. Then the Sun came out and shone in all his glory upon the traveller, who soon found it too hot to walk with his cloak on.
Title: Re: Detoxing feminist thinking
Post by: Vintagewife3 on January 09, 2019, 10:09:23 AM
That’s a good story for a situation like this! Very fitting! 
Title: Re: Detoxing feminist thinking
Post by: ggreg on January 09, 2019, 06:39:17 PM
Sign of a misspent youth.  Lots of reading.
Title: Re: Detoxing feminist thinking
Post by: Jaynek on January 09, 2019, 07:04:36 PM
The definition of feminism from Wiki:

“Feminism is a range of political movements (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_movement), ideologies (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ideologies), and social movements (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_movement) that share a common goal: to define, establish, and achieve political, economic, personal, and social equality of sexes (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender_equality).[1] (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feminism#cite_note-Hawkesworth-1)[2] (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feminism#cite_note-Beasley-2) This includes seeking to establish educational and professional opportunities for women that are equal to those for men.“

VW, if this is not your daily bread and butter and your beliefs are opposite of this statement then you’re not a feminist. Simple as that.
This is how secular and leftist sources, such as Wikipedia, define feminism, trying to make it sound like a harmless and innocent thing.  It is clear enough what feminism actually is, if we look at what feminists do and say, rather than accept such definitions.
Feminism is one piece of the cultural Marxism that dominates the West.  It involves seeing men as the oppressor class and women as the victim class.  And people are not judged by their individual beliefs and actions, but by what class they belong to.  To this way of thinking, men are always in the wrong, just like whites are always in the wrong.

A major sign of feminist thinking is looking down on men as a group, seeing them as morally worse than woman.  For us married women, it tempts us not to give husbands the respect we owe them.  So that is one of the major areas to watch out for.

So, what am I supposed to do with this in reguards to my husband? He doesn’t practice, and doesn’t believe everything the church says. I’m the one with the most education when it comes to the church, and why we can’t go to the NO mass even though I tried it with him. Where does that leave me when I’m trying to tell him that’s it’d be beneficial to his soul, and for the good of the family to start participating in religious activities? Is it wrong of me to do so?
Pray, don't nag.  And remember to hold him in highest respect.
Title: Re: Detoxing feminist thinking
Post by: Jaynek on January 09, 2019, 07:17:58 PM
I've actually been pondering this question, and after much reflection have come to the conclusion that it is in fact inappropriate for a woman to argue contentiously with men (including on a forum).

So, for instance, I believe it wrong and contrary to nature for a girl to compete against a boy in physical competition ... for a variety of reasons that I'll elaborate upon.  I don't see why intellectual battles with men should be any different.

Would you let your daughter play football against boys?  Of course not.  Girls should not be competitive directly with boys.  It's possible that you'd find a girl here or there who could compete well with boys (athletic and strong, etc.) ... but it's still inappropriate.  It harms both the boys and the girls involved.  And the boy is in an awkward position.  God designed boys to be chivalrous and respectful towards ladies.  So a girl is running at him carrying a football.  How does he react?  Does he hit her with everything he's got?  That's contrary to every male instinct implanted by God.  Does he then "pull his punches" and hold back?  In that case, he's hurting his team and not able to compete the way he's supposed to as a boy/man.

JayneK, I recall once that you objected to how I battled with you, since you are a woman.  But if you were to get into a boxing ring with me and start punching me in the face, isn't that putting me in an unfair no-win situation?  I'm not supposed to hit a lady, of course, but then do I just stand there and take repeated blows to the face?  That also is unmanly to let yourself get beaten up.  So it puts a man into a position of having to do something unmanly.
Thank you for offering your insights on this.  I'm getting the impression that this is not hypothetical and you feel that I have been virtually punching you in the face.  That was not my intention.  I think of a logical debate as comparable to game of chess.  It has rules that the opponents follow and does not involve any personal animosity. 

But, if I am coming across as competitive and pugnacious, that is a real problem.  I will continue to think about this.
Title: Re: Detoxing feminist thinking
Post by: magdalena59 on January 09, 2019, 08:53:37 PM
This is how secular and leftist sources, such as Wikipedia, define feminism, trying to make it sound like a harmless and innocent thing.  It is clear enough what feminism actually is, if we look at what feminists do and say, rather than accept such definitions.
Feminism is one piece of the cultural Marxism that dominates the West.  It involves seeing men as the oppressor class and women as the victim class.  And people are not judged by their individual beliefs and actions, but by what class they belong to.  To this way of thinking, men are always in the wrong, just like whites are always in the wrong.

A major sign of feminist thinking is looking down on men as a group, seeing them as morally worse than woman.  For us married women, it tempts us not to give husbands the respect we owe them.  So that is one of the major areas to watch out for.
Pray, don't nag.  And remember to hold him in highest respect.
Feminism has damaged so many men, women and families over the years.  I agree, there is nothing harmless or innocent about it.
Title: Re: Detoxing feminist thinking
Post by: pascendi on January 10, 2019, 08:44:34 AM
There is a writer blogger called Aaron Clarey and I think he hits it right on the head about feminism. You can listen to him on YouTube. He is a vulgar at times so you'll need to put on a filter. 

My favorite point he makes is that feminism drove women to work...that's it...to work. Think about it, it all says, go to work. Be a cubicle slave to get self-fulfillment. Commute to work for hours a week and work. Think about it. Feminism's is offering work.  :fryingpan:

He argues that a lot of women buy into work and work until they can't have children or have children with great effort, i.e. feminism teaches women to deny a biological hard wiring until it is too late. And, if they do have kids as a cubicle slave, they outsource raising their children as a consequence. So, they give up the connection to their children in order to work.  :facepalm:

In California, there is child care assistance paid for by the state and heard of a situation where a woman was working for $800 a month and getting $1200 for child care expenses. So, ultimately, it would have been better to pay her not to work! However, it is worse. She isn't at home nurturing her young one.  :heretic:

All of this meshes well with Catholic teaching and what anecdote communicates to us.  :cheers:
Title: Re: Detoxing feminist thinking
Post by: Vintagewife3 on January 10, 2019, 09:16:20 AM
Sign of a misspent youth.  Lots of reading.
Hahaha you, and I both. I miss having time to read through books. 
Title: Re: Detoxing feminist thinking
Post by: Vintagewife3 on January 10, 2019, 09:24:25 AM
I agree. Feminism goes so deep in our culture that it’s hard to see the damage even small things do. That’s why we have so many men trying to act like women, or be overly sensitive. It’s just not natural.... men already had a certain level of sensitivity towards their wives. So, there is no need for men to do it to the extent they do now. If the women in politics husbands would put them in their place we could start fixing the country. 


Women, and men are not equals in anything. Brain power, physically, or emotionally. 



I’ve noticed over the last week that the small changes I’m making are helping my family. So, I’m grateful, especially to the men here who have helped me realize the errors of my ways. I know I didn’t make it easy for them 😁

Title: Re: Detoxing feminist thinking
Post by: Pax Vobis on January 10, 2019, 10:42:23 AM
Quote
My favorite point he makes is that feminism drove women to work...that's it...to work.
Feminists wanted to work for INDEPENDENCE, MONEY AND STATUS.  Ultimately, the purpose of working was to 1) leave the house and have status outside being a mother, 2) show they were equals with men in earning money, 3) to gain independence from the "oppressive" patriarchy.
Title: Re: Detoxing feminist thinking
Post by: pascendi on January 10, 2019, 04:23:28 PM
Feminists wanted to work for INDEPENDENCE, MONEY AND STATUS.  Ultimately, the purpose of working was to 1) leave the house and have status outside being a mother, 2) show they were equals with men in earning money, 3) to gain independence from the "oppressive" patriarchy.
Ya, but you see just to work. What a low level achievement. Whoopee! You get to work. You get the rat race. You've converted your home into a sleeping mat and a mess facility by working. I mean really - do women or men really want to work? Is that the highest aim of feminism? Maybe the "glass ceiling" is a blessing - if there is a limit, it'll keep you from working. Let's work to live not live to work - feminism puts a woman on the track to work to live. More opportunities than ever, but who wants them? Why? Society speaks and makes us want things we wouldn't want otherwise. 
Title: Re: Detoxing feminist thinking
Post by: Vintagewife3 on January 10, 2019, 04:45:55 PM
Feminism is also around to make women the only gender be able to legally murder in cold blood. It’s not a group of people I want to associate with anymore. 
Title: Re: Detoxing feminist thinking
Post by: SusanneT on January 10, 2019, 04:54:49 PM
The whole feminist doctrine of ‘reproductive rights’ is founded in sin.  Advocating as it does the sins of birth control and child murder. 
Title: Re: Detoxing feminist thinking
Post by: Vintagewife3 on January 10, 2019, 05:55:52 PM
Yes, and ever since Sanger woke up, and started spewing her evil it escalated everything from women, and men going against God’s natural order. Honestly, if she doesn’t have a seat next to Satan I’d be surprised. 

Title: Re: Detoxing feminist thinking
Post by: Cera on January 11, 2019, 06:00:09 PM
Yes, and ever since Sanger woke up, and started spewing her evil it escalated everything from women, and men going against God’s natural order. Honestly, if she doesn’t have a seat next to Satan I’d be surprised.
As evil as she was, eugenicist Margaret Sanger was a johnny-come-lately. Italian communist Antonio Gramsc first thought of using the notion that women are oppressed. He realized that the poor were not joining in the revolution like he thought they should. In his writings from prison, he said the problem was that mothers were handing down the Catholic faith to their children. To stop that, he proposed "a long march through culture," using the media and educational systems to make women feel oppressed so they would stop passing down Catholicism and join the revolution.
In looking for material, I couldn't find his Prison Papers, but I found this:
https://mk.christogenea.org/references/antonio-gramsci-how-legacy-italian-communist-wrecking-catholic-church-today
Gramsci noted, "Religion must be approached 'not in the confessional sense' but in the secular sense of a unity of faith between a conception of the world and a corresponding norm of conduct." Gramsci proposed setting aside concern for Catholicism as an instructor of doctrine or body of belief and concentrating on it as a potential vehicle for ideology and politics that could be used in the service of Marxist communist order. Use Lenin's geopolitical structure not to conquer the halls ofthe Vatican and Holy See but rather use it to conquer the mind of the Catholic population itself. Though the church seemed strong on its surface, it had been subjected to a fairly constant and sustained barrage of criticism against its teachings and structural integrity. Gramsci needed to alter the Christian mind and turn it around completely to an anti-Christian position but keep those efforts secret. The best way to do this was to get individuals, regardless of their station in society, to think of the problems and issues facing them without reference to the Christian God or laws of the Christian God. A bedrock of Marxism-the guiding ideal that this paradise is the summit of human existence-is that there is nothing beyond the matter of this world. In other words, traditional theology would now be treated with no greater or lesser emphasis when compared to the other aspects of culture.
It made better sense, in Gramsci's mind, to let Catholics remain Catholics instead of making communists of Catholics. It would be preferable to mutate the dogma of their faith into a secular ideology similar to Marxism. The question merely became which opportunity and manner would present itself to start this transformation. Fortunately, for Marxist infiltrators, the Catholic Church provided the most ideal vehicle for this insertion when Pope John XXIII announced the 21st ecuмenical council in the history of the church, aka the Second Vatican Council, The pope's idea for the council was that the Holy Spirit would inspire all who attended with renewed vigor of faith and evangelism around the planet. He felt it important to include the Soviet Union (then led by Nikita Khrushchev) in this process and convinced the Soviet Premier to allow two Russian Orthodox priests from the USSR to serve as observers. Additionally, the pope granted, as a result of secret negotiations with Khrushchev, what amounted to be a huge concession by agreeing to not issue a condemnation of Marxism and the communist state. This was significant in that up to that time such condemnations had always been included as a given standard in any Vatican or Roman Catholic commentary on the world as a whole. - Changes made by the Second Vatican Council (Vatican II) were numerous and caused profound change in the way the Vatican approached the faithful and the very manner and language in which the Mass itself could be conducted. What the casual observer did not see, however, was the more profound philosophical shift in the attitudes and conclusions in other areas of the council. One docuмent on religious liberty declared that everyone, rich or poor, should be free from any constraint or restriction in religious matters, including the choice of which religion one chose to follow.
Title: Re: Detoxing feminist thinking
Post by: Cantarella on January 11, 2019, 10:15:11 PM
(https://scontent-sea1-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/49121563_1973396139376639_2009125519987048448_n.jpg?_nc_cat=100&_nc_ht=scontent-sea1-1.xx&oh=01367576d514bfbab783d0c9d23b3a51&oe=5CD4BC04)
Title: Re: Detoxing feminist thinking
Post by: Vintagewife3 on January 11, 2019, 11:32:50 PM
Cera, you’ve given me something to do this weekend. I had no idea about that.


Cantarella, I’m going to print that off, and put it by the sink. That’s a handy cheat sheet, and reminder!
Title: Re: Detoxing feminist thinking
Post by: Vintagewife3 on January 11, 2019, 11:40:27 PM
I have another one for my phone that says “be a wife who bases her life on the Bible, and not her emotions”
Title: Re: Detoxing feminist thinking
Post by: Nadir on January 12, 2019, 02:33:31 AM
Thank you, Cera, for your Gramsci post. My husband often talks of the role of Gramsci in the revolution, but I could never quite cotton onto it. That link you gave is very helpful.
Title: Re: Detoxing feminist thinking
Post by: Vintagewife3 on January 14, 2019, 08:28:30 AM
I’m looking for books to read on this subject. I have the one suggested earlier in the thread “dressing with dignity”, but I’m looking for other books on being a wife, and mother.