Catholic Info
Traditional Catholic Faith => Catholic Living in the Modern World => Topic started by: curiouscatholic23 on October 11, 2011, 03:57:48 PM
-
Am I the only one bothered by this secular trend of little girls playing competitive sports like little boys such as basketball, baseball, and soccer?
I officiate youth sports and ever since my conversion I feel guilty about officiating a 2nd grade girls basketball game. Its obvious the girls are not that into it, but the parents and coaches keep yelling at the girls to be more agressive and competitive.....the more agressive girls are the ones who are applauded and awarded, while the more feminine girls who just run around aimlessly are ostracized.
To me competitive sports teaches one how to be agressive and how to be competitive. Those are masculine qualities that belong with men/boys. Is that sexist or traditional catholic teaching?
These types of games are continued into high school where girls get on these traveling basketball/soccer teams which are even more competitive. Am I the only one who has a problem with this? I am not going to encourage my daughters (should I be blessed with any) to engage in competitive athletics. Its just not natural. I dont get why 99% of the secular world thinks its ok to push little girls into masculine endeavors. Just crazy. Don they see that when these girls grow up they will reflect their upbringing, and these comptetive natures will come out to the fullest? Competing with her husband?
Im also bothered when I work out at the local gym by my house. Since when did women lift weights? I don't get it. Why do women think its ok to dress extremely provocatively like they do in these 24 hour fitness? Why do people care so much about their bodies? Particuarly women, whose bodies were created to carry numerous children?
-
You've started a thread like this before and I shared my thoughts. But as a refresher:
I'm against women playing sports. They don't need to work out either, unless they're overweight or something.
-
You've started a thread like this before and I shared my thoughts. But as a refresher:
I'm against women playing sports. They don't need to work out either, unless they're overweight or something.
lol thanks for reminding me. I apologize for the re-thread. It just really bugged me today.
-
LOL, it's alright.
-
LOL, it's alright.
Sometimes I just go crazy thinking about feminism and how it has ruined every single aspect of our society. And I mean every aspect. For example look at the economy. How many women are taking mens job's right now? How have the wages in this country been destroyed by women? Its impossible to count.
Public high schools have these clubs where they encourage women to go into fields dominated by men like engineering. Why? Why? To take even more from men? What is going on here?
Im unemployed too right now so I am trying to stay positive, but I'll admit I get pissed off thinking about how much better the economy could be if feminism was not celebrated.
-
I know what you mean. The feminist movement (which is really more masculine than feminine) is immoral and against what the Church teaches about gender roles. Sadly, alot of Novus Ordites fall for this feminist junk as well.
-
I agree with you. I also think boys sports is way overdone.
-
With regard to 2nd graders, I don't get the inter-sports for them. Everyone needs physical activity that they enjoy. I have seen parents and coaches get all bound up in a game, softball, soccer, football. It's an ego thing for the parents and something they really need to have a real moment with to identify that and resolve. If nothing else to assure that they aren't in some way living vicariously through their children. And we've all been party to a set parents like that once in our lives at least.
When it comes to sports in general for girls/women-I'm all for it. I was a basketball player in high school and played it the first year of my undergrad. And loved it immensely. I started playing when my father, his mother and my sister would meet outside by the garage and play and I was steadily beating my dad who is a phenomenal player in many aspects. (He played for the St. Louis Cardinals for 1 season before he blew out his knee). My maternal grandmother was mind blowing and she taught me moves that carried me far in my little high school athletic career. She was all star in her state in 1940, 1942 and 1943. She was tall, beautiful, charming and simply lovely in every way.
After my transfer to a different school they did not offer baskeball but lacrosse. And I played marginally well most I had to show for my efforts were bruised, injured shins, shoulder from fall and frankly a ton of mean girls. But I didn't go to that school as a transfer student for athletics but for it's academic rigor.
Today, at a very old 40 (I can not believe it!) I am a marathon runner. I used to do triathlons but realized that I didn't enjoy it anymore so scaled back. Today, I run about 3 miles a day which isn't a lot. I used to run about 8 miles per day. But I have a life so something had to give.
Am I a modernist because I exercise? No. I enjoy the physical activity. I do get a lot of benefits for my activities. Mainly the ever present (and sometimes difficult to attain) 'second wind' which is addictive. I generally can eat whatever I want without worry. Though as I'm aging I'm noticing it's not as forgiving as it used to be, so sooner than later I'll be modifying that last sentence. ;)
If we lived in a time where physical labor was part and parcel to our survival I can guarantee you me running just for the 'fun' of it wouldn't be happening. I can venture a guess that the reason there is this type of physical activity in women (and men) is primarily because we are hard wired to be physically active in some aspect. Most people are not from an aristocratic background and farming or a type of trade was all manually intensive. Coming from farming communities such as myself I loved farm work and miss it in a nostalgic way. Living it wouldn't be my cup of tea right now simply because I have become accustomed to what my life is now.
If you feel guilty about being around these children doing this could you perhaps request a different venue or age/gender group? I don't think you're sexist at all. I think your a kind, sensitive person who is protecting his self, his soul. Many hugs to you, sweetheart.
-
Thank you Wisonsheepgirl. I appreciate that.
I have a question for you though. When you are working out and doing your marathons do you feel any less feminine?
Also, what do you wear when you run/workout? In my opinion 99% of women/young girls I see these days wear short shorts that show a lot of thighs. If the girl is pretty and my age it is kind of a turn on, which then forces me to turn the other way and not stare. Its hard. The other day I was driving home and all the public middle school girls who looked about 13 years old were running by my house and every single one of them was wearing shorts well above the knee. Was I scandalized? No, because they were way too young for me. But if they were 23 instead of 13 then ya I probably would have been strongly tempted.
Oh and 3 miles a day is still a lot.
-
I must say that I do agree with you curiouscatholic, and that it is definitely not good for women to be doing sports like football and the like (swimming and skating, however, are probably two exceptions, so long as they are not doing so aggressively and dress appropriately).
However, the fact that women nowadays play sports means that there was some period when women didn't play sports at all, and so there is an empty space to fill. If women didn't play sports, what did they do for fun? What are some good, feminine activities that women can do that are a lot of fun and wholesome?
-
Today's sports-crazy world aside, (I agree it's a bit much), women need to exercise, even weights. You may not be sexist but you may misunderstand what it means to be feminine if it's leading you to think women don't need healthy competition and exercise as well (you too SS). That's not a gender thing, that is a human being thing, part of what makes us healthy and happy. Strength training for example helps protect a woman against osteoporosis as she ages. It helps women during pregnancy and in labor when they are strong and in good shape. It helps her have more energy for her daily duties. Most of us would be better wives and mothers in many ways for exercising. It doesn't take away from the traditional role at all. Ideally gyms would not be mixed, but as I said, modern world aside, we need to stay active and at more than just housekeeping in order to be healthy.
-
Today's sports-crazy world aside, (I agree it's a bit much), women need to exercise, even weights.
No, women don't need to lift weights. They don't need big muscles. That is a rather feministic comment. There's nothing wrong with jogging or doing simple exercises, but lifting weights?
You may not be sexist but you may misunderstand what it means to be feminine if it's leading you to think women don't need healthy competition and exercise as well (you too SS). That's not a gender thing, that is a human being thing, part of what makes us healthy and happy.
I never said women don't need exercise. But they don't need to play sports or lift weights (and by sports I'm refering to masculine ones like basketball and baseball, if a girl wants to skate or something like that then there's no real harm in it, as long as she doesn't turn it into a career). I know lots of women who just walk or jog for their exercise, nothing else. They're in healty shape.
It helps her have more energy for her daily duties. Most of us would be better wives and mothers in many ways for exercising. It doesn't take away from the traditional role at all.
Exercising is good for you health, but it does not in any way make you a better wife or mother. Women make good wives and mothers by good morals.
-
What kind of physical activities could a woman do that is feminine, fun, and physically active? What kind of things can a girl do just for fun, and for no utilitary purpose? What did women use to do for fun?
-
I agree with you. I also think boys sports is way overdone.
Interesting you mention this, I've been thinking about sports in general for some time now. I've been wondering just how much they support the modern world and its thinking.
Here's my take. Sports are fine for entertainment purposes and are even ok to watch or attend (as long as you don't attend on Sunday). However, I think they also have their disadvantages. The main problem I have with professional sports is the greed from money. All you ever hear about is money, money, money. "I want this, I want that". These players make millions of dollars per year. And what do they do with it? Use it to buy big mansions and fancy cars, nothing but materialistic junk. How about giving that money to the poor? Or donating it to a good charity? And the money they make is never enough. A few years ago when I was still a Novus Ordite and basically obsessed with sports, I remember some baseball player being offered $45 million and saying to the team "Nope, I want what I'm worth. Give me $47 million". Insane! Sports players can be alot like Hollywierd starts, they let their fame and fortune go to their head.
The next big problem I have is them playing on Sunday. As we all know, Sunday is the day that we are supposed to honor God. We shouldn't be spending Sunday playing sports, that's blasphemous. And some sports will even play on Christmas Day and Good Friday. Playing on Christ's Birthday, and the day of His Death? What a slap in the face.
Oh, and don't get me started on the trashy cheerleaders. They are immodest, immoral, slutty, and suggestive and I think they ruin any fun and wholesomeness that sports can bring.
So in all, it's not sinful to follow sports. But sports do have some very materialistic and immoral aspects to them, thus why I would definitely discourage anyone making a career out of them.
-
What kind of physical activities could a woman do that is feminine, fun, and physically active? What kind of things can a girl do just for fun, and for no utilitary purpose? What did women use to do for fun?
I don't know because I'm not a girl, but I don't see how exercising would be a good way for girls to have fun.
-
Today's sports-crazy world aside, (I agree it's a bit much), women need to exercise, even weights.
No, women don't need to lift weights. They don't need big muscles. That is a rather feministic comment. There's nothing wrong with jogging or doing simple exercises, but lifting weights?
Yes, lifting weights. Lifting weights does not have the same effect on women as it does men. Normally a woman lifting weights will have "tone", not "big muscles". A woman's muscles don't normally bulge the way a man's do, but they still need exercising to be fit. You seem to think strength training for women is the same as strength training for men but it isn't. Unless one goes out of their way to try and achieve a man's big muscle look, strength training for women is tailored for women, who lack the levels of testosterone necessary for "big muscles". There's plenty of middle ground between flub and the champion weight lifter look, but muscles are muscles and women need them just as much as men do, even if they aren't as big or obvious as a man's.
You may not be sexist but you may misunderstand what it means to be feminine if it's leading you to think women don't need healthy competition and exercise as well (you too SS). That's not a gender thing, that is a human being thing, part of what makes us healthy and happy.
I never said women don't need exercise. But they don't need to play sports or lift weights (and by sports I'm refering to masculine ones like basketball and baseball, if a girl wants to skate or something like that then there's no real harm in it, as long as she doesn't turn it into a career). I know lots of women who just walk or jog for their exercise, nothing else. They're in healty shape.
Sorry. You said they don't need to work out. Work out and exercise are rather close in meaning, so that's what it sounded like to me.
It helps her have more energy for her daily duties. Most of us would be better wives and mothers in many ways for exercising. It doesn't take away from the traditional role at all.
Exercising is good for you health, but it does not in any way make you a better wife or mother. Women make good wives and mothers by good morals.
No where did I exclude good morals or place good health above good morals. But, even if placed below good morals in importance, good health is still very helpful in many ways. Same as with a man. If a man cannot provide because he is ill through his own fault, wouldn't he be culpable for not being able to provide? A woman is under the same obligation to care for her health so that she can better attend to her duties. In other words, besides the practical aid that good health provides, it falls under good morals to also care for our bodies.
-
Today's sports-crazy world aside, (I agree it's a bit much), women need to exercise, even weights.
No, women don't need to lift weights. They don't need big muscles. That is a rather feministic comment. There's nothing wrong with jogging or doing simple exercises, but lifting weights?
Yes, lifting weights. Lifting weights does not have the same effect on women as it does men. Normally a woman lifting weights will have "tone", not "big muscles". A woman's muscles don't normally bulge the way a man's do, but they still need exercising to be fit. You seem to think strength training for women is the same as strength training for men but it isn't. Unless one goes out of their way to try and achieve a man's big muscle look, strength training for women is tailored for women, who lack the levels of testosterone necessary for "big muscles". There's plenty of middle ground between flub and the champion weight lifter look, but muscles are muscles and women need them just as much as men do, even if they aren't as big or obvious as a man's.
You may not be sexist but you may misunderstand what it means to be feminine if it's leading you to think women don't need healthy competition and exercise as well (you too SS). That's not a gender thing, that is a human being thing, part of what makes us healthy and happy.
I never said women don't need exercise. But they don't need to play sports or lift weights (and by sports I'm refering to masculine ones like basketball and baseball, if a girl wants to skate or something like that then there's no real harm in it, as long as she doesn't turn it into a career). I know lots of women who just walk or jog for their exercise, nothing else. They're in healty shape.
Sorry. You said they don't need to work out. Work out and exercise are rather close in meaning, so that's what it sounded like to me.
It helps her have more energy for her daily duties. Most of us would be better wives and mothers in many ways for exercising. It doesn't take away from the traditional role at all.
Exercising is good for you health, but it does not in any way make you a better wife or mother. Women make good wives and mothers by good morals.
No where did I exclude good morals or place good health above good morals. But, even if placed below good morals in importance, good health is still very helpful in many ways. Same as with a man. If a man cannot provide because he is ill through his own fault, wouldn't he be culpable for not being able to provide? A woman is under the same obligation to care for her health so that she can better attend to her duties. In other words, besides the practical aid that good health provides, it falls under good morals to also care for our bodies.
Ask 50 women why they work out and I'll bet good money that less than 10 of them say that they work out because of their health. The usual answers are "I want to feel good about myself" "I want to look younger" "I want to fit into my old jeans" etc. All of these reasons are self-centered in nature. This is proven by the clothes most women wear when they're working out.
Am I judging them? Absolutely not. But I think it's spiritually unhealthy to work out for any reason other than your health. Playing sports puts you in danger of getting injured. So if a woman wants to take care of her health so that she can better attend to her duties, as you suggest, playing sports would be a no-no.
-
I agree with you. I also think boys sports is way overdone.
The whole scene is just kooky now.
Playing games used to be fun, and mostly free. ( Riding lessons and ballet expensive..but still.)
Anyway, I love being active and can't see any problem with healthy exercise. After I became a mother I could not do the amount of exercise I love and I have had to offer it up.
I have never met one woman who wanted to be fat. Maybe we are all brainwashed feminists that way. We are so fortunate to have food to eat every day and to be able to feed our children, we forget that fitness is a huge luxury.
-
Oremus I agree with you that there's plenty of vanity to go around. Among both men and women. Men aren't exempt from their brand of gym variety vanity. However, wanting to look and feel one's best and fit properly into one's clothes is not automatically vanity. We do have a basic right, with the dignity of being human, body and soul, temples of the Holy Ghost, to want to look and feel our best. There's nothing wrong with that until it is given higher priority than it deserves. It can cross the line into vanity, quickly and easily, but so can all things. Our ability to abuse our goods, temporal and spiritual, doesn't change the fact that those goods are good. If a person exercises for a less than perfect reason, the exercise itself is still good for them. It's their own perceptions and intentions that need correcting, not necessarily the exercise.
I know where you are going with sports but by that reasoning a man should not play sports either. He has just as much duty towards his family, if not more as head and leader. And "playing sports" covers such a wide variety of activities... I don't think women should play football, for example, and I do think many sports are very unfeminine, but neither would I say they can't play any sports. What about tennis? Or skiing? Or swimming? There are many sports whose benefits easily outweigh their risks.
I think the biggest problem with the modern view on exercise is that it is in mixed company and public. Honestly, to me, unless you engage in a social sport, like Badminton or something, exercise is best kept as a more private activity.
-
One of the things I admire about my mother (though I didn't when I was a dumb kid) is that I've never seen her exercise in my entire life.
I've never seen her try to run fast. I've seen her get on a bicycle one time - just to see if she remembered how to ride.
She's never been fat or out of shape. Carrying babies and kids is the best exercise, IMO.
Strength resistance training - I imagine a good strong husband can help with that.
Still it is obvious there are some women who are very athletic naturally, and there's nothing wrong with them pursuing feminine sports (sports that are truly feminine)
I don't like the long distance running, (there was recently a revolting story about a woman who went into labor running a marathon) I think sprinting might be okay - sort of like Atalanta.
-
Today's sports-crazy world aside, (I agree it's a bit much), women need to exercise, even weights.
No, women don't need to lift weights. They don't need big muscles. That is a rather feministic comment. There's nothing wrong with jogging or doing simple exercises, but lifting weights?
You may not be sexist but you may misunderstand what it means to be feminine if it's leading you to think women don't need healthy competition and exercise as well (you too SS). That's not a gender thing, that is a human being thing, part of what makes us healthy and happy.
I never said women don't need exercise. But they don't need to play sports or lift weights (and by sports I'm refering to masculine ones like basketball and baseball, if a girl wants to skate or something like that then there's no real harm in it, as long as she doesn't turn it into a career). I know lots of women who just walk or jog for their exercise, nothing else. They're in healty shape.
It helps her have more energy for her daily duties. Most of us would be better wives and mothers in many ways for exercising. It doesn't take away from the traditional role at all.
Exercising is good for you health, but it does not in any way make you a better wife or mother. Women make good wives and mothers by good morals.
a
Yes, women need more than cardio. Women lift weights to time and strengthen nor to bulk up. Men lift heavy weights with fewer reps, women lift light weights with many reps. The two techniques have very different results. Most women lift 3,5 and 8 lb weights, which will never give a woman a masculine physique.
Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater. There is a lot of middle ground between girls playing football and never exerting themselves more than walking around the block. Pregnancy, birth and mothering takes a lot out of a woman's body, the fitter she is, the better for her and her family. The greatest morals in the world don't get a family fed, laundry done, a house clean or the myriad of other things that go by the wayside when a mother is too sick, weak or in pain to care for her family.
-
However, wanting to look and feel one's best and fit properly into one's clothes is not automatically vanity. We do have a basic right, with the dignity of being human, body and soul, temples of the Holy Ghost, to want to look and feel our best. There's nothing wrong with that until it is given higher priority than it deserves.
The point Oremus was making is that most women don't exercise primarily for health reasons, it's all about looking good. Something I notice about alot of women who DON'T buy into the feminist movement is that they don't exercise or work out much. If they're overweight then fine. Otherwise, they don't need to work out.
-
Yes, women need more than cardio. Women lift weights to time and strengthen nor to bulk up. Men lift heavy weights with fewer reps, women lift light weights with many reps. The two techniques have very different results. Most women lift 3,5 and 8 lb weights, which will never give a woman a masculine physique.
Lifting weights has never been proven to help women with pregnancy. And they don't need to "bulk up". They're women!
-
Yes, women need more than cardio. Women lift weights to time and strengthen nor to bulk up. Men lift heavy weights with fewer reps, women lift light weights with many reps. The two techniques have very different results. Most women lift 3,5 and 8 lb weights, which will never give a woman a masculine physique.
Lifting weights has never been proven to help women with pregnancy. And they don't need to "bulk up". They're women!
You've been infromed twice now that women don't "bulk up", that you are applying male weight-lifting strategies to women, which is inaccurate as women have a different strategy and different result based on being feminine and not masculine, but you're still insisting on this bulking up thing. At first I could understand as (I think?) you are unmarried and probably don't have much experience with feminine exercise needs and strategies, however now you're just choosing to remain uninformed.
-
I see this is another one of those "no-win" situations for me. So forget it, I'll withdraw from the argument. But I will say this: there's nothing uninformed about me being against women participating in certain activities.
-
However, wanting to look and feel one's best and fit properly into one's clothes is not automatically vanity. We do have a basic right, with the dignity of being human, body and soul, temples of the Holy Ghost, to want to look and feel our best. There's nothing wrong with that until it is given higher priority than it deserves.
The point Oremus was making is that most women don't exercise primarily for health reasons, it's all about looking good. Something I notice about alot of women who DON'T buy into the feminist movement is that they don't exercise or work out much. If they're overweight then fine. Otherwise, they don't need to work out.
Right and my point was that wanting to look good is not necessarily bad. The bolded is untrue as well. You probably don't realize it happens because in traditional circles, exercise tends to be more private and in same sex company. As a woman, a cradle trad, you can trust me when I tell you that many traditional women exercise and work out, and those who don't, always want to start because they know they should and would feel better if they did. Those who exercise have a much easier time with pregnancy, labor and running after children. It does the same to us as it does to men, endorphins are released, one sleeps much better, has more energy etc... Thinking women can't enjoy exercise and be feminine is a misunderstanding of what femininity is. We are soul AND body, same as you.
-
I see this is another one of those "no-win" situations for me. So forget it, I'll withdraw from the argument. But I will say this: there's nothing uninformed about me being against women participating in certain activities.
That's fine. I'm against women participating in certain activities as well. I just know there is a lot more middle ground than you seem to be allowing for.
-
If your local Nautilus or whatever has too suggestive an atmosphere you might look into a small 'underground' gym or an MMA studio, which are sometimes men only in practice. Or think about building a home gym - to start you would need a power rack (which you can construct yourself), a barbell, and a miscellany of weights (hunt at garage sales). I have a pretty good gym now but I'm collecting stuff for a home gym.
-
Something to remember is that in the past most women (and men) got plenty of exercise naturally through their daily work. These days that is much rarer so deliberate planning for exercise is actually necessary.
Something to remember about evangelization is that people respond to beauty. Whether it is the beauty of your church, the music, the liturgy, your family and yes, your appearance, all are part of evangelizing. People aren't going to be attracted to a traditional Catholic life if you and your kids are unkempt and dumpy. Keeping yourself in good shape, as much as some would like to deny it, is actually good for evangelization. I'm not suggesting that you should be sɛҳuąƖly provocative but there is a big difference between being "attractive" and being "sɛҳuąƖized".
Let the raging begin. :heretic:
-
Yes, women need more than cardio. Women lift weights to time and strengthen nor to bulk up. Men lift heavy weights with fewer reps, women lift light weights with many reps. The two techniques have very different results. Most women lift 3,5 and 8 lb weights, which will never give a woman a masculine physique.
Lifting weights has never been proven to help women with pregnancy. And they don't need to "bulk up". They're women!
Strong, toned muscles DO help a woman in pregnancy. Weak back and stomach muscles can lead to many acute and chronic problems.
-
Strong, toned muscles DO help a woman in pregnancy. Weak back and stomach muscles can lead to many acute and chronic problems.
Exactly. My wife has a problem with her tailbone and lower back that probably would be reduced if she exercised more so the muscles could help keep everything in place.
-
I have a question for you though. When you are working out and doing your marathons do you feel any less feminine?
No I do not. I feel great. I've done something for myself and my family. It's an investment, I 'bank' a deposit daily with regards to my health. I have too many people depending on me. To be neglectful of my health begins the domino effect of neglecting all of my duties.
-
Wallflower has touched on a lot of the issues that have come up eloquently and capably.
I think there really seems to be a disconnect with regards to health and looking good here. It's been mentioned that there are women that exercise only for the goal of looking good. Yes, that's true. But why lump all women into that category? Just because a woman, specifically a trad Catholic woman exercises, does not mean that we're doing it for 'looking good'. The side benefit of being healthy and exercising IS looking the best that God intended.
I have a long family history of obesity, diabetes, heart conditions that can be counter-acted by exercise and living well in what is consumed and expended regarding my health. I choose my expenditure to be exercise to create the well being that is necessary to allow for the life that I live to continue. On of the other side benefits that is not discussed a lot is that exercise in it's release of endorphins is a relief of stress and anxiety. I have a ton of that and exercise is my best remedy. Otherwise I'd have to take medications to alleviate them. Which is not beneficial for me especially knowing I have this outlet.
There is nothing wrong with beauty. Too often people believe that in order to have a spiritual life that they must deny the positive aspects in the physical life. Carrying any idea to the extreme can become an obsession. It is possible to care for the spiritual aspect as well as our physical bodies that God gave us, and we must.
The OP asked if he was sexist, I do not believe he is. He started this thread asking about sports for girls primarily. I do not think some sports are appropriate for girls. All are contact sports. Someone mentioned basketball as not being appropriate for girls, I of course do disagree based on my personal experience. My first post did mention my grandmother who was born in 1925. She and many other girls did sports perhaps because many of the boys/men went off to war. It may have been the reason why she played. It certainly wasn't feminism that was part of her/their mindset. Now? Yes I see it, females wanting to go to war, be a solider, females wanting to be in wrestling, football. It's truly a disgrace how far and deep the feminist thought has pervaded society.
This is not one of those times. Physical activity of any kind for both genders is essential to offset the video gaming, sedentary lifestyle that many people have, particularly children in the last 20 years. What that physical activity is in the end is up to the parents. Some obviously as the OP shared choose inappropriate activities. For us trad Catholics specifically because we understand modesty and the development of this and other virtues and character building.
-
There is nothing wrong with beauty. Too often people believe that in order to have a spiritual life that they must deny the positive aspects in the physical life.
Yes that's certainly true.
Carrying any idea to the extreme can become an obsession.
It is plainly apparent that there are vastly more women obsessed with exercise and weight loss than those with scruples about exercising, they often become mentally or physically diseased and even ruin their appearance with their obsessive dieting and exercise.
I was recently told of a buxom 21 year old that likes to ride horses, apparently she was thinking of breast reduction surgery. This sort of thing is pure madness.
-
Everyone else has more well-founded reasons for approving of women working out, nevertheless I'll share mine. Please feel free to tell me I'm ridiculous. :)
A year or so ago I was listening to some sermons on vices, and how to identify them. They listed little things in everyday life which were indicators that you had virtues to work on. Obviously I had (and have) all of them to work on, but I was surprised by the indicators he listed for Sloth. Do I jump out of bed in the morning, do I make my bed promptly after morning prayer, do I do the dishes right after I dirty them, do I ever lean against walls? Am I prompt and generous in my spiritual exercises and in interior and exterior mortification? He listed others, but these stick out in my memory.
Among other changes, I promised God to work out three times a week, as long as He promised not to make me look better by doing so. Sometimes it's a struggle, but He’s my strength. I have an elliptical in my home which helps me work out in a good conscience. I do spiritual reading or listen to sermons during which, and offer it all in union with Christ sufferings for our brothers and sisters in Purgatory. I hope He is pleased with my actions. I'm sure you all know Him better than me, so in your charity tell me if I'm wrong.
As far as working out in public: eeeek! Maybe you all can do it because you have more balanced personalities and less scruples. Far from being relaxing I find myself plagued with the thought on one soul thinking of something impure because of me. Even wearing terribly ugly clothes is not enough to combat St. John Chysostom's words in my head:
When you have made another sin in his heart how can you be innocent? Tell me, who does this world condemn? Whom do judges in court punish? Those who drink poison or those who prepare it and administer the fatal poison? You have prepared the abominable cup, you have given the death-dealing drink, and you are more criminal than are those who poison the body; you murder not the body but the soul.
I probably have nothing to worry about, but souls are my Achilles heel. I've already stolen too many from Jesus.
-
Something to remember is that in the past most women (and men) got plenty of exercise naturally through their daily work. These days that is much rarer so deliberate planning for exercise is actually necessary.
[snip]
Let the raging begin. :heretic:
:laugh1:
Exercise is good for us! It's OK to care for our health and appearance. (the 'fasting, but remember to comb your beard' bit comes to mind.)
-
"Women don't need to work out"
(http://www.midwestsportsfans.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/mj-laughing.gif)
Please go.
Women don't need to work out, which is why your bones are so brittle and you have very little muscle mass and tons upon tons of fat. No wonder so many of you end up with osteoporosis when you think like that. No physical activities = no muscle. No muscles = you can't even move when you're 70+
A woman isn't going to get "bulky" or "jacked" from working out. It doesn't work that way. You won't gain weight if you don't eat enough anyways. Enough of the broscience, please. Women can and do benefit from physical activities, and she's not going to become a man unless she's trying to (i.e. steroids)
-
Girls exercising is not a problem. It is pitting them against boys or other girls in competitive sports trying to instill a "killer instinct" in them that seems objectionable.
With our culture's current obsession with physical appearance you see young girls running all over the place, doing ab crunches, lifting weights. To some extent it becomes a cult of the body, where the fitter she is, the more she can show off her "bod" to friends and attract men at the clubs on weekends.
Moderate exercise to keep in shape and healthy is one thing. Obsessively hitting the gym to get washboard abs, a shapely rear, and killer calves to later show them off is quite another.
-
My Dad put me in t-ball one year when I was maybe 6 or 7. I always liked being in the outfield so I could pick flowers...hahaha.
As to exercise, modern young women can easily become obsessed with fitness. Media, (especially fitness magazines) contribute to this. For teenage/college age girls, working out often goes beyond being fit and healthy and is pure vanity. Unfortunately, in western culture, this is what is valued. It is also exploited by feminists because women are allowed to obsess about every detail of their body, but then they decide men are pigs if they make any comment about female appearance, even though they are bombarded by images of it everywhere.
While I have personally given up being a fitness fanatic, I do still workout, but by myself at home and not for hours a day, which can mess with the body. I am satisfied that I am able to maintain my pre-pregnancy weight and feel trim. I don't care if I don't have the exact same muscle definition as I did at one time, because sometimes that can look borderline unfeminine. I don't think it is attractive to purposely try to look athletic if you have a naturally feminine shape.
I do think it is very important for mothers to stay healthy. As it was already mentioned, most women do not have the same amount of physical work to do as they did 100 years ago. This, along with unhealthy diet/processed foods contributes to obesity which can harm a woman's fertility and raise the risk of pregnancy complications such as preeclampsia and gestational diabetes. I had a very easy labor and delivery with my daughter, and I do think that being fit may have helped me. My doctor cut me off from vigorous exercise in the second trimester, but I took long walks, did a lot of stretching, and used a resistance band. I think this helped me bounce back quickly after giving birth. Sometimes now I will do light hand weights, but if you were to follow the advice of say, Shape magazine, you'd be overdoing it with strength training.
Additionally, I don't think there is anything wrong with women working out to keep their appearance nice, both to attract a spouse in the first place and then also just to keep looking nice for a husband during the marriage. In the same way that a wife should strive to keep her home beautiful and comfortable for her husband, she should keep herself looking nice too. For some women who don't have much physical housework to do, formal exercise might be a part of this. I don't think that necessarily crosses the line to vanity.
-
It is this sort of myth amongst rigorist that women didn't play sports before, were competitive, or didn't get their hands dirty. One great example against that is camogie, which is common in Ireland. Here are some pictures:
Early 1900s
(http://www.birthplaceofhockey.com/images/pichockeyists/women/camogie-team1904-4.jpg)
(http://homepage.eircom.net/~ballinacree/images/exhibition_2006/muldoon_camogie_1931.jpg)
-
...and women's suffrage was right around the corner.
:thinking:
-
It is this sort of myth amongst rigorist that women didn't play sports before, were competitive, or didn't get their hands dirty. One great example against that is camogie, which is common in Ireland. Here are some pictures:
A quick aside:
Look at the clothing they wore back then.
Feminism, coeducation and organized athletics was well underway at the turn of the 20th century. Where's the evidence that organized team sports were commonly played by women in the history of Christendom?
-
That's just it: there is no evidence that organized team sports were commonly played by women in the history of Christendom. The reason is because a woman playing professional sports contradicts what their roles are supposed to be according to the teachings of the Church.
Feminism hasn't been a large movement for centuries, it came along at the turn of the 20th century.
-
Feminism, coeducation and organized athletics was well underway at the turn of the 20th century. Where's the evidence that organized team sports were commonly played by women in the history of Christendom?
I didn't make that argument. And I don't have to take back everything to "Christendom." There was slavery in Christendom too, so everything wasn't rosy and perfect. I am not going to carbon copy everything from the middle ages to this time in terms of society. Organized sports is a modern thing in itself besides. My basic point is women played sports in the past. Ireland had a vibrant Catholic society, and they were fine with women playing camogie.
-
How old do the women in those pictures appear to be?
-
And I don't have to take back everything to "Christendom." There was slavery in Christendom too, so everything wasn't rosy and perfect
There was slavery and women didn't play sports as much as men!
I am not going to carbon copy everything from the middle ages to this time in terms of society.
You were the one saying that women playing sports is nothing new. Well, it is relatively new.
Organized sports is a modern thing in itself besides.
Nonsense. Ever hear of the tournament?
My basic point is women played sports in the past.
And you're trying to use it to justify what women do today in sports.
Ireland had a vibrant Catholic society, and they were fine with women playing camogie.
Sports are not evil and there are many sports suitable for women but the idea that women should be raised participating in them as being vital for their social development is evil.
-
Organized sports is a modern thing in itself besides.
Nonsense. Ever hear of the tournament?
You know what I mean.
My basic point is women played sports in the past.
And you're trying to use it to justify what women do today in sports.
Not what women do today, but that women can participate in sports, as well as vote, as well as go to school and be educated, as well as work, as well as learn to protect themselves, etc. If none of those things are a detriment to family life, then I can't see the problem. I think some trads have this vision, which really is not accurate, that a woman's ONLY place is the home. I know many trad women who do all these things and have healthy personal and family lives. Plus, sports are fun.
Ireland had a vibrant Catholic society, and they were fine with women playing camogie.
Sports are not evil and there are many sports suitable for women but the idea that women should be raised participating in them as being vital for their social development is evil.
I didn't make that argument, so I don't know where that is coming from. Plus we can't broad-brush girls either as though they all want to play sports. Some girls are quite fine doing other things.
-
I think some trads have this vision, which really is not accurate, that a woman's ONLY place is the home. I know many trad women who do all these things and have healthy personal and family lives. Plus, sports are fun.
That is not a Catholic mindset. What you just wrote is extremely dangerous, not to mention false. The woman's place is at home PERIOD. The Catechism of the Council of Trent stated this specifically. You should look up what the Church teaches before just writing your opinion.
-
I think some trads have this vision, which really is not accurate, that a woman's ONLY place is the home. I know many trad women who do all these things and have healthy personal and family lives. Plus, sports are fun.
That is not a Catholic mindset. What you just wrote is extremely dangerous, not to mention false. The woman's place is at home PERIOD. The Catechism of the Council of Trent stated this specifically. You should look up what the Church teaches before just writing your opinion.
This is what it says: Duties Of A Wife
On the other hand, the duties of a wife are thus summed up by the Prince of the Apostles: Let wives be subject to their husbands. that if any believe not the word, they may be won without the word by the conversation of the wives, considering your chaste conversation with fear. Let not their adorning be the outward plaiting of the hair, or the wearing of gold, or the putting on of apparel: but the hidden man of the heart in the incorruptibility of a quiet and meek spirit, which is rich in the sight of God. For after this manner heretofore the holy women also, who trusted in God, adorned themselves, being in subjection to their own husbands, as Sarah obeyed Abraham, calling hint lord.
To train their children in the practice of virtue and to pay particular attention to their domestic concerns should also be especial objects of their attention. The wife should love to remain at home, unless compelled by necessity to go out; and she should never presume to leave home without her husband's consent.
Again, and in this the conjugal union chiefly consists, let wives never forget that next to God they are to love their husbands, to esteem them above all others, yielding to them in all things not inconsistent with Christian piety, a willing and ready obedience.
-
There is nothing wrong with a woman exercising or working out. St. Pius X and Pope Pius XII rightfully commended sports and exercise for physical health. These activities can be done modestly.
-
Jaynek, I'm not sure how you interpret that, but it does affirm that women have no role outside the home. Popes Pius XI and Pius XII also both condemned the woman working outside the home.
-
Communism is particularly characterized by the rejection of any link that binds the woman to the family and the home, and her emancipation is proclaimed as a basic principle.- Pope Pius XI
-
Thanks for posting that by the way, Jaynek. :)
-
I certainly wouldn't say it's sinful for women to play sports or work out. All things in moderation. Sports or exercise become sinful once more important things like family or prayer become subjugated to them. But that' doesn't just go for women, that's for anyone with a hobby.
Sports are certainly *less* important for women than men. Women are not naturally competitive or aggressive and thus aren't in "need" of a way to physically vent like men. Doesn't mean it's wrong to play them. Sports are a healthy interest for any person with the right direction.
As far as exercise, no problem here. Women who have the time and inclination ought to exercise. It keeps them busy (keeps anyone busy) and looking good.
As far as women and weights, again, no problem. Not sure if the people against women and weights understand that when women lift weights, they don't really build bulk or mass. They certainly *can* with the right approach, but what weights do for women more than anything is tone. Women who lift weights with that approach certainly gain a health benefit. And looks benefits.
My thoughts, anyways.
-
Jaynek, I'm not sure how you interpret that, but it does affirm that women have no role outside the home. Popes Pius XI and Pius XII also both condemned the woman working outside the home.
There are important qualifiers in the Catechism that you do not seem to be taking into account: "unless compelled by necessity to go out; and she should never presume to leave home without her husband's consent."
Church teaching recognizes that a woman may be compelled by necessity to be outside the home and that her husband may permit this. While the ideal is for women to be at home, it is not as absolute as you were making it sound.
-
Thanks for posting that by the way, Jaynek. :)
Well, someone here doesn't like it. I got a thumbs down for posting it and you got one for thanking me. :rolleyes:
-
Today's sports-crazy world aside, (I agree it's a bit much), women need to exercise, even weights. You may not be sexist but you may misunderstand what it means to be feminine if it's leading you to think women don't need healthy competition and exercise as well (you too SS). That's not a gender thing, that is a human being thing, part of what makes us healthy and happy. Strength training for example helps protect a woman against osteoporosis as she ages. It helps women during pregnancy and in labor when they are strong and in good shape. It helps her have more energy for her daily duties. Most of us would be better wives and mothers in many ways for exercising. It doesn't take away from the traditional role at all. Ideally gyms would not be mixed, but as I said, modern world aside, we need to stay active and at more than just housekeeping in order to be healthy.
Usually I don't agree with the women on here but I have no problem with women being female athletes. I don't think women should life weights though, that is a masculine activity, as is football, basketball, baseball, and boxing. However physical attraction for women is not about the consumeristic tendencies in terms of fashion or the intellectual development but should be about physical beauty and that makes a healthy body come first.
-
Communism is particularly characterized by the rejection of any link that binds the woman to the family and the home, and her emancipation is proclaimed as a basic principle.- Pope Pius XI
That statement could also speak for global capitalism as well which sees women as emancipated from the family and home so that they can become means of production. Anyway yes women should stay in the home and have children.
-
Today's sports-crazy world aside
Well the entertainment values might be a bit much but physical activity I would argue is more important than any intellectual development. The man who cannot defend himself cannot defend his future wife either. There is no need for one who is physically weak while intellectually strong for words or arguments will not back down an opponent.
-
That is not a Catholic mindset. What you just wrote is extremely dangerous, not to mention false. The woman's place is at home PERIOD. The Catechism of the Council of Trent stated this specifically. You should look up what the Church teaches before just writing your opinion.
You're overplaying your hand, as has already been established. Let's be clear, everyone's place is the home. The fact that men have to leave home for 8 to 10 or more hours per day to work is probably just as destructive to the family as mothers doing the same. Distant fathers is a proven contributor to same-sex attraction, for instance. And we needn't recite fully the complaints about dads coming home and expecting to be waited on hand and foot, and contributing little to rearing of the children because that isn't his "territory." It is an overly dichotomous view of home life. The fact that we think the place of the woman is in the home "period," but the man apparently is a globe-trotter is just wrong because it still drive a wedge between the man and the woman, as does the view that both are globe-trotters. Some men may be called to those responsibilities far from home or for long spans of time, but that is not the norm. The clear paradigm is man on the land (breadwinning), and woman with the children. Up to marriage it seems quite reasonable that there could be great latitude in their ability to cultivate skills outside of their parent's home. There are certain things which are proven situations which are good for humanity, like maintaining family homes instead of people single in apartments, but all these circuмstances are not sinful. A former boss of mine was over 40 and single. I can't fault her for wanting to have her own home, but she still is closely tied to her parents and sister, who live near-by. She's not under a man, and that is fine because she isn't trying to break down families. It was just an accident of her life.
I am not going to press this, but I wonder how many of these comments come from people married or who have grown female children. I am not saying you need to have these things to know, but some comments seem to be dictated from a sort of idealistic view with no regard for the reality of woman being actual humans and not abstract concepts. Women are not all the same. They have character and temperament just like men, and some women operate better outside of the physical structure of a home. There is a way to balance their desires with the requirements of benefit to family and society. Women and men should be home-centered.
I don't think women should life weights though, that is a masculine activity, as is football, basketball, baseball, and boxing.
Please explain why these are masculine and not feminine activities.
-
Please explain why these are masculine and not feminine activities.
I see nothing wrong with a woman's basketball team as long as women are on it only but football, baseball, and boxing, along with weight-lifting are definitely masculine. You think that a woman can deal with that sort of exercise? Not to mention that the gender roles should not be interchangeable. That is a Frankfurt School theory.
-
Please explain why these are masculine and not feminine activities.
I see nothing wrong with a woman's basketball team as long as women are on it only but football, baseball, and boxing, along with weight-lifting are definitely masculine. You think that a woman can deal with that sort of exercise? Not to mention that the gender roles should not be interchangeable. That is a Frankfurt School theory.
Good explanation. :laugh1:
-
Good explanation. :laugh1:
Why don't you mind your own business? I think for a REAL MAN it is obvious what sports are masculine and what are feminine.
-
Good explanation. :laugh1:
Why don't you mind your own business? I think for a REAL MAN it is obvious what sports are masculine and what are feminine.
Yes, that must be it, I'm not a real man. I'm one of those androgynous internet disinformation cyborg spies.
I'm genuinely confused by this concept of obvious yet unexplainable concepts. Anyways.
-
Yes, that must be it, I'm not a real man. I'm one of those androgynous internet disinformation cyborg spies.
I'm genuinely confused by this concept of obvious yet unexplainable concepts. Anyways.
Well I thought it WAS obvious that football, baseball, boxing, and weight-lifting were masculine activities or sports. As for the androgyny thing well I have no idea as to your 'masculine tendencies' since the Frankfurt School has created four generations of 'cowardly, feminine men.'
-
Please explain why these are masculine and not feminine activities.
I see nothing wrong with a woman's basketball team as long as women are on it only but football, baseball, and boxing, along with weight-lifting are definitely masculine. You think that a woman can deal with that sort of exercise? Not to mention that the gender roles should not be interchangeable. That is a Frankfurt School theory.
You actually have to have a reason. To just to prod you a bit, if women are playing against women, then would not the amount of exercise they need to deal with be appropriate? But please do explain to me why these are masculine and not feminine activities. You've conceded basketball. What's next?
-
You actually have to have a reason. To just to prod you a bit, if women are playing against women, then would not the amount of exercise they need to deal with be appropriate? But please do explain to me why these are masculine and not feminine activities. You've conceded basketball. What's next?
Nothing. Football, baseball, boxing, and weight-lifting are masculine sports. Hell even our public schools concede as much (though not our Hollywood movies which show the immoral act of women boxing). I mean I thought it obvious that these sports are masculine. As I said though I have no problem with women being physically fit.
-
Dude, the question was why are they masculine? Intuitively and immediately we call such things masculine but the question is now posed "why?"
I'm not disagreeing that those activities have a masculine slant. But I'm echoing the question why? What is it about those behaviors that makes them masculine? "Because they are" isn't an answer.
-
Could YOU imagine women playing football or baseball or boxing? I could not. It would be beyond strange.
-
Dude, the question was why are they masculine? Intuitively and immediately we call such things masculine but the question is now posed "why?"
I'm not disagreeing that those activities have a masculine slant. But I'm echoing the question why? What is it about those behaviors that makes them masculine? "Because they are" isn't an answer.
I see I have to yet again remind you 'dude' that this is a conversation between two people, not including yourself. Masculine sports are epitomized by physical strength, hard blows, and the like, something women cannot take part in which is why those sports are only masculine.
-
:idea:
-
Masculine sports are epitomized by physical strength, hard blows, and the like, something women cannot take part in which is why those sports are only masculine.
Why can't they take part? Women beat rugs and slabs of meat, why not other things?
-
:idea:
Hmm?
-
Why can't they take part? Women beat carpets and slabs of meat, why not other things?
A woman would never beat a man in terms of physical strength I can clue you that. Women are meant to be naturally inferior in terms of physical strength.
-
Why can't they take part? Women beat carpets and slabs of meat, why not other things?
A woman would never beat a man in terms of physical strength I can clue you that. Women are meant to be naturally inferior in terms of physical strength.
Not never. There are wimpy men, and strong women. And a woman on adrenaline can kick around a man any day. Ask a police officer. But what if they are paired against themselves?
-
Dude, the question was why are they masculine? Intuitively and immediately we call such things masculine but the question is now posed "why?"
I'm not disagreeing that those activities have a masculine slant. But I'm echoing the question why? What is it about those behaviors that makes them masculine? "Because they are" isn't an answer.
I see I have to yet again remind you 'dude' that this is a conversation between two people, not including yourself. Masculine sports are epitomized by physical strength, hard blows, and the like, something women cannot take part in which is why those sports are only masculine.
If you don't want people to reply to you, you probably shouldn't post on an internet forum.
-
Not never. There are wimpy men, and strong women. And a woman on adrenaline can kick around a man any day. Ask a police officer. But what if they are paired against themselves?
Oh, okay let me say it again. A REAL MAN would never be beaten by a woman, maybe a wimpy boy would though.
Again you would be okay with two women beating the tar out of eachother? How is that feminine?
-
Trad Guy, this is a public forum, not a private conversation between 2 people.
Baseball is a sport of "hard blows" & "physical strength"?? What kind of baseball are you watching?
Answer the other person's question!
-
Trad Guy, this is a public forum, not a private conversation between 2 people.
Baseball is a sport of "hard blows" & "physical strength"?? What kind of baseball are you watching?
Answer the other person's question!
Calm down.
Baseball has a very 'hard ball' that can give plenty of 'blows' to the head I can clue you that.
-
Not never. There are wimpy men, and strong women. And a woman on adrenaline can kick around a man any day. Ask a police officer. But what if they are paired against themselves?
Oh, okay let me say it again. A REAL MAN would never be beaten by a woman, maybe a wimpy boy would though.
Again you would be okay with two women beating the tar out of eachother? How is that feminine?
You're the one making claims. I want to know genuinely. If we're going to start dictating minute details of women's lives, I figure we should have a reason to give. You seem to be very specific, like certain sports, so I want to be clued into your reasoning. Or is it really just arbitrary?
-
You're the one making claims. I want to know genuinely. If we're going to start dictating minute details of women's lives, I figure we should have a reason to give. You seem to be very specific, like certain sports, so I want to be clued into your reasoning. Or is it really just arbitrary?
I already told you my reasoning, look at the post above you about 4 posts about myself saying that these sports are characterized by a real hardness and toughness not meant for a woman, and I am making no claims just asking you some genuine questions. And yes women should be dictated to for most have leftist leanings that should be kept in check, most of all compassion and 'equality.'
-
You're the one making claims. I want to know genuinely. If we're going to start dictating minute details of women's lives, I figure we should have a reason to give. You seem to be very specific, like certain sports, so I want to be clued into your reasoning. Or is it really just arbitrary?
I already told you my reasoning, look at the post above you about 4 posts about myself saying that these sports are characterized by a real hardness and toughness not meant for a woman, and I am making no claims just asking you some genuine questions. And yes women should be dictated to for most have leftist leanings that should be kept in check, most of all compassion and 'equality.'
Yes, I read what you wrote. You are making new claims, though. And yes you are making claims. "A real hardness and toughness not meant for a woman" is a claim about women. "These sports are characterized by a real hardness and toughness" is another claim about those sports. Why are they not meant for women? Are these sports by their nature "hard" and "tough"?
-
A lot of sports (even if just girl against girl) encourage masculine behavior. Hockey is a good example.
One really unfair thing that has resulted from girls getting into traditionally male sports is that it takes away opportunities for men due to the laws governing athletics at high school and college levels.
Not sure if it has been studied, but from my own anecdotal observation it seems that the athletic females who go beyond tennis etc. tend to become all around tomboys who are highly competitive and want male opportunities in every area of their lives. These probably aren't the girls who are going to want lots of babies or who are fulfilled taking care of their husbands and children, and who enjoy being domestic.
What does Catholic teaching say about womanhood? What qualities should young ladies want to develop? Ability to throw fast pitch all afternoon and order takeout, or to take care of people, run a home etc. ? What lifestyle encourages nurturing and virtuous women?
-
These probably aren't the girls who are going to want lots of babies or who are fulfilled taking care of their husbands and children, and who enjoy being domestic.
What modern women are these days? (no offense) :laugh1:
I guess it depends on the personality of the individual.
-
Yes, I read what you wrote. You are making new claims, though. And yes you are making claims. "A real hardness and toughness not meant for a woman" is a claim about women. "These sports are characterized by a real hardness and toughness" is another claim about those sports. Why are they not meant for women? Are these sports by their nature "hard" and "tough"?
Yes to the last question and these sports are characterized by a manly toughness such as physical violence not meant for a woman. Even in baseball the ball itself can be dangerous. If you've ever been hit in the head by a baseball you know what I'm talking about. In football the defense definitely tries to 'drag down' the opponent, again not something meant for women. And boxing's very characterisitc is physical violence and toughness by pure steel dexterity, not meant for a feminine creature.
-
I see nothing wrong with a woman's basketball team as long as women are on it only but football, baseball, and boxing, along with weight-lifting are definitely masculine. You think that a woman can deal with that sort of exercise? Not to mention that the gender roles should not be interchangeable. That is a Frankfurt School theory.
After researching which exercises would give me the greatest health benefits, I concluded that my fitness routine should include weight lifting. I have bench pressed over 100 pounds. I can dead lift at that weight too. This might not be as much as a man lifts, but it is a significant amount and I can deal with it just fine.
I have not gotten bulky or masculine looking. It gives me firm toned muscles that are not even noticeable in the modest clothing that I habitually wear. My husband, however, notices and is pleased. I would expect just about any man (including "real men") to appreciate a healthy physique in his wife.
I appreciate that exercise gives me more strength and energy to apply to my duties as wife and mother. As well as weight lifting, my fitness routine includes Pilates, walking and cycling.
-
Here's what camogie is like:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9nbJCmoGz8w
And here is what the girls are like:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ooMspWHudY
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y1lhbHjE74o
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U3loiv_9CP4
Seem pretty normal and feminine to me. Maybe it has more to do with the Bigger, Stronger, Faster mentality of Americans.
-
Yes to the last question and these sports are characterized by a manly toughness such as physical violence not meant for a woman. Even in baseball the ball itself can be dangerous. If you've ever been hit in the head by a baseball you know what I'm talking about. In football the defense definitely tries to 'drag down' the opponent, again not something meant for women. And boxing's very characterisitc is physical violence and toughness by pure steel dexterity, not meant for a feminine creature.
Okay, so you have no answer.
-
Good explanation. :laugh1:
Why don't you mind your own business? I think for a REAL MAN it is obvious what sports are masculine and what are feminine.
Another masculine quality is logical thinking. I think for a REAL MAN it is obvious that this is a logical fallacy. Even some women can tell. :laugh1:
-
Yes to the last question and these sports are characterized by a manly toughness such as physical violence not meant for a woman. Even in baseball the ball itself can be dangerous. If you've ever been hit in the head by a baseball you know what I'm talking about. In football the defense definitely tries to 'drag down' the opponent, again not something meant for women. And boxing's very characterisitc is physical violence and toughness by pure steel dexterity, not meant for a feminine creature.
Okay, so you have no answer.
Are these not historically masculine sports? I don't see what the real 'dilemna' is here. I know what characterizes a man. We do not need to have a Frankfurt School babble about the 'indecisiveness' of gender roles.
-
Another masculine quality is logical thinking. I think for a REAL MAN it is obvious that this is a logical fallacy. Even some women can tell. :laugh1:
No just Mith and I don't like eachother personally.
-
Are these not historically masculine sports? I don't see what the real 'dilemna' is here. I know what characterizes a man. We do not need to have a Frankfurt School babble about the 'indecisiveness' of gender roles.
I'm just pressing you, and you don't have real reasons. Is history your reason now? Back people we're historically slaves in the US. We can go on.
-
Are these not historically masculine sports? I don't see what the real 'dilemna' is here. I know what characterizes a man. We do not need to have a Frankfurt School babble about the 'indecisiveness' of gender roles.
Such as...women should exercise but should not take part in the 'man's world.' That summarizes my 'sexist' philosophy.
-
I'm just pressing you, and you don't have real reasons. Is history your reason now? Back people we're historically slaves in the US. We can go on.
I have already told you my reasons? Why are they not 'real?'
-
Another masculine quality is logical thinking. I think for a REAL MAN it is obvious that this is a logical fallacy. Even some women can tell. :laugh1:
No just Mith and I don't like eachother personally.
So you are letting your emotions guide your words? Traditionally women are emotional and men are rational.
-
So you are letting your emotions guide your words? Traditionally women are emotional and men are rational.
Does it really matter this much?
-
So you are letting your emotions guide your words? Traditionally women are emotional and men are rational.
Does it really matter this much?
You seem to think that traditional roles matter a lot when it comes to sports. To be consistent, you should write the way that men traditionally write.
-
You seem to think that traditional roles matter a lot when it comes to sports. To be consistent, you should write the way that men traditionally write.
I have strong opinions on a lot of subjects. You have to be very passionate about your speaking, and rational as well.
-
Dude, the question was why are they masculine? Intuitively and immediately we call such things masculine but the question is now posed "why?"
I'm not disagreeing that those activities have a masculine slant. But I'm echoing the question why? What is it about those behaviors that makes them masculine? "Because they are" isn't an answer.
Masculine sports are sports that draw on or showcase masculine qualities such as competitiveness and risk-taking. It follows that highly competitive, dangerous sports are masculine.
-
You seem to think that traditional roles matter a lot when it comes to sports. To be consistent, you should write the way that men traditionally write.
I have strong opinions on a lot of subjects. You have to be very passionate about your speaking, and rational as well.
Well, you have mastered the passionate part. :laugh1:
-
I'm just pressing you, and you don't have real reasons. Is history your reason now? Back people we're historically slaves in the US. We can go on.
I have already told you my reasons? Why are they not 'real?'
You restate yourself and make new claims without evidence or argument to back them up. Your answer is the perennial "because."
[I am off, if you wish to continue this, I'll read up later today or early tomorrow. God bless,]
-
I see nothing wrong with a woman's basketball team as long as women are on it only but football, baseball, and boxing, along with weight-lifting are definitely masculine. You think that a woman can deal with that sort of exercise? Not to mention that the gender roles should not be interchangeable. That is a Frankfurt School theory.
After researching which exercises would give me the greatest health benefits, I concluded that my fitness routine should include weight lifting. I have bench pressed over 100 pounds. I can dead lift at that weight too. This might not be as much as a man lifts, but it is a significant amount and I can deal with it just fine.
I have not gotten bulky or masculine looking. It gives me firm toned muscles that are not even noticeable in the modest clothing that I habitually wear. My husband, however, notices and is pleased. I would expect just about any man (including "real men") to appreciate a healthy physique in his wife.
I appreciate that exercise gives me more strength and energy to apply to my duties as wife and mother. As well as weight lifting, my fitness routine includes Pilates, walking and cycling.
Some women might enjoy lifting weights as part of their workout, but for a female there is really no health benefit to going beyond 8-10 lb hand weights at the most. A woman can be extremely well toned without ever doing a dead lift. Some women might not bulk, but some do, especially if they don't balance with cardio and watch their calories. For bone health and a toned body light weights are all you need, and resistance bands and exercises that use your own body weight for resistance (pilates/planking) are really the ideal because they promote long, lean muscles which are going to appear more feminine.
Sure, some men want a fit woman, but I hope a younger generation of girls will understand that this can be accomplished without a weight room or excessive exercise. It's the difference between being satisfied with a trim, flat stomach and feeling the need for a defined washboard. You absolutely cannot tell the difference in modest clothing, and as I hope to be entering a season in my life where I'll be having babies, it seems like a selfish waste of time trying to stay ripped.
The same is true for men. Women can appreciate an effort to be healthy and in good shape, but men do not need to be vain about exercise to attract a female. A man's strong demeanor is much more of an attractant, and a sign of "manliness" than any specific physical characteristic. I am not sure if it is because women are wired to be less visual or what the reason is, but strength of behavior in men is paramount when it comes to attractiveness.
-
I see nothing wrong with a woman's basketball team as long as women are on it only but football, baseball, and boxing, along with weight-lifting are definitely masculine. You think that a woman can deal with that sort of exercise? Not to mention that the gender roles should not be interchangeable. That is a Frankfurt School theory.
After researching which exercises would give me the greatest health benefits, I concluded that my fitness routine should include weight lifting. I have bench pressed over 100 pounds. I can dead lift at that weight too. This might not be as much as a man lifts, but it is a significant amount and I can deal with it just fine.
I have not gotten bulky or masculine looking. It gives me firm toned muscles that are not even noticeable in the modest clothing that I habitually wear. My husband, however, notices and is pleased. I would expect just about any man (including "real men") to appreciate a healthy physique in his wife.
I appreciate that exercise gives me more strength and energy to apply to my duties as wife and mother. As well as weight lifting, my fitness routine includes Pilates, walking and cycling.
Longterm strength training will raise your basal testosterone, and you may tend to be more aggressive as a result. You've probably considered this though.
-
Some women might enjoy lifting weights as part of their workout, but for a female there is really no health benefit to going beyond 8-10 lb hand weights at the most. A woman can be extremely well toned without ever doing a dead lift. Some women might not bulk, but some do, especially if they don't balance with cardio and watch their calories. For bone health and a toned body light weights are all you need, and resistance bands and exercises that use your own body weight for resistance (pilates/planking) are really the ideal because they promote long, lean muscles which are going to appear more feminine.
In my research and in discussions with fitness professionals, I have found a consensus that weight lifting does not cause bulking up. We just don't have enough testosterone. That is certainly my personal experience and I see other female weight-lifters at the gym, none of whom are bulky. There is no reason for women to avoid this exercise, although there are other forms of resistance training that can have similar benefits for women who prefer something else.
Sure, some men want a fit woman, but I hope a younger generation of girls will understand that this can be accomplished without a weight room or excessive exercise. It's the difference between being satisfied with a trim, flat stomach and feeling the need for a defined washboard. You absolutely cannot tell the difference in modest clothing, and as I hope to be entering a season in my life where I'll be having babies, it seems like a selfish waste of time trying to stay ripped.
I am at a different stage of life. I am in my 50s and starting to feel the effects of aging. It takes more time and effort to maintain fitness than it did when I was younger. Fortunately, most of my children are grown (my "baby" is eleven) and I have more time to spend on taking care of my health. I'm thinking about staying out of a walker not about staying ripped.
The same is true for men. Women can appreciate an effort to be healthy and in good shape, but men do not need to be vain about exercise to attract a female. A man's strong demeanor is much more of an attractant, and a sign of "manliness" than any specific physical characteristic. I am not sure if it is because women are wired to be less visual or what the reason is, but strength of behavior in men is paramount when it comes to attractiveness.
While I agree that spiritual strength is more important than physical, I was surprised at much I was affected when my husband joined a gym and started working out. I thought he was attractive before but he is even moreso now. I thought I was above such things, but I can really see a difference in how I respond to him. Perhaps this would not happen to women who are more spiritually mature.
-
Longterm strength training will raise your basal testosterone, and you may tend to be more aggressive as a result. You've probably considered this though.
A natural increase in testosterone from exercise is not likely to cause more aggressiveness than I can control. It has the benefit of giving more energy which is something I really need.
-
Church teaching recognizes that a woman may be compelled by necessity to be outside the home and that her husband may permit this. While the ideal is for women to be at home, it is not as absolute as you were making it sound.
I realize there are exceptions, such as if the husband becomes unable to work. But as long as the husband is able to work and has a job, the woman's role is at home.
Women are not all the same. They have character and temperament just like men, and some women operate better outside of the physical structure of a home. There is a way to balance their desires with the requirements of benefit to family and society. Women and men should be home-centered.
You, sir, are a feminist, and I don't care how many liberals thumb me down for saying it. The Church has never said that women can work outside the home based upon their social needs or desires. A woman who puts her desires ahead of the needs of her children is a selfish mother. What you're espousing is a Vatican II mindset.
-
In my research and in discussions with fitness professionals, I have found a consensus that weight lifting does not cause bulking up. We just don't have enough testosterone. That is certainly my personal experience and I see other female weight-lifters at the gym, none of whom are bulky. There is no reason for women to avoid this exercise, although there are other forms of resistance training that can have similar benefits for women who prefer something else.
At a certain point heavy weights will cause some bulking. I'm not saying it is a concern for every woman, and you know what works for you, but it does happen. There are many women who are unnaturally muscular and they got that way by using heavy weights on a regular basis. We don't start out having enough testosterone to be bulky, but as Graham mentioned, testosterone will increase. A woman still in their childbearing years should avoid heavy, repetitive weight lifting for that reason.
I think of people like my Great Grandmother who never formally exercised but stayed fit from doing farm chores/gardening and general housework that used to be more strenuous than it is now. I am unfortunately at a desk a lot, so I need to add in more physical movement in through exercise, but structured heavy lifting is not imperative.
I am at a different stage of life. In am in my 50s and starting to feel the effects of aging. It takes more time and effort to maintain fitness than it did when I was younger. Fortunately, most of my children are grown (my "baby" is eleven) and I have more time to spend on taking care of my health. I'm thinking about staying out of a walker not about staying ripped.
The ripped comment was just a general statement. You certainly gave no impression that your workout choices are just for vanity. :) I was thinking of young women who can easily become obsessed with fitness and think guys will expect a perfectly chiseled physique that goes beyond what any woman would have naturally. The desire for this requires a lot of time and might make her appear selfish or overly vain. It is also can lead to amenorrhea, which isn't healthy or natural. This is especially true for women who run long distances.
While I agree that spiritual strength is more important than physical, I was surprised at much I was affected when my husband joined a gym and started working out. I thought he was attractive before but he is even moreso now. I thought I was above such things, but I can really see a difference in how I respond to him. Perhaps this would not happen to women who are more spiritually mature.
I have a LONG ways to go before I would consider myself spiritually mature, so that's not it for me. :wink: I'm not saying physical attraction isn't necessary, because it is. I just know that for a single gal like myself, (and one with "baggage") the traits and values that would make someone a strong and manly leader of a family are far more important than having a six pack.
-
That is not a Catholic mindset. What you just wrote is extremely dangerous, not to mention false. The woman's place is at home PERIOD. The Catechism of the Council of Trent stated this specifically. You should look up what the Church teaches before just writing your opinion.
You're overplaying your hand, as has already been established. Let's be clear, everyone's place is the home. The fact that men have to leave home for 8 to 10 or more hours per day to work is probably just as destructive to the family as mothers doing the same. Distant fathers is a proven contributor to same-sex attraction, for instance. And we needn't recite fully the complaints about dads coming home and expecting to be waited on hand and foot, and contributing little to rearing of the children because that isn't his "territory." It is an overly dichotomous view of home life. The fact that we think the place of the woman is in the home "period," but the man apparently is a globe-trotter is just wrong because it still drive a wedge between the man and the woman, as does the view that both are globe-trotters. Some men may be called to those responsibilities far from home or for long spans of time, but that is not the norm. The clear paradigm is man on the land (breadwinning), and woman with the children. Up to marriage it seems quite reasonable that there could be great latitude in their ability to cultivate skills outside of their parent's home. There are certain things which are proven situations which are good for humanity, like maintaining family homes instead of people single in apartments, but all these circuмstances are not sinful. A former boss of mine was over 40 and single. I can't fault her for wanting to have her own home, but she still is closely tied to her parents and sister, who live near-by. She's not under a man, and that is fine because she isn't trying to break down families. It was just an accident of her life.
I am not going to press this, but I wonder how many of these comments come from people married or who have grown female children. I am not saying you need to have these things to know, but some comments seem to be dictated from a sort of idealistic view with no regard for the reality of woman being actual humans and not abstract concepts. Women are not all the same. They have character and temperament just like men, and some women operate better outside of the physical structure of a home. There is a way to balance their desires with the requirements of benefit to family and society. Women and men should be home-centered.
There are reasons women might have to work outside the home. As an unwed mother, I have no choice. Additionally the world still needs midwives and secretaries etc. but ideally these positions are either based out of the home, or they are held by single women or married women with grown children. A wife/mother should be at home. A good wife will take it as her job to stretch her husband's income by being a frugal manager of the home and supporting his career, whatever that may be.
This idea that some women operate better outside the home is however, a feminist belief. A woman who says that she is a better person when she works outside the home is prioritizing her own temperament and desires above Catholic teaching about the structure of the family.
No, I am not married and do not have grown children. I have just come to believe (as a woman who has fallen hard and is trying to get back up) that significantly extending female adolescence is bad for women spiritually and bad for society in general. We have gotten to the point where there are years and years (if not decades) between the time a young lady is matured and ready to leave her parents home, and the time she decides she has lived enough and is ready to start a family. Why would God design women and their fertility the way he does if we were not meant to marry young, but are instead better off adding "filler" through college, career development, and extra time for corruption of moral purity? These things have been shown as harmful towards Catholic marriage, so why promote them?
-
At a certain point heavy weights will cause some bulking. I'm not saying it is a concern for every woman, and you know what works for you, but it does happen. There are many women who are unnaturally muscular and they got that way by using heavy weights on a regular basis. We don't start out having enough testosterone to be bulky, but as Graham mentioned, testosterone will increase. A woman still in their childbearing years should avoid heavy, repetitive weight lifting for that reason.
I think of people like my Great Grandmother who never formally exercised but stayed fit from doing farm chores/gardening and general housework that used to be more strenuous than it is now. I am unfortunately at a desk a lot, so I need to add in more physical movement in through exercise, but structured heavy lifting is not imperative.
There is one woman at the gym who is a competitive body builder and she has some bulking but she deliberately works at it. Really hard. I have never heard of it happening accidentally to a woman who is exercising for fitness.
I lift heavy weights because I enjoy it. One important thing to look for in an exercise is that it should be an activity one enjoys. Otherwise it becomes to difficult to keep it up. I agree with you that structured heavy lifting is not imperative, but women should not be afraid to try it and see if it is a good activity for them.
The ripped comment was just a general statement. You certainly gave no impression that your workout choices are just for vanity. :) I was thinking of young women who can easily become obsessed with fitness and think guys will expect a perfectly chiseled physique that goes beyond what any woman would have naturally. The desire for this requires a lot of time and might make her appear selfish or overly vain. It is also can lead to amenorrhea, which isn't healthy or natural. This is especially true for women who run long distances.
There are problems with over-exercising and it has definitely gone too far when it affects one's fertility. Personally, I am more likely to err in not exercising enough so that is the problem that I have given more attention to. There is no question that our culture gives us unreasonable expectations about our bodies and the solution for that is being spiritually grounded enough to resist. Prayer is the foundation for physical fitness that is pursued in a balanced and godly way.
-
This idea that some women operate better outside the home is however, a feminist belief. A woman who says that she is a better person when she works outside the home is prioritizing her own temperament and desires above Catholic teaching about the structure of the family.
I am an example of a woman who is not temperamentally suited to being a stay at home mom. I am an introvert who functions best with lots of silence and alone time. I don't like physical contact with people, am uncomfortable with emotions and have trouble dealing with interruptions or changes to my routine.
I have no regrets that I stayed home with my children rather than fulfilling my temperament. Being a mom does not come easily to me so I have faced constant struggle and failure. And that is exactly what I needed. Also part of my temperament is a tendency to be arrogant and impatient. I needed to be forced to turn to God. I needed to be humbled. I did not need to encourage my temperament but to grow beyond it. I still have the same character flaws but I do not think I could have made any progress in overcoming them if I had not accepted the challenge of staying home. I might have become even worse.
-
What are some good, feminine activities that women can do that are a lot of fun and wholesome?
These are not just for women but quilting, knitting, crochet, cake decorating, baking, soap making, weaving, cross stitching, designing patterns, spinning, jewlery making, making dresses, pottery, scrapbooking, musical instruments, singing, teaching others these crafts.
-
Im also bothered when I work out at the local gym by my house. Since when did women lift weights? I don't get it.
I don't have a problem with women strength training. A woman's hormones will not allow her to get that "little man" look. The women who look like that are lifting for a long time each day and taking steroids. IMO there is nothing unfeminine about strenth training as part of fitness. As you get older you loose muscle, some resistance training helps you keep muscle.
I strength train, and I'm nowhere close to having that body builder look as a 3x, LOL. I do free weights and I attend an aquatic fitness class where we use water weights.
I don't agree with doing a bikini competition but I don't see how performing weight lifting exercises as part of fitness is intrinsically unfeminine.
-
I see nothing wrong with a woman's basketball team as long as women are on it only but football, baseball, and boxing, along with weight-lifting are definitely masculine. You think that a woman can deal with that sort of exercise? Not to mention that the gender roles should not be interchangeable. That is a Frankfurt School theory.
After researching which exercises would give me the greatest health benefits, I concluded that my fitness routine should include weight lifting. I have bench pressed over 100 pounds. I can dead lift at that weight too. This might not be as much as a man lifts, but it is a significant amount and I can deal with it just fine.
I have not gotten bulky or masculine looking. It gives me firm toned muscles that are not even noticeable in the modest clothing that I habitually wear. My husband, however, notices and is pleased. I would expect just about any man (including "real men") to appreciate a healthy physique in his wife.
I appreciate that exercise gives me more strength and energy to apply to my duties as wife and mother. As well as weight lifting, my fitness routine includes Pilates, walking and cycling.
Where I workout the weight room is full with plus sized grandmas. The last time I saw a woman that looked like a muscular "little man" was at a Ladies Gym a few years ago. Her voice was low and I'm sure she took steroids.
-
I see nothing wrong with a woman's basketball team as long as women are on it only but football, baseball, and boxing, along with weight-lifting are definitely masculine. You think that a woman can deal with that sort of exercise? Not to mention that the gender roles should not be interchangeable. That is a Frankfurt School theory.
After researching which exercises would give me the greatest health benefits, I concluded that my fitness routine should include weight lifting. I have bench pressed over 100 pounds. I can dead lift at that weight too. This might not be as much as a man lifts, but it is a significant amount and I can deal with it just fine.
I have not gotten bulky or masculine looking. It gives me firm toned muscles that are not even noticeable in the modest clothing that I habitually wear. My husband, however, notices and is pleased. I would expect just about any man (including "real men") to appreciate a healthy physique in his wife.
I appreciate that exercise gives me more strength and energy to apply to my duties as wife and mother. As well as weight lifting, my fitness routine includes Pilates, walking and cycling.
Where I workout the weight room is full with plus sized grandmas. The last time I saw a woman that looked like a muscular "little man" was at a Ladies Gym a few years ago. Her voice was low and I'm sure she took steroids.
see it a lot, all types, some biker looking, some big gals, some one has to divert ones eyes from.......starting to like the idea of men-only gyms, a lot less fluff and no temptations, at least, from normal, militant straight guys......
-
I think gyms shoudl be divded by sex too. Unfortunately I don't have a ladies gym available to me.
-
Longterm strength training will raise your basal testosterone, and you may tend to be more aggressive as a result. You've probably considered this though.
A natural increase in testosterone from exercise is not likely to cause more aggressiveness than I can control. It has the benefit of giving more energy which is something I really need.
Well, I'm not talking about momentary spurts of anger, the issue would be becoming a basically more masculine woman over time without noticing it. It is part of the basic issue with women going into manly sports like football or strength training.
-
I think gyms shoudl be divded by sex too. Unfortunately I don't have a ladies gym available to me.
nor men-only for me....we then have to do what we can and as I have been sick and not able to go for 2 weeks, getting really out of shape quick......wish this crud would depart and drink the poison somewhere else :laugh1: ,hate to have to build back up.....and lose ground....
-
You, sir, are a feminist, and I don't care how many liberals thumb me down for saying it. The Church has never said that women can work outside the home based upon their social needs or desires. A woman who puts her desires ahead of the needs of her children is a selfish mother. What you're espousing is a Vatican II mindset.
...
This idea that some women operate better outside the home is however, a feminist belief. A woman who says that she is a better person when she works outside the home is prioritizing her own temperament and desires above Catholic teaching about the structure of the family.
I don't recall saying those things. You are reading into what I said. I never presented a woman working outside of the home in neglect of her children. Please read my posts and you'll see that. Furthermore, I said both men and women should (ideally) be home. The fact that nuns were out teaching in schools shows that women were not bound to the four walls of their home. Any occupation of married women which draws them away from their children, without serious need, I would consider immoral and should be corrected ASAP. As for women without children, I don't see compelling teaching that these women are bound to work only in the home. The Church does not teach that either. Think about midwives and the many occupations women did which were out and about. Lastly, I don't recall VII saying anything women being liberated from the home, putting her desires over the children's, unless I missed that. My mindset is thoroughly Catholic, and if I am shown to be out of step with the Church, or secular data shows that certain things are destructive to Christ's ends, then I will adjust accordingly.
I have just come to believe (as a woman who has fallen hard and is trying to get back up) that significantly extending female adolescence is bad for women spiritually and bad for society in general. We have gotten to the point where there are years and years (if not decades) between the time a young lady is matured and ready to leave her parents home, and the time she decides she has lived enough and is ready to start a family. Why would God design women and their fertility the way he does if we were not meant to marry young, but are instead better off adding "filler" through college, career development, and extra time for corruption of moral purity? These things have been shown as harmful towards Catholic marriage, so why promote them?
I don't see the connection between a single woman working and/or going to college, and the current trend to delay marriage and family. I know a wonderful trad couple that is getting married soon. The young lady (19 years old) will eventually stop school and work as they transfer into a family. I think that a lot of this has to do with how one is raised, and the priorities taught to them about life. Obviously some people don't find mates, but others sit on their hands and date, or worse co-habitate, and put off marriage and kids. I am not for this. And I simply think that a work life outside the house has no real connection to that trend. Men have this trend even more. I think it is about maturity and about setting clear priorities in life. The minute I found my wife, we got married in less than six months. Some may say that is rash, but my priest approved (he knew us both), and I didn't see any need to waste time. Catholics who are serious about loving God and doing His will don't have the conflict you're talking about. I think it is rooted deeper. A lot these issues with women and the home are solved when you solve the major issue of what you believe. I think most women actually want to settle at home with a family, so that solves most of the problem there.
-
I don't agree with doing a bikini competition but I don't see how performing weight lifting exercises as part of fitness is intrinsically unfeminine.
I don't think there is anything at all wrong with strength training. It is an important part of fitness, as cardio alone with no muscle resistance is useless. That is why so many women can go to Zumba 3 nights a week and never lose a pound. You do need weight bearing exercises, and I don't think anyone has said otherwise.
It's just a matter of opinion as to how best to accomplish it. To some, it seems unfeminine to be doing squats with a big barbell. If it is just for health and general fitness and toning then hand weights, a kettle ball, and resistance bands are more than sufficient and can be done in the privacy of your own home.
I apologize if my opinion has offended any female lifters. Even some very modern men aren't big into women hanging out in a weight room and lifting big weights, the same way (despite their modernism) they aren't advocating for women NFL players. It is just a matter of preference and feeling as to what is or is not feminine. Plyometrics probably aren't very feminine either, so I am examining those workouts myself.
Hormones should be considered to. If you ask a secular trainer about testosterone from long term strength training they will likely dismiss your concerns. Just keep in mind, those are the same people who would tell you that birth control pills aren't bad for you either. It is the repetitive nature of stress lifting that can pull things out of balance when lactic acid stimulates hormones. The whole modern fitness movement is hardly worried about a woman's fertility or her behavior when hormonal balance is tipped.
-
You, sir, are a feminist, and I don't care how many liberals thumb me down for saying it. The Church has never said that women can work outside the home based upon their social needs or desires. A woman who puts her desires ahead of the needs of her children is a selfish mother. What you're espousing is a Vatican II mindset.
...
This idea that some women operate better outside the home is however, a feminist belief. A woman who says that she is a better person when she works outside the home is prioritizing her own temperament and desires above Catholic teaching about the structure of the family.
I don't recall saying those things. You are reading into what I said. I never presented a woman working outside of the home in neglect of her children. Please read my posts and you'll see that. Furthermore, I said both men and women should (ideally) be home. The fact that nuns were out teaching in schools shows that women were not bound to the four walls of their home. Any occupation of married women which draws them away from their children, without serious need, I would consider immoral and should be corrected ASAP. As for women without children, I don't see compelling teaching that these women are bound to work only in the home. The Church does not teach that either. Think about midwives and the many occupations women did which were out and about. Lastly, I don't recall VII saying anything women being liberated from the home, putting her desires over the children's, unless I missed that. My mindset is thoroughly Catholic, and if I am shown to be out of step with the Church, or secular data shows that certain things are destructive to Christ's ends, then I will adjust accordingly.
I have just come to believe (as a woman who has fallen hard and is trying to get back up) that significantly extending female adolescence is bad for women spiritually and bad for society in general. We have gotten to the point where there are years and years (if not decades) between the time a young lady is matured and ready to leave her parents home, and the time she decides she has lived enough and is ready to start a family. Why would God design women and their fertility the way he does if we were not meant to marry young, but are instead better off adding "filler" through college, career development, and extra time for corruption of moral purity? These things have been shown as harmful towards Catholic marriage, so why promote them?
I don't see the connection between a single woman working and/or going to college, and the current trend to delay marriage and family. I know a wonderful trad couple that is getting married soon. The young lady (19 years old) will eventually stop school and work as they transfer into a family. I think that a lot of this has to do with how one is raised, and the priorities taught to them about life. Obviously some people don't find mates, but others sit on their hands and date, or worse co-habitate, and put off marriage and kids. I am not for this. And I simply think that a work life outside the house has no real connection to that trend. Men have this trend even more. I think it is about maturity and about setting clear priorities in life. The minute I found my wife, we got married in less than six months. Some may say that is rash, but my priest approved (he knew us both), and I didn't see any need to waste time. Catholics who are serious about loving God and doing His will don't have the conflict you're talking about. I think it is rooted deeper. A lot these issues with women and the home are solved when you solve the major issue of what you believe. I think most women actually want to settle at home with a family, so that solves most of the problem there.
I would like to kindly point out that you misquoted me in the first quote. That first paragraph is not mine.
-
(*too not to in a previous post)
I don't see the connection between a single woman working and/or going to college, and the current trend to delay marriage and family.
College is expensive. If you are planning to marry and raise children it is a lot of debt for nothing. Very few institutions are going to provide the type of education a Catholic should want. My first day of Philosophy class the professor presented an argument for the morality of infanticide. Not just abortion, but the suffocating of newborns as a means to fight poverty. Even many "Catholic" colleges have liberal American-Jesuit professors who think they are above dogma and tell everyone to follow their heart or their poorly calibrated conscience. Their collar is meaningless. If they even bother to put it on, that is.
An 18 year old woman has little to gain from that environment and so much to lose. That doesn't mean she can't read, study, travel, and learn and perfect her domestic skills, all while still living at home and praying for marriage.
We will just have to agree to disagree. I may be a little biased and bitter.
-
I think gyms shoudl be divded by sex too. Unfortunately I don't have a ladies gym available to me.
nor men-only for me....we then have to do what we can and as I have been sick and not able to go for 2 weeks, getting really out of shape quick......wish this crud would depart and drink the poison somewhere else :laugh1: ,hate to have to build back up.....and lose ground....
Hope you feel better soon.
-
I would like to kindly point out that you misquoted me in the first quote. That first paragraph is not mine.
I apologize for the mix-up.
-
(*too not to in a previous post)
I don't see the connection between a single woman working and/or going to college, and the current trend to delay marriage and family.
College is expensive. If you are planning to marry and raise children it is a lot of debt for nothing. Very few institutions are going to provide the type of education a Catholic should want. My first day of Philosophy class the professor presented an argument for the morality of infanticide. Not just abortion, but the suffocating of newborns as a means to fight poverty. Even many "Catholic" colleges have liberal American-Jesuit professors who think they are above dogma and tell everyone to follow their heart or their poorly calibrated conscience. Their collar is meaningless. If they even bother to put it on, that is.
An 18 year old woman has little to gain from that environment and so much to lose. That doesn't mean she can't read, study, travel, and learn and perfect her domestic skills, all while still living at home and praying for marriage.
We will just have to agree to disagree. I may be a little biased and bitter.
I don't disagree with you. I am not saying people have to do these things. And I would never advise a woman to make dumb decisions because she feels like she needs to go to college or something. We need to make wise decisions. I don't think women who do not have familial responsibilities should be categorically excluded.
-
Another masculine quality is logical thinking. I think for a REAL MAN it is obvious that this is a logical fallacy. Even some women can tell. :laugh1:
No just Mith and I don't like eachother personally.
Actually, tradguy, I haven't an opinion on you "personally." But I'm bothered and annoyed at your unfailing and invariable manner of posting which consists of making (usually outrageous) claims that you can't logically justify. Attempts that you DO make to justify your claims involve you writing off people who disagree with you as liberals or feminists and drastically shifting the goalposts. I find many of your posts to be disingenuous and not motivated by any real interest in anything other than blindly and bluntly enforcing the same thoughts that you continually fail to justify.
-
Longterm strength training will raise your basal testosterone, and you may tend to be more aggressive as a result. You've probably considered this though.
A natural increase in testosterone from exercise is not likely to cause more aggressiveness than I can control. It has the benefit of giving more energy which is something I really need.
Well, I'm not talking about momentary spurts of anger, the issue would be becoming a basically more masculine woman over time without noticing it. It is part of the basic issue with women going into manly sports like football or strength training.
I haven't come across anything about this. Could you please link to some sources or cite some research so I can look into this further?
Competitive, violent sports like football train women to develop those qualities. I think they are inappropriate for women for that reason. I have not heard about them affecting hormones, but I never seriously considered them so I have not looked into them.
Women (and men) need some kind of strength training as they age in order to maintain health. Without it we become susceptible to debilitating weakness, brittle bones, obesity and many other illnesses. Much of what is commonly thought of as "normal" problems of aging is actually due to lack of proper exercise. (And much is due to unhealthy diet.) I have come across information about strength training affecting hormones but not in a negative way, unless it is a situation of over-training.
-
It's just a matter of opinion as to how best to accomplish it. To some, it seems unfeminine to be doing squats with a big barbell. If it is just for health and general fitness and toning then hand weights, a kettle ball, and resistance bands are more than sufficient and can be done in the privacy of your own home.
I apologize if my opinion has offended any female lifters. Even some very modern men aren't big into women hanging out in a weight room and lifting big weights, the same way (despite their modernism) they aren't advocating for women NFL players. It is just a matter of preference and feeling as to what is or is not feminine. Plyometrics probably aren't very feminine either, so I am examining those workouts myself.
Speaking for myself, I am not offended. You have a right to your opinions and you express yourself reasonably and courteously.
-
Excercise is good. It is better then being out of shape and overweight.
Everything in moderation.
Yes, as women we would should make our home our priority.
Anyone watching the Olympics?
Go team USA
-
I would like to kindly point out that you misquoted me in the first quote. That first paragraph is not mine.
I apologize for the mix-up.
No big deal. :)
Could YOU imagine women playing football or baseball or boxing? I could not. It would be beyond strange.
Hey, didn't they have a powder-puff game during homecoming week at your school? :smile:
I guess the public schools around here have stopped calling it powder-puff because it is sexist. Pretty soon it won't even exist.
-
Excercise is good. It is better then being out of shape and overweight.
Everything in moderation.
Yes, as women we would should make our home our priority.
Anyone watching the Olympics?
Go team USA
True, woemn are better in the home and Church if they are in shape and thin. easier to have children and keep up with them......that said, would agree that butchy-types need not be. Some women I see at gym and elsewhere working out to much, looking and acting too manish.....likely too many male hormones flowing and supplemented......
-
Hey, didn't they have a powder-puff game during homecoming week at your school? :smile:
I guess the public schools around here have stopped calling it powder-puff because it is sexist. Pretty soon it won't even exist.
Ugh don't remind me. :tv-disturbed:
Most of the guys laughed that off anyway, as something the girls couldn't do.
And considering that there is sex education, even for kindergarteners :tv-disturbed: the public school is a catechism for the Frankfurt School and the counterculture.
-
College is expensive. If you are planning to marry and raise children it is a lot of debt for nothing. Very few institutions are going to provide the type of education a Catholic should want. My first day of Philosophy class the professor presented an argument for the morality of infanticide. Not just abortion, but the suffocating of newborns as a means to fight poverty. Even many "Catholic" colleges have liberal American-Jesuit professors who think they are above dogma and tell everyone to follow their heart or their poorly calibrated conscience. Their collar is meaningless. If they even bother to put it on, that is.
An 18 year old woman has little to gain from that environment and so much to lose. That doesn't mean she can't read, study, travel, and learn and perfect her domestic skills, all while still living at home and praying for marriage.
We will just have to agree to disagree. I may be a little biased and bitter.
I'd like to add to your post that a career leads to a woman definitely holding off marriage, thinking she has the 'good life' now with the money and doesn't need a man to support her. Even worse under affirmative action women will get the job over men so a man wanting to start a family will be stripped of his duties and responsibilities by women holding jobs.
-
Longterm strength training will raise your basal testosterone, and you may tend to be more aggressive as a result. You've probably considered this though.
A natural increase in testosterone from exercise is not likely to cause more aggressiveness than I can control. It has the benefit of giving more energy which is something I really need.
Well, I'm not talking about momentary spurts of anger, the issue would be becoming a basically more masculine woman over time without noticing it. It is part of the basic issue with women going into manly sports like football or strength training.
I haven't come across anything about this. Could you please link to some sources or cite some research so I can look into this further?
Competitive, violent sports like football train women to develop those qualities. I think they are inappropriate for women for that reason. I have not heard about them affecting hormones, but I never seriously considered them so I have not looked into them.
Although it is true that the body responds to different requirements by raising and lowering different hormones (and this should be obvious once you consider it), within limits of course, I think you misunderstood what I'm saying. The issue is a woman becoming basically more masculine through sport, whether this is due to an increase in basal testosterone or a more violent attitude or both.
Women (and men) need some kind of strength training as they age in order to maintain health. Without it we become susceptible to debilitating weakness, brittle bones, obesity and many other illnesses. Much of what is commonly thought of as "normal" problems of aging is actually due to lack of proper exercise. (And much is due to unhealthy diet.) I have come across information about strength training affecting hormones but not in a negative way, unless it is a situation of over-training.
I don't disagree, and I'm at fault for using the term strength training incorrectly. I was referring to doing heavy compound lifts, which raise testosterone levels the most.
-
Hey, didn't they have a powder-puff game during homecoming week at your school? :smile:
I guess the public schools around here have stopped calling it powder-puff because it is sexist. Pretty soon it won't even exist.
Ugh don't remind me. :tv-disturbed:
Most of the guys laughed that off anyway, as something the girls couldn't do.
And considering that there is sex education, even for kindergarteners :tv-disturbed: the public school is a catechism for the Frankfurt School and the counterculture.
Sex education for kindergartners???!! That is so sick.
-
Sex education for kindergartners???!! That is so sick.
Hmm mmm. Found out that little "bag of joy" when my little sister came home one day talking about her privates from the public school.
It goes right back to Georg Lukacs and his "cultural Marxist terrorism" of supporting "sex education" for children.
-
Although it is true that the body responds to different requirements by raising and lowering different hormones (and this should be obvious once you consider it), within limits of course, I think you misunderstood what I'm saying. The issue is a woman becoming basically more masculine through sport, whether this is due to an increase in basal testosterone or a more violent attitude or both.
I can follow your reasoning concerning violent attitude, but your statements regarding hormones are different enough from what I learned about this that I am puzzled. I'm wondering if your comments about basal testosterone refer to younger women. Most of my reading was focused on women my own age. For us, we face drastic hormone changes, whether we exercise or not, when we naturally lose our fertility. As I understand it, the hormone changes induced by weight lifting merely offset the hormone changes of menopause and so reduce its unpleasant symptoms. I can't recall seeing anything that suggested the hormone changes from weight lifting make an post-menopausal woman more masculine. I am far from being an expert on this, so I am willing to re-examine this if you can suggest further reading to me.
-
technical difficulties caused double post
-
Sex education for kindergartners???!! That is so sick.
Hmm mmm. Found out that little "bag of joy" when my little sister came home one day talking about her privates from the public school.
It goes right back to Georg Lukacs and his "cultural Marxist terrorism" of supporting "sex education" for children.
In other threads you have no problems with public school though? You go so far to take issue with trad Catholics who are critical of public schools too.
What is even sicker is the same publishing companies that published a pedophile book also published the books for the young children attempting to present sodomites as normal family units. Heather Has Two _____ was one book.
-
what Trad Catholic would have no problems with public schools?????? :shocked:
said persons would either have a real lack of discernment, lack of research or not really overly trad, but merely, using name.... :confused1:
-
I'd like to add to your post that a career leads to a woman definitely holding off marriage, thinking she has the 'good life' now with the money and doesn't need a man to support her. Even worse under affirmative action women will get the job over men so a man wanting to start a family will be stripped of his duties and responsibilities by women holding jobs.
Very true. Just think how much the economy could improve and how the unemployment rate would fall if more mothers stayed home. It's a lifestyle thing though. Materialism corrupts many. This why I'm leaning towards not chasing a promotion that could go to a man trying to keep his wife at home with the kids. I have to work no matter what, but a new position might make the difference for another family.
-
Real wages have been falling since 1973. So part of the reason was necessity, if the standard of living was going to be maintained.
"Real wages never recovered their pre-1973 recession peak. As wages dropped through the decades, the number of people in an average household that had to work—in order to make ends meet—increased."
Source: http://www.shadowstats.com/article/no-414-hyperinflation-special-report-2012 (http://www.shadowstats.com/article/no-414-hyperinflation-special-report-2012)
(http://www.shadowstats.com/imgs/2012/717/image022.gif)
-
I always wonder what constitutes "making ends meet."
I can't help but laugh when I read all the news articles about what it costs to have a baby. When you look at the breakdown it is ridiculously over inflated. They often calculate outrageous amounts for clothing and baby equipment. They never consider breastfeeding,cloth diapers, shopping the clearance rack for the opposite season or going to thrift stores and garage sales. They don't consider that you can buy 2-3 year old baby gear (most of which you don't need anyway) that has only been used by 1-2 kids, for a fraction of the price on Craig's list.
Babies are obviously only one category of expenses, but I would imagine there are other areas where cost of living is based on a very cushy version of making ends meet.
Many dual income families put so much towards daycare and dual student loans that it just doesn't seem to make much sense to have the mother work.
Sadly, women do takes jobs from men and it breaks down the whole family model.
-
what Trad Catholic would have no problems with public schools?????? :shocked:
She is taking what I said out of context. I have made my criticism of public schools well known.
-
Real wages have been falling since 1973. So part of the reason was necessity, if the standard of living was going to be maintained.
"Real wages never recovered their pre-1973 recession peak. As wages dropped through the decades, the number of people in an average household that had to work—in order to make ends meet—increased."
Source: http://www.shadowstats.com/article/no-414-hyperinflation-special-report-2012 (http://www.shadowstats.com/article/no-414-hyperinflation-special-report-2012)
(http://www.shadowstats.com/imgs/2012/717/image022.gif)
And why have real wages fallen? Because of free trade destroying our manufactoring base and the "family living wage" being destroyed.
-
Heather Has Two _____ was one book.
Yes a very vile book. Moms are the front lines in this culture war. She is the one who goes to the school board to protest this stuff or cuts off the TV when something vile comes on.
-
Very true. Just think how much the economy could improve and how the unemployment rate would fall if more mothers stayed home. It's a lifestyle thing though. Materialism corrupts many. This why I'm leaning towards not chasing a promotion that could go to a man trying to keep his wife at home with the kids. I have to work no matter what, but a new position might make the difference for another family.
What's even more sad is that conservatism used to be about traditional values. Now all it cares about is money and what the corporations want. My how the movement has fallen.
-
Very true. Just think how much the economy could improve and how the unemployment rate would fall if more mothers stayed home. It's a lifestyle thing though. Materialism corrupts many. This why I'm leaning towards not chasing a promotion that could go to a man trying to keep his wife at home with the kids. I have to work no matter what, but a new position might make the difference for another family.
What's even more sad is that conservatism used to be about traditional values. Now all it cares about is money and what the corporations want. My how the movement has fallen.
conservatives put a line in the sand, then the water washes it away or, they re-draw it.......RL Dabney had a great quote on it, for a Prot:
"Conservatism's history has been that it demurs to each aggression of the progressive party, and aims to save its credit by a respectable amount of growling, but always acquiesces at last in the innovation. What was the resisted novelty of yesterday is today one of the accepted principles of conservatism; it is now conservative only in affecting to resist the next innovation, which will tomorrow be forced upon its timidity and will be succeeded by some third revolution, to be denounced and then adopted in its turn. American conservatism is merely the shadow that follows Radicalism as it moves forward to perdition. It remains behind it, but never retards it, and always advances near its leader. This pretended salt hath utterly lost its savor: wherewith shall it be salted? Its impotency is not hard to explain. It is worthless because it is the conservatism of expediency only, and not of sturdy principle. It tends to risk nothing serious for the sake of truth."
-
what Trad Catholic would have no problems with public schools?????? :shocked:
She is taking what I said out of context. I have made my criticism of public schools well known.
ok :smile:
-
BTW, after seeral weeks on sick and recovery list, went bac kto teh gym-went last week, but made me almost relapse.
Result, plenty of women in skimpy and tight clothing that made thingsa bit distracting, mainly listened to music and focused on exercises and the TV occ.......thankfully, no Faux news or etc.Really, lost a lot just those few weeks in progress to stamina, strength......
-
conservatives put a line in the sand, then the water washes it away or, they re-draw it.......RL Dabney had a great quote on it, for a Prot:
"Conservatism's history has been that it demurs to each aggression of the progressive party, and aims to save its credit by a respectable amount of growling, but always acquiesces at last in the innovation. What was the resisted novelty of yesterday is today one of the accepted principles of conservatism; it is now conservative only in affecting to resist the next innovation, which will tomorrow be forced upon its timidity and will be succeeded by some third revolution, to be denounced and then adopted in its turn. American conservatism is merely the shadow that follows Radicalism as it moves forward to perdition. It remains behind it, but never retards it, and always advances near its leader. This pretended salt hath utterly lost its savor: wherewith shall it be salted? Its impotency is not hard to explain. It is worthless because it is the conservatism of expediency only, and not of sturdy principle. It tends to risk nothing serious for the sake of truth."
I guess it depends on what "conservatism" you are referring to. I consider myself an old school, traditional conservative. But you know the biggest reason the Right consistently fails is that members from the Left have converted the Right to their liberal and Trotskyite ideology.
-
Too many Catholics I think take secular labels, when conservatism is a part of liberal Enlightenment, a false opposition to a false liberalism, two sides of same Enlightenment coin.
I am a "C" I tell people, Catholic. Hence, views on war, economics,etc are Catholic and not always in line with either Party in power, nor little boxes we are often put in.......
-
Heather Has Two _____ was one book.
Yes a very vile book. Moms are the front lines in this culture war. She is the one who goes to the school board to protest this stuff or cuts off the TV when something vile comes on.
As far as public school and tv things are beyond a point where a parent could just stop 1 thing here and there to keep the evil out.
I don't believe it should women but men should be going before the school board or protesting what is aired on tv but not because they have children in the school or own a tv.