Catholic Info
Traditional Catholic Faith => Catholic Living in the Modern World => Topic started by: Jaynek on July 02, 2018, 10:26:34 AM
-
There have been a whole bunch of threads about women and marriage lately and I am wondering if we are working from the same underlying assumptions. I am going to put out a bunch of propositions to see whether people agree or not.
1. Feminism is evil and pervasive throughout Western society.
2. Feminism pits men and women against each other.
3. Feminism promotes a false understanding of men's and women's roles in marriage and in society.
4. Trads, even those who disagree with feminism, are subtly influenced by it.
5. Women need to be alert to feminism within ourselves and constantly fighting against it.
-
There have been a whole bunch of threads about women and marriage lately and I am wondering if we are working from the same underlying assumptions. I am going to put out a bunch of propositions to see whether people agree or not.
1. Feminism is evil and pervasive throughout Western society.
2. Feminism pits men and women against each other.
3. Feminism promotes a false understanding of men's and women's roles in marriage and in society.
4. Trads, even those who disagree with feminism, are subtly influenced by it.
5. Women need to be alert to feminism within ourselves and constantly fighting against it.
You're either very dense for finally coming around to see it, or you're trying to employ damage (reputation) control, because your comments on the apropos threads reveal the undercurrent of feminism within you and the other women.
The fact is, with all of the LARP-ing by women at CathInfo about how they want "Catholic Monarchy" and "patriarchy", their deep essence is opposed to it.
The same applies to many of the "men" on this forum.
-
...
-
2. Feminism pits men and women against each other.
No, feminism pits women against men ONLY! It is the false idea that men are the problem, by blaming men for the authority, duty and governing role that God ordained. Feminism is a corruption of the peace and stability of marriage/society just as Eve’s rebellion corrupted the peace and stability of Eden.
Men are only corrupted by accepting the error that women can do that which God has not ordained. Yet, men will only accept feminism when it comes from a woman, just like Adam wouldn’t have accepted the apple from Satan, but only from Eve.
Feminism corrupts women first, then the women corrupt the men. In the US, Feminism started in the 1800s with the rise of women and prohibition, then it continued with the roaring 20s, then to women’s sufferage, birth control, divorce, abortion, equality in the workplace and education, etc.
5. Women need to be alert to feminism within ourselves and constantly fighting against it.
At this point in society, we’re way past the ALERT phase. It’s in a full-blown warning mode. Crisis mode. Immediate danger mode.
Most all women are infected and have been for 2-3 generations. THe more men that are infected, (which is growing), the more society is sunk.
-
Per your comment about "working from the same underlying assumptions", I think the first thing to do would be to define "feminism", so that everyone who comments, agrees or disagrees, is working from the same underlying definition of "feminism". ..
Good point. The dictionary definition of feminism is usually something like "the advocacy of women's rights on the basis of the equality of the sexes" and that is not what it really is.
Feminism is a variation of Marxism which replaces class warfare between the bourgeois and proletariat with a war between men and women. Judgments are based on what class people belong to rather than their actions as individuals.
This is far more insidious than merely saying that the sexes are equal. There are even some senses in which it is true to say that the sexes are equal, as in, men and women are equal in dignity or equal in their need for salvation through Christ. (Of course, husband and wife are NOT equal in authority within marriage.)
-
The fact is, with all of the LARP-ing by women at CathInfo about how they want "Catholic Monarchy" and "patriarchy", their deep essence is opposed to it.
I have an intellectual understanding of the desirability of patriarchy. Not only feminism, but original sin, are obstacles to living out what I know is right.
I don't expect to ever obey and respect my husband as much I think I should, no matter how much I try. This is just the human condition.
-
There have been a whole bunch of threads about women and marriage lately and I am wondering if we are working from the same underlying assumptions. I am going to put out a bunch of propositions to see whether people agree or not.
1. Feminism is evil and pervasive throughout Western society.
2. Feminism pits men and women against each other.
3. Feminism promotes a false understanding of men's and women's roles in marriage and in society.
4. Trads, even those who disagree with feminism, are subtly influenced by it.
5. Women need to be alert to feminism within ourselves and constantly fighting against it.
In general yes to all, and most here would agree.
However but I don’t think that’s what is being argued here, it is the approach to, and/or solution to this error.
For example: a prenuptial agreement is a solution to men’s fears of losing their financial stability due to women’s feminist tendencies because most women at their core are gold diggers because they are infected with the disease of feminism-
And those who don’t agree with this are called feminists, or enableing LARPS.
Honestly, how charitable is it to stand there and yell at people that it’s all your fault we are in this mess..stupid Hilary-worshipping females and there beloved feminism.
-
In general yes to all, and most here would agree.
However but I don’t think that’s what is being argued here, it is the approach to, and/or solution to this error.
That's what I'm trying to figure out in this thread. Is there are general agreement about feminism being evil, with disagreement only about specific solutions, or is there disagreement about feminism itself?
There are posters who appear to take disagreement with their preferred solution as acceptance of feminism. Perhaps it would be helpful to clarify that virtually all of us despise feminism.
-
a prenuptial agreement is a solution to men’s fears of losing their financial stability due to women’s feminist tendencies because most women at their core are gold diggers
A prenup protects a man from the freemasonic, anti-family, anti-catholic, anti-men COURT SYSTEMS!
A woman’s “gold digging” is a secondary issue. She could care less about money, but once she divorces her husband THE COURTS follow THEIR PROCESS, regardless of her views on money. In many area of divorce, it’s THEIR DECISION, not hers.
If you ignore the control, will and decision-making POWER of the COURTS, you are either dishonest or supremely naive.
-
I have an intellectual understanding of the desirability of patriarchy. Not only feminism, but original sin, are obstacles to living out what I know is right.
I don't expect to ever obey and respect my husband as much I think I should, no matter how much I try. This is just the human condition.
I believe modernism is our problem. For both men and women it is an inward as well as outward struggle and it manifests itself within marriage too.
It is still not be charitable for men and women to call each other feminist and chauvinistic pigs though (Yes I’ve heard ‘pig’ used towards women here) there seams to be a double standard here because some are trying to tip scales hoping to correct something that can only be corrected by prayer.
-
A prenup protects a man from the freemasonic, anti-family, anti-catholic, anti-men COURT SYSTEMS!
A woman’s “gold digging” is a secondary issue. She could care less about money, but once she divorces her husband THE COURTS follow THEIR PROCESS, regardless of her views on money. In many area of divorce, it’s THEIR DECISION, not hers.
If you ignore the control, will and decision-making POWER of the COURTS, you are either dishonest or supremely naive.
Yes I see where most of your concern is.
Civil authorities as well as Church authorities have been corrupted and we must be prudent in our daily decisions. These days are evil and disaster is looming around the corner for all of us.
However, I don’t reject all authority based on my fear of authority’s abuses. That is where I think we differ.
For example: Some choose to live off grid, grow there own food and govern their own kingdoms on their land.
I however am a semi-modernist suburbian that still shops at a grocer and washes their clothes in a machine.
I am no where near the ideal you have presented.
I pray every day for the protection from the hand of wrongful authority. We all would do well to.
-
I believe modernism is our problem. For both men and women it is an inward as well as outward struggle and it manifests itself within marriage too.
Because modernism is a rejection of objective truth known through Divine Revelation and Church authority, it is closely connected to the errors of feminism. The more I can restore my mind to traditional Catholic thinking, the more I can free myself from feminist influence. And it works the other way round. The more I escape from feminism, the better I can avoid modernist ways of thinking.
-
A prenup protects a man from the freemasonic, anti-family, anti-catholic, anti-men COURT SYSTEMS!
THE COURTS follow THEIR PROCESS, regardless of her views on money. In many area of divorce, it’s THEIR DECISION, not hers.
I know four couples personally who have either separated or divorced. They are all Catholic too.
Each was a different situation but none of them involved courts taking money from the husband.
One couple divorced and both moved on to new spouses and started new families. He kept his money and she kept the kids. He has new wife and kids now too.
Another couple the wife left and only took her own stuff to start a new life with someone else.
Another wife wanted a career so she separated from her husband and they share the kids while both work and live in seperate homes.
Another couple had difference of Faith Novus Ordo vs Tradition so they ended up divorced but both have careers and share the kids.
Not saying what I’ve seen is all that exists, just really do have a hard time seeing courts waiting to pounce on husbands money.
-
Because modernism is a rejection of objective truth known through Divine Revelation and Church authority, it is closely connected to the errors of feminism. The more I can restore my mind to traditional Catholic thinking, the more I can free myself from feminist influence. And it works the other way round. The more I escape from feminism, the better I can avoid modernist ways of thinking.
Practicing virtue is the solutuion to all this fem nonsense. Feminism would all but disappear if we women were more diligent growing in virtue and improving our states. We do need to take it seriously and work on ourselves while we learn and grow. It would help a wife very much to have a husband that encourages while she learns to overcome her errors, but many of us do not have that so it is more difficult and sometimes takes a little longer.
-
2. Feminism pits men and women against each other.
No, feminism pits women against men ONLY! It is the false idea that men are the problem, by blaming men for the authority, duty and governing role that God ordained. Feminism is a corruption of the peace and stability of marriage/society just as Eve’s rebellion corrupted the peace and stability of Eden.
Men are only corrupted by accepting the error that women can do that which God has not ordained. Yet, men will only accept feminism when it comes from a woman, just like Adam wouldn’t have accepted the apple from Satan, but only from Eve.
Feminism corrupts women first, then the women corrupt the men. In the US, Feminism started in the 1800s with the rise of women and prohibition, then it continued with the roaring 20s, then to women’s sufferage, birth control, divorce, abortion, equality in the workplace and education, etc.
5. Women need to be alert to feminism within ourselves and constantly fighting against it.
At this point in society, we’re way past the ALERT phase. It’s in a full-blown warning mode. Crisis mode. Immediate danger mode.
Most all women are infected and have been for 2-3 generations. THe more men that are infected, (which is growing), the more society is sunk.
I disagree, respectfully! with your response to point #2. While feminism may have started out as primarily women against men, the natural response of men has been to oppose women. In fact, in some ways, feminism is more harmful to men over the long run. Men are intended by God to be the leaders, but feminism has emasculated them.
-
However, I don’t reject all authority based on my fear of authority’s abuses. That is where I think we differ.
Where did I say, or imply, that I reject the court's authority, or ANY govt authority? I didn't.
You're missing the point that a prenup is a CONTRACT whereby the 2 spouses agree how to split assets FAIRLY in the case of divorce. If there isn't one, then THE COURTS GET TO DECIDE how to split up assets. Since the courts are FEMINIST, they are BIASED AGAINST MEN, therefore men get screwed. It's not complicated.
If you were in school and a certain teacher always picked on you and treated you unfairly, if someone stole your lunch money, are you going to complain to the teacher who isn't fair to you, or are you going to find a teacher that is impartial? Of course, you're going to avoid a teacher, who time and again mistrusts you, disbelieves you and thinks you're a bad kid. So, a prenup seeks for spouses to decide how to FAIRLY split assets WHILE THEY LOVE EACH OTHER, in order to avoid the BIASED courts and also the EMOTIONAL RESENTMENT that divorce brings.
-
There have been a whole bunch of threads about women and marriage lately and I am wondering if we are working from the same underlying assumptions. I am going to put out a bunch of propositions to see whether people agree or not.
1. Feminism is evil and pervasive throughout Western society.
2. Feminism pits men and women against each other.
3. Feminism promotes a false understanding of men's and women's roles in marriage and in society.
4. Trads, even those who disagree with feminism, are subtly influenced by it.
5. Women need to be alert to feminism within ourselves and constantly fighting against it.
So, I’ve always thought there was a difference between today’s feminist, and the first suffragettes. Today’s feminist are just... well, they aren’t even women anymore. That being said I’ve always agreed with past suffragette thinking on equality. But are they one in the same? It came across that suffragettes wanted the same equal rights, while keeping the men at the head.
Todays feminist definitely out men against women, and women against women. If you don’t agree even on small factors with them you are the enemy.
That being said the pre-nup thing is making more sense now. But what would protect a woman if the man decides to leave her with his pre-nup?
-
Practicing virtue is the solutuion to all this fem nonsense. Feminism would all but disappear if we women were more diligent growing in virtue and improving our states. We do need to take it seriously and work on ourselves while we learn and grow. It would help a wife very much to have a husband that encourages while she learns to overcome her errors, but many of us do not have that so it is more difficult and sometimes takes a little longer.
Practicing virtue is only PART of the solution. Feminism is a religious AND SOCIAL problem. The fact that many good, traditional wives/women are still feminist proves the fact that it is more than just a spiritual error, it is a philosophy, a lifestyle, an attitude. Some of this can be fixed by prayer, some of it must be fixed by a REORDERING OF SOCIETY.
Here is a (short) list of things that women do, that are feminist. Many won't change these practices because they argue that "technically, they aren't sinful", so these practices persist. But they are highly feminist and destructive to society. And they are born of a feminist/rebellious attitude, which is hard to change.
1. Wearing pants/mens clothes. This is a sign the woman hates her nature and wants to be a man/independent/free.
2. Living alone or outside of the parents house, if not married (assuming your parents are alive). This just isn't natural, has never been and never will be. It is a sign of independence and a wanting to be free of authority, which women are not designed to have, nor are they able to handle.
3. Instructing, correcting, arguing with men (who are not their children). Women are not designed for this role in life. A debate such as those on this forum is often friendly and worthwhile for all genders (but many women can't even handle these discussions, or at least they are practically worthless, because they miss many of the teaching points as they internalize most things and cannot grasp abstract arguments and philosophical principles). A woman who is too interested in intellectual matters (in general, not always) is a sign they are feminized and want to be a man. At least, if they are of an intellectual bent, they should study/learn from a wise man, so their studies won't be wasted or corrupted.
I can't wait for the downvotes!!
p.s. I've noticed that, for these topics, the only time I get any upvotes is when I mention a man's failings ALONG WITH a woman's failings. Of course men have many failings and we could create AN ENTIRE WEBSITE to deal with those, but we're SPECIFICALLY talking about feminism here, and women particularly. It's another proof that women can't have unemotional, rational discussions on this topic, since they can't admit they are wrong UNLESS someone else admits they're also wrong. Very immature and very feminist.
-
So, I’ve always thought there was a difference between today’s feminist, and the first suffragettes. Today’s feminist are just... well, they aren’t even women anymore. That being said I’ve always agreed with past suffragette thinking on equality. But are they one in the same? It came across that suffragettes wanted the same equal rights, while keeping the men at the head.
There were problems with the suffragettes too, although not as bad as today's feminists.
-
Here is a (short) list of things that women do, that are feminist. Many won't change these practices because they argue that "technically, they aren't sinful", so these practices persist. But they are highly feminist and destructive to society. And they are born of a feminist/rebellious attitude, which is hard to change.
1. Wearing pants/mens clothes. This is a sign the woman hates her nature and wants to be a man/independent/free.
2. Living alone or outside of the parents house, if not married (assuming your parents are alive). This just isn't natural, has never been and never will be. It is a sign of independence and a wanting to be free of authority, which women are not designed to have, nor are they able to handle.
3. Instructing, correcting, arguing with men (who are not their children). Women are not designed for this role in life. A debate such as those on this forum is often friendly and worthwhile for all genders (but many women can't even handle these discussions, or at least they are practically worthless, because they miss many of the teaching points as they internalize most things and cannot grasp abstract arguments and philosophical principles). A woman who is too interested in intellectual matters (in general, not always) is a sign they are feminized and want to be a man. At least, if they are of an intellectual bent, they should study/learn from a wise man, so their studies won't be wasted or corrupted.
I really appreciate this kind of practical specific advise. It helps me to figure out what actions I can take in my own life when I see things like this. This is more useful than dealing with abstractions and theories all the time.
I especially like point number 3 because this is an area that I struggle with. I am naturally argumentative and also inclined to be interested in intellectual matters.
Thank you.
-
While feminism may have started out as primarily women against men, the natural response of men has been to oppose women.
Just like Eve sinned first and then corrupted Adam, so feminism corrupted women first and then the women have corrupted men/children/society.
Most men, even today with the thick cloud of feminism everywhere, STILL do not oppose women. What men oppose are MASCULINE women because men naturally respect, admire and protect a feminine woman. It's in the nature of a man to want to guard her from evil, and help her...if she LETS HIM guard and protect her. A feminist wants to control a man, and any situation, instead of allowing herself to be protected and cared for. Feminism destroys women's trust of men and of herself; it destroys women's natural feminine qualities of being passive, accepting and trusting.
When women ACT MASCULINE (i.e. not passive, but assertive/aggressive. Not accepting, but hyper-critical and complaining. Not trusting but controlling and obsessive.), then men have an auto/instinctive response to such masculine attitudes. If men are faced with aggression, they will respond with aggression to either avoid the threat or to conquer the threat.
If men are faced with a controlling attitude, or disrespect, their natural response is to assert control and challenge the disrespect.
If men are faced with criticism and complaining, they ignore it or pick apart the illogical and emotional attributes of such comments.
Men don't think about these reaction; they just react. If women act this way over a long term time frame, then men will stop TRYING to treat them as women, since they are clearly acting as men.
In fact, in some ways, feminism is more harmful to men over the long run. Men are intended by God to be the leaders, but feminism has emasculated them.
Long term feminist attitudes will affect some men, but not all. Feminism has affected over 90% of women in some way; it has not affected that many men. Men's natures are inherently stable. Their vices are the same throughout history and don't change that much - violence, drinking, womanizing, debauchery, etc. The devil knows this and the Church knows this, which is why the devil tempted Eve and why the Church's Nuptial Blessing is primarily for women.
Most of the modern problems of men relate to the over-indulgence in fun, irresponsibility and immoral pleasures. This has always been men's downfall and it still is. The growth of feminism hasn't changed this, it has only destroyed the sacrament of marriage, and the family, which is one of the main vehicles by which fallen men are socially reconstructed. Marriage can teach a wayward, lazy man that hard work, responsibility and lawful pleasure is worth fighting for and sacrificing for, when he sees the joys/innocence of children and the loving acceptance of his wife and their needs.
Feminism, however, destroys marriage and society, because women have the attitude that 1) I don't need men to help me. 2) I'm independent. 3) Assertiveness and agressiveness are the best ways to get what I want. Feminism teaches women to act like men, so men are not motivated to treat them like women (and they wouldn't appreciate it anyways) but they ARE motivated (subconsciously) to treat masculine woman AS COMPETITION. So men stop leading and women get frustrated, and society is a mess, both inside marriage and outside it too.
-
I really appreciate this kind of practical specific advise. It helps me to figure out what actions I can take in my own life when I see things like this. This is more useful than dealing with abstractions and theories all the time.
I especially like point number 3 because this is an area that I struggle with. I am naturally argumentative and also inclined to be interested in intellectual matters.
Thank you.
I actually really appreciated this too, but didn’t voice it! It made things super simple. I love a good argument, and can pick one over anything.
I keep thinking if you guys sat in on my marriage you’d think I’m more feminist then I mean to be. Somehow it just got settled between i is I make the most choices/big decisions especially with the kids. He made the choice to finally buy the house, but I was not pushing that since I’m not the one working. That stress rest only on him. He pays the bills, works, and comes and goes as he pleases. I pretty much do everything else.. but I’m not trying to order him around, or boss him. It’s just how it happened.
-
Whoever is downvoting Vintagewife, please give her explanations about why you are doing so. She is new to the forum and apparently to traditional Catholicism as well. She says that she wants to learn. Just giving downvotes doesn't help people very much with figuring out what they are getting wrong.
I'm hoping that somebody can give her advice on how to improve her obedience to her husband. I was trying to think of something to say but decided I better leave it to somebody wiser than me.
-
Whoever is downvoting Vintagewife, please give her explanations about why you are doing so. She is new to the forum and apparently to traditional Catholicism as well. She says that she wants to learn. Just giving downvotes doesn't help people very much with figuring out what they are getting wrong.
I'm hoping that somebody can give her advice on how to improve her obedience to her husband. I was trying to think of something to say but decided I better leave it to somebody wiser than me.
I appreciate this. I’m super serious about about learning...
I’m super supportive of him. I want us to have a good marriage. I’ve been very honest about who I am, and I’m not trying to cause any trouble.
-
Don’t take downvotes personally. Most of the time the person doesn’t understand why they disagree.
-
Good point. The dictionary definition of feminism is usually something like "the advocacy of women's rights on the basis of the equality of the sexes" and that is not what it really is.
Feminism is a variation of Marxism which replaces class warfare between the bourgeois and proletariat with a war between men and women. Judgments are based on what class people belong to rather than their actions as individuals.
This is far more insidious than merely saying that the sexes are equal. There are even some senses in which it is true to say that the sexes are equal, as in, men and women are equal in dignity or equal in their need for salvation through Christ. (Of course, husband and wife are NOT equal in authority within marriage.)
Great points! The only thing I would add is that cultural Marxism also seeks to destroy both the Church and the Family. Gender neutrality is Feminism 2.0 -- the next step in their plan to further social chaos.
-
Great points! The only thing I would add is that cultural Marxism also seeks to destroy both the Church and the Family. Gender neutrality is Feminism 2.0 -- the next step in their plan to further social chaos.
In case you didn't know, State marriage licenses are inherently Marxist.
Also, to oppose the husband as the sole authority on what is equitable within the family and between spouses, is to embrace Marxist ideals. The sneaky ones posture with "Catholic piety" which is really an infusing of "equality" into the marriage so the wife has as much determination over the money, assets & wealth in the household than the husband. They proceed to call this, "husbands loving, honoring & protecting their wives". Finally, they LARP about being "Catholic Monarchists" and "supporters of patriarchy", both of which are intrinsically opposite to equality and women having as much control over the financial resources as the husband.
-
In case you didn't know, State marriage licenses are inherently Marxist.
Also, to oppose the husband as the sole authority on what is equitable within the family and between spouses, is to embrace Marxist ideals. The sneaky ones posture with "Catholic piety" which is really an infusing of "equality" into the marriage so the wife has as much determination over the money, assets & wealth in the household than the husband. They proceed to call this, "husbands loving, honoring & protecting their wives". Finally, they LARP about being "Catholic Monarchists" and "supporters of patriarchy", both of which are intrinsically opposite to equality and women having as much control over the financial resources as the husband.
So, pretty much if I say anything about the money that makes me a feminist?
-
There have been a whole bunch of threads about women and marriage lately and I am wondering if we are working from the same underlying assumptions. I am going to put out a bunch of propositions to see whether people agree or not.
1. Feminism is evil and pervasive throughout Western society.
2. Feminism pits men and women against each other.
3. Feminism promotes a false understanding of men's and women's roles in marriage and in society.
4. Trads, even those who disagree with feminism, are subtly influenced by it.
5. Women need to be alert to feminism within ourselves and constantly fighting against it.
Broadly I would agree although I would probably stress the damage caused by what is an inherently evil and unGodly ideology to both men, women and especially girls.
-
Practicing virtue is only PART of the solution. Feminism is a religious AND SOCIAL problem.
2. Living alone or outside of the parents house, if not married (assuming your parents are alive). This just isn't natural, has never been and never will be. It is a sign of independence and a wanting to be free of authority, which women are not designed to have, nor are they able to handle.
I can't wait for the downvotes!!
Because feminism is a religious problem, it cannot help but affect all aspects of life. They feed into each other and maintain a disordered society. A woman may not be a feminist at heart, or desire to act like a feminist, but unless she is a cloistered nun in a traditional order, she is pretty much forced to act in a feminist manner in some respects to survive.
I have no desire to be a feminist, however, I live in "violation" of your second precept, and have done so since age 18. Why? I grew up in a marginally novus ordo Catholic home, one that held to high moral standards in many areas, but one tainted by Americanism. When the children, male or female, turned 18, they were expected to leave the nest. The economic conditions at that time were favorable to becoming self-supporting with a job requiring only high school, sometimes less.
I struggled my way through to two Master's degrees on full-time + part-time jobs, always assuming I'd eventually get married. That never happened, so here I am at age 60 working a full-time job and moonlighting at odd jobs to survive, pretty much as I have since my mid-twenties. My siblings and extended family abandoned Church, religion, morality decades ago. There is nobody with whom I could live--or would want to live, even if offered! My parents are living but I cannot live with them since they require medical care I'm incapable of providing, either personally or financially.
So, yes, sometimes a woman has no choice but to "man-up" to take care of herself and protect her virtue. There is no man to do it.
As for pants and men's clothes, there are none in my wardrobe.
Yes, I do enjoy intellectual endeavors, but getting into hysterical arguments over them? No. It seems to me there are as many men as women who can't admit they're wrong. Too bad, because these people aren't apt to learn anything, not even from their mistakes. Is this feminism or plain old pride?
No reason to down-thumb you. You're not rude, one who resorts to name-calling, illogic, etc.
-
Hi Seraphina,
There are definitely exceptions to every rule, for sure. Sometimes life throws you a curve ball, especially nowadays. Mostly what I'm talking about are ideals and the "perfect" scenario, especially for point #2. However, there's no reason that women can't follow pts #1 and #3, no matter where they're living.
-
Hi Seraphina,
There are definitely exceptions to every rule, for sure. Sometimes life throws you a curve ball, especially nowadays. Mostly what I'm talking about are ideals and the "perfect" scenario, especially for point #2. However, there's no reason that women can't follow pts #1 and #3, no matter where they're living.
I suspect more exceptions that you think.
-
What is the purpose of your comment other than to prove your hatred of men once again? Just like on the other thread, you assume you know how many exceptions I have in mind...which you don’t ...Most of your comments are either off-topic or divisive. I wish you would act more mature because I’m sure you have much to offer this debate. As it is now, your salty attitude prevents you from any meaningful contribution.
-
What a good thread!
Feminism is so deep-rooted in society...how can traditional Catholic women NOT be infected/affected by it? How many of our daily activities that we do without thinking about are things that declare out independence from men? I can think of several:
voting
driving
college education
I'm not saying it's practical to not drive, just that it aids a woman's independence from her husband or father.
And voting...well, how many of you ladies vote? And yet, we're told that it's a mans job to run society (or in this case, rebuild it!) So maybe I'm archaic, but the idea that women are "equal" to men smacks of modernism to me. We're not equal physically--and no offense, there are exceptions--but often not mentally either. Not in the same clear-cut, logical way men are. We're smarter in different ways. And again, no offense to the men, but we're not equal emotionally either. Which is how God designed it, because we are meant for different roles in life--in the home.
As far as a college education, well, of course there are exceptions. But they're rare. I myself have a Bachelors degree (RN). I wish I'd never gotten it. If I could go back and redo that time, I would. Bp Williamson says women don't belong at Universities, and he's right. I imbibed so many feminist ideas at that time--all without realizing it. The first 5 years of our marriage were miserable because of it. I argued with my husband all the time. I FINALLY realized what was going on and have since taken steps to correct it, but I still struggle against those evil feminist ideas.
Satan certainly had the right idea. He went after Eve, and he's going after women. Why? Because if you destroy the heart, you destroy the home.
-
What a good thread!
Feminism is so deep-rooted in society...how can traditional Catholic women NOT be infected/affected by it? How many of our daily activities that we do without thinking about are things that declare out independence from men? I can think of several:
voting
driving
college education
I'm not saying it's practical to not drive, just that it aids a woman's independence from her husband or father.
And voting...well, how many of you ladies vote? And yet, we're told that it's a mans job to run society (or in this case, rebuild it!) So maybe I'm archaic, but the idea that women are "equal" to men smacks of modernism to me. We're not equal physically--and no offense, there are exceptions--but often not mentally either. Not in the same clear-cut, logical way men are. We're smarter in different ways. And again, no offense to the men, but we're not equal emotionally either. Which is how God designed it, because we are meant for different roles in life--in the home.
As far as a college education, well, of course there are exceptions. But they're rare. I myself have a Bachelors degree (RN). I wish I'd never gotten it. If I could go back and redo that time, I would. Bp Williamson says women don't belong at Universities, and he's right. I imbibed so many feminist ideas at that time--all without realizing it. The first 5 years of our marriage were miserable because of it. I argued with my husband all the time. I FINALLY realized what was going on and have since taken steps to correct it, but I still struggle against those evil feminist ideas.
Satan certainly had the right idea. He went after Eve, and he's going after women. Why? Because if you destroy the heart, you destroy the home.
How does voting make a woman non-dependent on her husband? I personally don’t vote, but I have never been able to just vote for the lesser of two evils. If I did vote I’d still look to my husband for guidance, and a good political debate. I can totally agree with college, and can honestly say I’ve never seen any good of it come from my girl friends who went. ( I know that’s not the case for every women)
My question is wouldn’t it be easier for husbands to just give house hold allowances? I mean something that would cover food, children’s needs, and something for the wife for her up keep on her appearance, or have some fun? That way he still has control on whole, but everyone’s needs are met.
-
How does voting make a woman non-dependent on her husband? I personally don’t vote, but I have never been able to just vote for the lesser of two evils. If I did vote I’d still look to my husband for guidance, and a good political debate.
I know you're talking about a fun debate regarding politics, but for many couples, politics can be quite divisive. There should be 1 vote per family because anything else is a potential dividing factor. The family should be a unit, all in agreement, all in unison. If it's not, the husband has the final say.
It used to be that ONLY men who owned property could vote. The reason being that one who owns property has a vested interest in how politics, taxes, etc affected society. All the others who didn't own property could be easily manipulated (like they are today) because they don't understand how life really works.
Take for example, the common socialist theme seen by hollywood and heard by the media - the evil, corrupt businessman. Ok, now there ARE many corrupt businessmen, so it's not a bad character to show in movies, but the "avg joe" who owns a plumbing business, or an insurance office is NOT the same thing as a CEO of a Fortune 500 company. A typical small business owner only has a business because he sacrificed many, many things to build that business and then the media lumps him into 'corp corruption' when businesses get tax breaks. Meanwhile, most people have NO IDEA the dedication, time, energy, RISKS, STRESS, and non-stop work it takes to build and run a business. If they did, they'd have more appreciation for a small business.
Aside from that, it could still be argued that only those who own businesses/property should vote. All others don't have a real-life concept of economics, health insurance, etc.
-
I know you're talking about a fun debate regarding politics, but for many couples, politics can be quite divisive. There should be 1 vote per family because anything else is a potential dividing factor. The family should be a unit, all in agreement, all in unison. If it's not, the husband has the final say.
It used to be that ONLY men who owned property could vote. The reason being that one who owns property has a vested interest in how politics, taxes, etc affected society. All the others who didn't own property could be easily manipulated (like they are today) because they don't understand how life really works.
Take for example, the common socialist theme seen by hollywood and heard by the media - the evil, corrupt businessman. Ok, now there ARE many corrupt businessmen, so it's not a bad character to show in movies, but the "avg joe" who owns a plumbing business, or an insurance office is NOT the same thing as a CEO of a Fortune 500 company. A typical small business owner only has a business because he sacrificed many, many things to build that business and then the media lumps him into 'corp corruption' when businesses get tax breaks. Meanwhile, most people have NO IDEA the dedication, time, energy, RISKS, STRESS, and non-stop work it takes to build and run a business. If they did, they'd have more appreciation for a small business.
Aside from that, it could still be argued that only those who own businesses/property should vote. All others don't have a real-life concept of economics, health insurance, etc.
Oh trust me! My husband and I have had our fair share of divisive debates. We hardly agree on anything political. I still consider a heated debate a good one.
The reasons you mention are another reason I don’t vote. I’m a productive member of society by raising wholesome kids, and being there for my husband. Plus, the things I do for community, but I don’t pay taxes. My husband is the business owner, and head of house. I may not agree with his political stances at times, but he does actually get the finally say.
-
I am so glad to read other women having the courage to say what they think and what is right in direct contravention of feminist ideology.
The family is a unit and the head of that unit is the husband / father. Whatever goes on in terms of debate inside the family, he represents it to the wider world and that includes in my view voting. I would give the head of every family a vote for himself and another for his wife and any other adult daughters.
I am torn on education because whilst I generally support the idea that girls education should be focused on the home, the nursery and on Christ I think we do need highly educated women in some specific roles - most especially medicine. But I strongly disagree with girls living outside of parental control and would not allow my daughters to go away to college.
-
Nursing and teaching (but not high school and maybe not middle school) is a natural area for women to be. Or accounting, librarian, gardening. Or other health areas. ...not trying to make an exhaustive list, but most other professions are contrary to women’s natural talents and are better performed by men.
Also, women, even if they have a natural talent, shouldn’t be in men dominant fields. *Ideally*
-
Nursing USED to be a natural area for women to be. Having been there, though, I can tell you it's a very feminist field now.
Example: RN's used to wear white dress uniforms and be expected to stand for the doctors. If such a thing happened today...I think the other RN's would have heart attacks!
We were told in nursing school that the doctors (implied men) were NOT better. We do NOT have to give our seats up. Scrubs (pants) are ok. Wearing skirts is bad. And so on and so forth.
And then of course, there's the big push for "murses" (male nurses). Which in a crisis area--ICU, ER, flight truama, etc--may not be such a bad idea. But for the empathy of floor nursing? Creepy. If I had to go back and do it again I'd stick to being a nurses aide.
And the reason I went to college? My dad insisted on it. I HAD to have a college education. Even though I told him all through high-school I didn't really want to; he demanded it. His mother would have been considered a feminist; it's amazing how one woman can affect subsequent generations so much! The high importance of eradicating feminism in our homes and hearts!
-
Nursing and teaching (but not high school and maybe not middle school) is a natural area for women to be. Or accounting, librarian, gardening. Or other health areas. ...not trying to make an exhaustive list, but most other professions are contrary to women’s natural talents and are better performed by men.
Also, women, even if they have a natural talent, shouldn’t be in men dominant fields. *Ideally*
I homeschool k-12. Is that feminist? I dont think so. I can certainly do a better job than the teachers in public school, and protect my children's souls to boot.
.
Accounting? No thanks. Give me algebra any day of the week! :) some women handle math better than others. This does not make them feminist because they use the talents God gave them.
-
I have an intellectual understanding of the desirability of patriarchy. Not only feminism, but original sin, are obstacles to living out what I know is right.
I don't expect to ever obey and respect my husband as much I think I should, no matter how much I try. This is just the human condition.
Yes. We all recognize God's authority, but most of us fail to obey on a regular basis. It's called fallen human nature and sin.
-
TxTrad,
If you read my post VERY CAREFULLY you would see that what I wrote, and what you wrote, are in agreement.
I was pointing out that, historically, women were NEVER involved in teaching young men after the 5th/6th grade. Once young men reach that age, they need to be taught by men. Your "disagreement" was a situation of homeschool, which is not anywhere close to what I was talking about.
Secondly, I mentioned accounting as a possible job and you responded "some women handle math better than others. This does not make them feminist because they use the talents God gave them."
Well, no crap! Some women are better at math, which is WHY I SUGGESTED ACCOUNTING. (If you don't know, accounting has lots of math).
Both your statements are 'manufactured fights' as I call them. Or, you just have poor reading comprehension. Either way, it explains why you and Croix got along so well...you constantly disagree with people for stupid reasons.
-
TxTrad,
If you read my post VERY CAREFULLY you would see that what I wrote, and what you wrote, are in agreement.
I was pointing out that, historically, women were NEVER involved in teaching young men after the 5th/6th grade. Once young men reach that age, they need to be taught by men. Your "disagreement" was a situation of homeschool, which is not anywhere close to what I was talking about.
Secondly, I mentioned accounting as a possible job and you responded "some women handle math better than others. This does not make them feminist because they use the talents God gave them."
Well, no crap! Some women are better at math, which is WHY I SUGGESTED ACCOUNTING. (If you don't know, accounting has lots of math).
Both your statements are 'manufactured fights' as I call them. Or, you just have poor reading comprehension. Either way, it explains why you and Croix got along so well...you constantly disagree with people for stupid reasons.
I don't mean to berate, only to distinguish.
.
1. I don't see "historically" anywhere in your post.
2. You did not distinguish between homeschool and non-homeschool.
3. Accounting requires about 3rd grade math (adding and subtracting, and a little multiplication and division).
4. I may have reading comprehension issues, but I believe I read your post correctly, even after reading it SLOWLY, as you suggested.
5. I would further state that if a woman has a natural ability for the sciences, she should use them. For example, Madame Curie.
.
"Nursing and teaching (but not high school and maybe not middle school) is a natural area for women to be. Or accounting, librarian, gardening. Or other health areas. ...not trying to make an exhaustive list, but most other professions are contrary to women’s natural talents and are better performed by men.
Also, women, even if they have a natural talent, shouldn’t be in men dominant fields. *Ideally*"
-
You just like to argue for argument's sake. Good day.
-
Pope Leo XIII in Rerum Novarum (On Capital and Labor), 1891:
“Finally, work which is quite suitable for a strong man cannot rightly be required from a woman or a child.” ...
“Women, again, are not suited for certain occupations; a woman is by nature fitted for home-work, and it is that which is best adapted at once to preserve her modesty and to promote the good bringing up of children and the well-being of the family.”
-
Catholics would do good in listening to the teachings of true Popes of the Roman Church about Woman and Feminism, instead of youtube "Pastor Dowel" and the like.
The Church knows best.
From Pope Benedict XV:
“One must carefully guard, lest those perverse doctrines prevail which wish to make woman rather a rival of man than his coworker; that is, that she be not so much adorned by those virtues with which it befits her to resign peacefully within domestic walls; but given to alien pursuits and striving in a foreign field.”
“One can see, too, that there are many women who, devoting themselves too much to pursuits foreign to their nature, have acquired manners of acting which are utterly masculine; and that these same women, deserting their duties in the home for which they were created, rashly throw themselves into the midst of life’s struggle.”
"The changed conditions of the times have conferred upon woman functions and rights which were not allowed her in former times. But no change in the opinions of men, no novelty of circuмstances and events will ever remove woman, conscious of her mission, from her natural centre, which is the family…Hence it may be justly said that the changed conditions of the times have enlarged the field of woman’s activity. An apostolate of woman in the world has succeeded that more intimate and restricted action which she formerly exercised within the domestic walls; but this apostolate must be carried out in such a manner as to make it evident that woman, both outside and within the home, shall not forget that it is her duty, even to-day, to consecrate her principal cares to the family."
-
It is abundantly clear that God designed the overwhelming majority of women for marriage and most especially motherhood. For a role which is very different from that of men yet complimentary in a Godly family.
Feminists are obsessed with the idea of turning women into men and rejecting what God has designed.
-
Pope Pius XI, points independent - minded women who wish to "open their own paths and be self-sufficient" toward the religious life:
What does the modern woman, the feminist, want? Would she be sufficient for herself, open her own path, and not be dependent on the egoism and domination of men, would she find a field for her own proper activity? Very well, the Church has already done that by encouraging the religious profession and consecration of so many generous lives to works of piety, education, assistance, evangelization, in fact the apostolate of good in every imaginable form.
Behold a true and holy feminism, from the very first beginnings of religious life down to this latest example which we see before us in these last days of Paola Frassinetti, a glorious example, a meritorious feminism indeed.
What are the religious of all times and places, if they are not women who are sufficient of themselves, and willed to labour in those fields which they had willed and chosen? Truly here we see the true emancipation, the elevation, the consecration of woman, and all this the Church has ever venerated, and required to be held in honour by the Christian world.
-
It seems feminism is simply the movement promoting unchastity.
-
It seems feminism is simply the movement promoting unchastity.
That is far too positive a way to look at it. It barely scratches the surface of how evil feminism is.
-
That is far too positive a way to look at it. It barely scratches the surface of how evil feminism is.
You don't think it's the root of the problem?
-
You don't think it's the root of the problem?
The root of the problem is rebellion against God. Feminism is about women rejecting the nature they were given by God and the relationship with men ordained by Him. The lack of chastity, while evil, is only a symptom.
-
I agree feminists do not just encourage women to be unchaste - feminism is far worse in that it goes against every aspect of what God created women for and every blessing he gave us.
-
The root of the problem is rebellion against God. Feminism is about women rejecting the nature they were given by God and the relationship with men ordained by Him. The lack of chastity, while evil, is only a symptom.
It is only a symptom but it is also absolutely fundamental. Women have always sinned and their vanity and selfishness has always lead them to fornication and lust. But only feminists see this as a virtue.