Strength and Honor: Triumphing over Feminism
- Thread starter Wynona
- Start date
-
Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Deus vult
Member
You’re a monster if you have something against your daughter and a trans woman sharing the same public restroom.
Wrangler
Well-Known Member
Sticks and stones. And what I have against such perversion is to subordinate objective reality to subjective feelings.
To show the concept is being destroyed by this evil ploy, people have to unncessarily add an adjective to clarify what the noun unmistakably conveys. Biological men should not violate women safe spaces. (Biological men calling themselves any kind of woman does not make it so). Odd that you suppose it honorable our society should shame people who want to keep women safe spaces to actual, real, biological women.
Seems your trope wants to introduce a 3rd use of language:
- literal
- metaphorical
- perverted-corrupt
Wrangler
Well-Known Member
This reveals the lie about feminism from the beginning.
I grew up being lectured that a word whose root is feminine is actually about equality.
This lie was reveals when they ignored the plight of men who got the short end of the stick, such as life expectancy, death in war or on the job, custody of children, etc.
My husband and I are Gen Z. Born 1995.
Our generation didn't have a baseline for what men and women were expected to do for each other. We have seen a lot of henpecked husbands and boyfriends, even in our own families. Men who have lost all zest for life and consider that a normal marriage. Women who have complete control in their relationships and who still aren't happy.
We did not grow up seeing the horrors of patriarchy. Maybe some of you have.
We grew up seeing feminism as the culture's baseline. Its awful.
Our generation didn't have a baseline for what men and women were expected to do for each other. We have seen a lot of henpecked husbands and boyfriends, even in our own families. Men who have lost all zest for life and consider that a normal marriage. Women who have complete control in their relationships and who still aren't happy.
We did not grow up seeing the horrors of patriarchy. Maybe some of you have.
We grew up seeing feminism as the culture's baseline. Its awful.
Wrangler
Well-Known Member
Deus vult
Member
Society always knows what’s best for us. When has society ever steered us wrong? You gotta get with the times and put those Bronze-Age beliefs to rest. Back then people didn’t know any better, now we do.
Trans in an MMA fight beating a biological woman. Very honorable of the woman taking a beating for the trans community. We must fight for inclusion.
Last edited:
Feminist meme: Submissive women who do housework enable husbands lack of gratitude and get left for a younger woman anyway.
Reality: Marriage is never free of risk, especially since feminism pushed a sexual revolution that teaches women to weaponize sexuality and act as temptresses to men whether they are married or not.
But here's what usually happens: if you as a woman decide to stop arguing and draining your man's energy, he can then begin to use that energy to work on himself, then improve life for both of you, then help the kids, then grow to impact the community and the world.
If he has to argue with you and never have peace at home, he is forced back to home base and can never quite move past it, unless he leaves you altogether and picks up the pieces.
Adam was to subdue the earth and populate it. But he cannot do it without Eve's cooperation and submission.
Reality: Marriage is never free of risk, especially since feminism pushed a sexual revolution that teaches women to weaponize sexuality and act as temptresses to men whether they are married or not.
But here's what usually happens: if you as a woman decide to stop arguing and draining your man's energy, he can then begin to use that energy to work on himself, then improve life for both of you, then help the kids, then grow to impact the community and the world.
If he has to argue with you and never have peace at home, he is forced back to home base and can never quite move past it, unless he leaves you altogether and picks up the pieces.
Adam was to subdue the earth and populate it. But he cannot do it without Eve's cooperation and submission.
Wrangler
Well-Known Member
So, you're a Christian, huh?
FYI, your reply is formulaic as my answer is grounded in definition and the branch of philosophy known as epistemology, not 'Bronze-Age beliefs' - AS IF that automatically would make them invalid.
Deus vult
Member
You my friend, are evidence that we have reached a point where we can no longer tell the difference between satire and seriousness as a society.
Last edited:
An older friend suggested all women should have university education and three years of work experience and field training in case their husbands leave or pass away suddenly.
The need to be prepared to not rely on men financially is one of feminism's strongest arguments.
This is the main reason I was raised to get grades for college rather than focus on homemaking skills.
I just don't think it's worth sacrificing a woman's ability to fully invest in her marriage. College and jobs did in fact act as competition with my husband. And him initially making room for me to do that actually led me to believe he was taking advantage. He wasn't but I was never happy sharing financial responsibilities with him.
Also, I saw myself preparing for an "out". My husband could sense my "just in case" mentality, but couldn't describe it exactly. This led to many fights and misunderstandings.
God forbid my husband passed away suddenly. I have a baby girl and am halfway through a second pregnancy! But this is the United States. Women get a huge safety net here. Food stamps? WIC? Countless other government programs? Its hard to fall through the cracks here unless you're an addict.
Even if there were no government safety net, both his parents and mine are obsessed with my baby. Im sure they would help until I could work again.
I would still have no interest in some intense career. I would ideally become a housekeeper for my parents to be near my children or an entry-level job that contributed enough to pitch in. I hate office work and wouldn't likely use the IT associates I got. Waitressing or another somewhat active job may suit me better. Waitresses can make a good amount depending on the restaurant.
The mourning period does not need to be skipped. No less than a year with no new guy friends or any suitors. I would need to focus and not make any unnecessary life changing moves during this time.
If I decide not to remarry, I will have to balance work and motherhood, but it could happen. If I am open to remarry it would have to be a God fearing, working man who doesn't mind kids. I hear men like that have a thing for women who can cook! lol
Im not sure I could see myself remarrying at all at this point. Ive become so accustomed to my husband and his way of being. But if that, at some point became my goal, I don't think my life up to this point would be too much of a disadvantage in finding a mate.
The strong independent woman in need of no one...sometimes she has trouble in the dating world. Men enjoy being needed and valued. It's the secret sauce of relationships.
TL;DR The submissive homemaker who suddenly loses her husband is going to face financial hardship. But fully investing in a marriage to the point that it is healthy is inherently risky and the alternative is not worth it. Although remarriage is optional, the submissive homemaker has a natural advantage if that is her eventual goal.
The need to be prepared to not rely on men financially is one of feminism's strongest arguments.
This is the main reason I was raised to get grades for college rather than focus on homemaking skills.
I just don't think it's worth sacrificing a woman's ability to fully invest in her marriage. College and jobs did in fact act as competition with my husband. And him initially making room for me to do that actually led me to believe he was taking advantage. He wasn't but I was never happy sharing financial responsibilities with him.
Also, I saw myself preparing for an "out". My husband could sense my "just in case" mentality, but couldn't describe it exactly. This led to many fights and misunderstandings.
God forbid my husband passed away suddenly. I have a baby girl and am halfway through a second pregnancy! But this is the United States. Women get a huge safety net here. Food stamps? WIC? Countless other government programs? Its hard to fall through the cracks here unless you're an addict.
Even if there were no government safety net, both his parents and mine are obsessed with my baby. Im sure they would help until I could work again.
I would still have no interest in some intense career. I would ideally become a housekeeper for my parents to be near my children or an entry-level job that contributed enough to pitch in. I hate office work and wouldn't likely use the IT associates I got. Waitressing or another somewhat active job may suit me better. Waitresses can make a good amount depending on the restaurant.
The mourning period does not need to be skipped. No less than a year with no new guy friends or any suitors. I would need to focus and not make any unnecessary life changing moves during this time.
If I decide not to remarry, I will have to balance work and motherhood, but it could happen. If I am open to remarry it would have to be a God fearing, working man who doesn't mind kids. I hear men like that have a thing for women who can cook! lol
Im not sure I could see myself remarrying at all at this point. Ive become so accustomed to my husband and his way of being. But if that, at some point became my goal, I don't think my life up to this point would be too much of a disadvantage in finding a mate.
The strong independent woman in need of no one...sometimes she has trouble in the dating world. Men enjoy being needed and valued. It's the secret sauce of relationships.
TL;DR The submissive homemaker who suddenly loses her husband is going to face financial hardship. But fully investing in a marriage to the point that it is healthy is inherently risky and the alternative is not worth it. Although remarriage is optional, the submissive homemaker has a natural advantage if that is her eventual goal.
Wrangler
Well-Known Member
The hateful "I don't need a man" mantra. The way I see it, if a woman embraces this mantra, men should avoid her like the plague of death.
Independent of ANY relationship, all people, including women, should strive to be the best they can be. Everyone should strive to be healthy - mentally, physically, spiritually and yes, financially. The obvious hatred from feminism is chicks should do this cuz men are so bad. The feminist message seems to be to enter into a relationship with a man at your own risk and its wise to have one foot out the door AND a suitor or 2 on the side "just in case."
Another name for this feminist "wisdom" is not committed.
Our society laments men who don't want to commit. What is it they are expected to commit to? (Unworthy women). The slang term is refusal to "wife up" such unworthy women who feel entitled to be someone's wife - even though they 'don't need a man' - and never developed virtue. And asserting equality is not a virtue.
I remember a certain infamous pastor said, "Don't go to college just because you assume there isn't a Godly man who'll take care of you."
I thought he was wild for saying that at the time. But he has a point.
BlessedPeace
Well-Known Member
I'dike to address this part of your post:
Many leading feminists say that the option for women to be homemakers ought not to be an option at all in order for progress to happen.
I'm not familiar with Feminist publications. Would you please post those Feminists sources to whom you refer there. Thank you in advance.
@BlessedPeace
Post in thread 'Strength and Honor: Triumphing over Feminism' Strength and Honor: Triumphing over Feminism
Post in thread 'Strength and Honor: Triumphing over Feminism' Strength and Honor: Triumphing over Feminism
Let me know if you need more references. I was mainly thinking of Simone de Beauvoir's quote. Thanks for stopping by!
Post in thread 'Strength and Honor: Triumphing over Feminism' Strength and Honor: Triumphing over Feminism
Post in thread 'Strength and Honor: Triumphing over Feminism' Strength and Honor: Triumphing over Feminism
Let me know if you need more references. I was mainly thinking of Simone de Beauvoir's quote. Thanks for stopping by!
BlessedPeace
Well-Known Member
She is a comedian.
She's married Kenneth Pitchfork in 1962 and had a son they named Kenneth.
I'm not sure this means Robin Morgan supports marriage for women. She may have regretted the match. Im not familiar with her life or comedy, but the statement about marriage seemed serious to me.
Feminists from the first wave compared marriage to slavery.
"Sarah Grimké, although not as able a writer or lecturer as her sister, used largely the same tactics. In her 1837 pamphlet Letters on the Equality of the Sexes and the Condition of Woman, she began by quoting Blackstone, a leading legal authority: "If the wife be injured in her person or property, she can bring no action for redress without her husband's concurrence, and in his name as well as her own." Sarah commented: "This law…is similar to the law respecting slaves, 'A slave cannot bring a suit against his master or any other person, for an injury—his master must bring it.'" She compared a Louisiana law stipulating that a slave's possessions belong to his master with the law stating, "A woman's personal property by marriage becomes absolutely her husband's which, at his death, he may leave entirely from her." Sarah pointed out over and over that, before the law, there was no difference between a slave and a woman."
---Reason article
BlessedPeace
Well-Known Member
Did you read the entry that precedes de Beauvoir's last entry circled in blue ink?
At one time American women were not allowed to vote,work,or inherit, or live without supervision of a man. Their father,brother,husband.
These policies were allegedly grounded in Biblical principles.
Have you read Deuteronomy 22?
Or Judges 19?
BlessedPeace
Well-Known Member
Marriage was slavery. And remains such if one adheres to OT ideology. Even when revived for Gentiles in the NT.
Interestingly, many say teachings and laws in the OT don't spy to NT Christians today.
Yet, they will say the marriage edict does still hold authority.
In the beginning in America women were property of the husband. Which is why the marriage vows concluded with the pronunciation, man and wife.
Similar threads
