Strength and Honor: Triumphing over Feminism

[Wrangler]

Oh Wrangler! It took me a little while to respond because something really bothered me about men wanting a peaceful fertile partner… it is the fertile part that got me. What if she can’t bear physical children at all?

Perhaps what bothered you so much about the post is how it exploded the myth of equality. A infertile partner is not equal to a fertile partner. (@Pancho Frijoles.)

I watched a vid a few weeks ago that explored several vids that women made shaming men for having standards - standards that not all women will equally pass. It must be understood that both women and men have preferences in who their partner is - and that's OK. Charles Darwin wrote a book, I forget the title but it is about how females choose partners in the animal kingdom. The saying is men compete and women choose.

Among humans, men also choose and that must be a bit unsettling to go from a mindset of sitting on the throne selecting, fully confident you will walk away a winner, from being off the throne, being judged and possibly rejected. Rejection is scary for us all.

But she is a fertile partner in the grace of God where she is ready to conceive and bear Fruit unto God …would she also be considered a fertile partner?

No. My comment was literal not figurative. (Not equal @Pancho Frijoles )

By the worlds standards her fertility may not be too attractive but considering peaceful is a part of that fertility …she might might make a good peaceful fertile partner? Even though she isn’t fertile to have physical children. Or can’t any longer such as Sarah… whose womb was dead. Going to have to think about that one.

Again, no. Peaceful and fertile are independent. The world's biggest shrew can be fertile. And the most peaceful women could be infertile.

This reminds me of hiring someone. I made this comment the other day. You or another person could be wonderful in every way but don't know anything about quantum mechanics.

The first requirement for the job is knowing quantum mechanics. So, one goes about the selection process, not starting from the list of all the wonderful people but from those who know quantum mechanics (or who is fertile).

Our society has foolishly rejected the notion of absolutes. While compatibility may be a matter of degree. Other things, like fertility, are absolute - at least during a specific time interval. And I have no question it is the same for women. Most women will prefer a rich guy even if compatibility is low. This also goes against feminism and the name of this dynamic is called hypergamy. Both, hypergamy and fertility, are survival strategies. Feminism is an evil ideology that leads to unhappiness, if not death.

 

[VictoryinJesus]

Perhaps what bothered you so much about the post is how it exploded the myth of equality. A infertile partner is not equal to a fertile partner. (@Pancho Frijoles.)

I don’t think so. you don’t know me. I grew up having this idea God sees women as only cattle. Like a possession. Nothing more than livestock where one may, yes, walk by to see which is the best cattle of the bunch. I can’t explain to you my messed up head on how I thought God viewed women. Because of this I thought people were crazy to say Jesus loved women. What bothered me about men looking for a fertile partner was not women’s equality with men(or fighting to have it)…but being viewed by how well a woman’s reproductive organs function, and not her heart.

Again, no. Peaceful and fertile are independent.

Are they? Tell that to the fertile ground that received the seed and bears Fruit unto God, peace being a part of that Fruit.

The world's biggest shrew can be fertile

To what end? Would you marry her (a shrew)and find “peace” and “a fertile partner”?

And the most peaceful women could be infertile.

Exactly. But not infertile towards God.

Most women will prefer a rich guy even if compatibility is low.

I’ve heard that called having daddy issues. It comes from brokenness and fatherless seeking for something…not always seeking for equality but something that satisfies.

 

[VictoryinJesus]

A infertile partner is not equal to a fertile partner. (@Pancho Frijoles.)

You are still missing the point.
That is a crazy statement to me “an infertile partner is not equal to a fertile partner.”

That is comparing two things from a world view. Unless I misunderstood it’s the same as saying “women who can’t have children is not equal to women who can have children.”

If that was the intent. How absurd! (Imo) I’m menopausal (just so you know). I appears my child bearing days are long gone. BUT what I hear in His Word is I may (still yet) be in my prime for bearing (Fruit) children unto God. That is what I hear …not to be heartbroken as if the womb is shut and is now dead because God can cause birth well into old age. Going far beyond what the physical body can not do, bringing forth children (Fruit) unto God. That is not infertile. And any woman that is not about to bear physical children, God can do the impossible that she bears spiritual children making her called fruitful in His eyes.

Paul spoke on fatherhood —and children—-but he wasn’t speaking in terms of where he found a woman with fertile ground to insert or pour his seed (Christ) into. An infertile partner(with the spirit of God) is far superior to a fertile partner (without the Spirit of God) in this one thing. Haven’t your read he was a tender plant, a root in dry ground?

 

[Wrangler]

I’ve heard that called having daddy issues.

No, I don't think so. Again, it is a survival strategy. Which mate is more likely to provide enough resources for your offspring to survive; the poor man or the rich man, all other things being equal?

 

[Wrangler]

You are still missing the point.
That is a crazy statement to me “an infertile partner is not equal to a fertile partner.”

We are making 2 different points. You keep wanting the conversation to steer away from the value of a fertile women to men seeking such marital relationships. I keep wanting to steer the conversation away from the spiritual and keep it soul full.

The statement you hold as crazy is as fundamental to someone in the car market, "A car with a well tuned engine is not equal to a car with an engine that does not run at all." Rational people don't buy products that don't work as designed.

My wife and I have 18 grandchildren and past the days of making babies ourselves. I, for one, am no longer in that market but your personal situaion or my personal situation does not change how feminism is a negative force in the world, right?

 

[VictoryinJesus]

We are making 2 different points. You keep wanting the conversation to steer away from the value of a fertile women to men seeking such marital relationships. I keep wanting to steer the conversation away from the spiritual and keep it soul full.

The statement you hold as crazy is as fundamental to someone in the car market, "A car with a well tuned engine is not equal to a car with an engine that does not run at all." Rational people don't buy products that don't work as designed.

My wife and I have 18 grandchildren and past the days of making babies ourselves. I, for one, am no longer in that market but your personal situaion or my personal situation does not change how feminism is a negative force in the world, right?

Ok. I’m not sure why it’s crucial to steer it away from one to the other. I’m just glad you can tell the difference. That’s all.

That’s A LOT of grandbabies!

 

[VictoryinJesus]

The statement you hold as crazy is as fundamental to someone in the car market, "A car with a well tuned engine is not equal to a car with an engine that does not run at all." Rational people don't buy products that don't work as designed.

Reminds me of “why buy the cow when you are getting the milk for free.”

 

[Wrangler]

Reminds me of “why buy the cow when you are getting the milk for free.”

Ha! Continuing that analogy, why buy the cow if it doesn’t produce milk?

 

[VictoryinJesus]

Ha! Continuing that analogy, why buy the cow if it doesn’t produce milk?

no comment. I’m keeping my mouth shut.

 

[Wrangler]

Ok. I’m not sure why it’s crucial to steer it away from one to the other. I’m just glad you can tell the difference. That’s all.

That’s A LOT of grandbabies!

Did you hear about the guy who wants a uterus transplant so he can be the first man to have an abortion? Rush Limbaugh used to call abortion a sacrament on the Left. Not the way to have grand babies - but it is the feminist way.

 

[VictoryinJesus]

Did you hear about the guy who wants a uterus transplant so he can be the first man to have an abortion? Rush Limbaugh used to call abortion a sacrament on the Left. Not the way to have grand babies - but it is the feminist way.

I didn’t hear about it. To me it’s all the reprobate mind way which does appear to be growing worse and worse. It use to be people hid things not acceptable, but now they just do all the filth they want out in the open for others to see without any hesitation. The world celebrating it even. from as you’ve said feminist. to the break down of home and marriage and children without either parent…many with drug addicted parents so the children have to be raised by grandparents. A common thing today. To school shootings. To drag queen parades. To openly vulgar movies on television no less than porn out in the open brought right into your home. To social media. YouTube it, your worst nightmares caught on video. Even catching fatal accidents happening to people and videoing it for entertainment! You speak of children and then those children. Children today are under attack. Social media …how young are your grandchildren? Social media is taking over where it tells kids what it wants them to think and feel and it’s scary. There have been deaths and suicide. Killings. And also this endorsement you speak of about genders. Families are disconnected. I could go on and on …but I guess my point is, it may have come out of feminism but I don’t think that is the only way. It’s like that question concerning Adam and Eve. Yes Eve was deceived. But there is one question that remains…where was Adam when all this happened? Men have their part too. We can live in denial. But it has grown to where it takes two to afford all the big money things people want today. IF there is a husband and wife together…I say if because often (in this generation) the man splits. But if there is two you better bet the husband has his part in wanting the big possessions too. Does this man think like you about the feminist way or does he command “you get your rearend to work so we can have big things.”? Greed, lust, desire to build a kingdom with the most expensive cars, the best house in the neighborhood, all the name-brand items and clothing …it takes two if not more to fuel that desire to have. In this both are equally pushing sacrifice to have those things. At what cost?

I don’t hold strongly all the above. Maybe none of that makes sense and I’m just ranting. Stupid opinionated thoughts. I do see your point. But my point is, you’re picking at a scab (that bugs you the most) ignoring there’s a much larger wound I think.

 

[Wynona]

I appreciate everyone contributing their thoughts and discussions so much!!

To me, a successful forum thread need not have everyone agree or even always stick with purely nice words. I call it good when people can present different ideas and come away with more clarity on their own views or the views of others.

 

[Wynona]

If I recall correctly, feminism was opposed by most women, but corporations and the government spun it as “equality” so they can have more people to tax and more people working.

This is correct. I reject feminism from it's start. The majority of women in America thought politics were a distraction from their influence in the home and in community culture. Its not that they didn't want to participate in society. They always did that through local clubs, church involvement, and organized charity efforts.

So the right to vote as the first wave feminists wanted it was mostly rejected by the women of the time.

There is no part of feminism that I think society needed. Women naturally have more options and power the more advanced a society gets. Take Queen Elizabeth I for example. She had tremendous power--- and England was not a feminist society at all during her reign.

I consider myself a big supporter in biblical patriarchy. The Bible elevated women past being simply sex objects, breeders, or political bargaining chips. The Bible says the woman was created for the man to assist him in his God given purpose on earth and to be a permanent, irreplaceable companion to reflect Christ and the Church.

I believe in women being a protected class, not fighting on the front lines in wars.

 

[VictoryinJesus]

The Bible says the woman was created for the man to assist him in his God given purpose on earth and to be a permanent, irreplaceable companion to reflect Christ and the Church.

Makes me think of Proverbs 12:4 A virtuous woman is a crown to her husband: but she that makes ashamed is as rottenness in his bones.

 

[Grailhunter]

@Wynona @Rita @VictoryinJesus @Cassandra

What are you women doing on this forum? You should be in the kitchen and making sure my skivvies are ironed LOL And grab me a beer while you are at it.

To be honest my opinion on this topic is probably shaded by the fact that I am a hopeless romantic.

Feminism….what is it? I call it a social “ism” Women’s suffrage was something that needed to happen. But it turned out to be a movement without leadership or the wrong kind of leadership.

For Christians the Holy Spirit is there if you do not understand fairness. Do all things in love. If Christians would have embraced and took the helm of women’s rights it could have been a benefit to women and could have shown the world the heart of Christianity. But instead Christians were drug into it kicking and screaming. Women’s rights or equal rights is just as it implies….common sense and fairness….treat people as you want to be treated.

Overall what did it do for women? Put them to work with no additional benefit. At one time one income could support a family with a house and a car and children had a mother. When women entered the workforce the economics change so it took two incomes to do the same thing. And took mothers out of the home and away from their children or worse.

Sometimes a wife has to work to make ends meet. As far as I am concerned “has to work” is life out of control….either by your own poor planning or by unforeseen circumstances. Either way you have to support each other. I gave my son a piece of advise, don’t get married until you can afford a family. He took my advice. Which meant a job skill through education first. Life is about choices, where you end up is dependant on those choices.

I see this all the time….a woman in scrubs buying a case a beer before she goes to work. She is taking the beer back home to her husband or boyfriend so he can sit on his “keester” while she works. That is not supporting each other.

Fairness! Christians should know this but it is not a lesson easily learned from the Bible because it was written in a time period when women were still considered property. So we have to rely on the Holy Spirit and the Spirit that Christ exhibited in the Gospels. Not only what He said, but what He did…. There was never a time that Christ did not help a woman in need. Fairness….it is not that difficult to understand and practice. Treat others how you want to be treated. What is so hard to understand about that?

In a relationship, you should divide up the chores…guys need to learn to cook a little. Hanging around the house can get a little boring and children can be a little taxing. Getting a break from it all is not too much to ask. Put your heads together come up with something were she can work for herself at her own pace….it will build confidence in herself. It is better than working for somebody.

But you have to weigh all that with the fact that children need a mother. If you are a mother you need to do the “mothering” thing while the children are young. That is not too much to ask. Now a days it is even more important than ever but it is still a team effort. Society is there to teach your children bad thing, you have to stay on top of it and keep them busily with constructive things. Still a team effort.

Getting the family involved with a family oriented church is so important….not just Sundays, all church activities. Birds of a feather flock together. Teach them to stand with other Christians and worship the Lord.

Some mothers want to have a career, nothing wrong with that. Careers take planning, so plan it at the appropriate time, after the children are in High School. And plan for the family responsibilities to be equalized out between mom and dad.

It is all a matter of fairness and responsibility and respect and love. A man can be the head of the household but his wife’s happiness should be of high priority.

 

[Wynona]

@Grailhunter


Thanks for the post! I really like this statement...

A man can be the head of the household but his wife’s happiness should be of high priority.

This is the type of man I believe women benefit the most in marrying.

 

[Wynona]

 

[Wynona]

I see feminism's main sins as envy and selfish ambition. But one of the sad results of a movement that opposes God's design for women are the women who choose neither home dedication or traditionally male roles, but pure selfishness as a lifestyle.

These women are hardly activists. They shop. They club. They party with drugs. They make online accounts to sell porn of themselves. They agree with feminism in so far as it validates living totally for themselves or without any discipline.

I believe that there is true greatness in service. Serving with a good heart is what makes us powerful, not doing everything we want or even what men are usually expected to do.

 

[Deus vult]

The bigoted Selective Service only requires men aged 18-25 to register for the draft, it needs to be more inclusive.

 

[Wynona]

I got some of the waves of feminism wrong earlier. There are four, not five. Here's how it went in the U.S.

1st wave: Women fought for voting rights in the late 1800's, winning the right to vote around the 1920's through the 19th(?) Amendment. Key examples were Elizabeth Cady Stanton and Susan B. Anthony. Very privileged women whose ideas, most women objected to at the time.

2nd Wave: World War II forces many women into the workforce. Women like Betty Friedan and Gloria Steinem denounce the value homemaking and marriage as valuable for women. They were also very priveleged. Wage equality protests, Career-centeredness, and the sexual revolution would be in full force by the 1960's. Divorce laws loosened and Roe v Wade made abortion legal.

3rd wave: Key word is intersectionality---different groups of people fighting for rights and crossing intetests. No more just focusing on wealthy white ladies. Gay marriage, LGBT, black women's issues, and even Islamaphobia become hot topics. Think of this movement as a split from those feminists who still believe feminism should only be about women. One notable example is J.K Rowling, the author of the Harry Potter series.

4th wave: Feminism splits again on transgender activism. J.K Rowling disagrees with certain trans issues that negatively affect women so she is currently on the outs and mobs want to cancel her. Are trans women, women? 3rd wavers likely say no. 4th wavers say yes.