If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#381
|
|||
|
|||
pregnant 17 year old
alath wrote: It's fairly likely that his wife, having given up after long dealing with the kind of intransigence and defensiveness that we're dealing with, is going about the situation in her way unilaterally. I wonder what the wife is like. Chris has shown his true colors here, quite clearly. Maybe the wife has no grasp or concept of adult relationships either - it would go a long way towards explaining her choice of a husband. Either way, the outcome is a foregone conclusion. Even one "partner" like Chris in a marriage would spell its doom. It's so interesting to watch this thread. What Chris describes is not a foriegn or difficult point of view. I think Nan described this best where she stated that Chris' point of view stems from a patriarchy social structure. I, for one, participate in this structure and can relate to Chris' dilemma. And before you go about insulting people who share this point of view, just remember that we have a lower divorce rate than you people and your "adult relationships". Regards... |
#382
|
|||
|
|||
pregnant 17 year old
wrote in message
ups.com... alath wrote: It's fairly likely that his wife, having given up after long dealing with the kind of intransigence and defensiveness that we're dealing with, is going about the situation in her way unilaterally. I wonder what the wife is like. Chris has shown his true colors here, quite clearly. Maybe the wife has no grasp or concept of adult relationships either - it would go a long way towards explaining her choice of a husband. Either way, the outcome is a foregone conclusion. Even one "partner" like Chris in a marriage would spell its doom. It's so interesting to watch this thread. What Chris describes is not a foriegn or difficult point of view. I think Nan described this best where she stated that Chris' point of view stems from a patriarchy social structure. I, for one, participate in this structure and can relate to Chris' dilemma. And before you go about insulting people who share this point of view, just remember that we have a lower divorce rate than you people and your "adult relationships". So, sorry, you're just wrong. "We people" with our "adult relationships" don't divorce any more often than "you people", and possibly divorce slightly less often. Studies have shown that people who belong to evangelical or fundamentalist churches which stress the sanctity of marriage and the evils of divorce, and adhere to the patriarchal family structure have just as high or higher rates of divorce as people who have more egalitarian models of marriage and family. That doesn't prove the patriarchal model of marriage is WRONG, mind you. It's drive me nuts, but you aren't MY husband (and I think we're both glad of that!). If you and your wife are both happy with it, more power to you. But Chris' wife is apparently NOT happy with it, and THAT'S why his marriage is "hanging by a thread" (if, indeed, he's for real and not just stirring the pot). That doesn't make HIM wrong, either, but it might make him "not right" for his wife. -- Be well, Barbara |
#383
|
|||
|
|||
pregnant 17 year old
Circe wrote: wrote in message ups.com... alath wrote: It's fairly likely that his wife, having given up after long dealing with the kind of intransigence and defensiveness that we're dealing with, is going about the situation in her way unilaterally. I wonder what the wife is like. Chris has shown his true colors here, quite clearly. Maybe the wife has no grasp or concept of adult relationships either - it would go a long way towards explaining her choice of a husband. Either way, the outcome is a foregone conclusion. Even one "partner" like Chris in a marriage would spell its doom. It's so interesting to watch this thread. What Chris describes is not a foriegn or difficult point of view. I think Nan described this best where she stated that Chris' point of view stems from a patriarchy social structure. I, for one, participate in this structure and can relate to Chris' dilemma. And before you go about insulting people who share this point of view, just remember that we have a lower divorce rate than you people and your "adult relationships". So, sorry, you're just wrong. "We people" with our "adult relationships" don't divorce any more often than "you people", and possibly divorce slightly less often. Studies have shown that people who belong to evangelical or fundamentalist churches which stress the sanctity of marriage and the evils of divorce, and adhere to the patriarchal family structure have just as high or higher rates of divorce as people who have more egalitarian models of marriage and family. Although I find the Barna Group statistics fascinating, I don't believe in their validity because I think some factors, such as the fact that Christians marry more than non-Christians in the US, are not taken into consideration. Also, you have to look into societies in which patriarchy is the primary social structure and compare their divorce rates with those of Westernized (feministic) cultures. But Chris' wife is apparently NOT happy with it, and THAT'S why his marriage is "hanging by a thread". That doesn't make HIM wrong, either, but it might make him "not right" for his wife. I actually have to agree with you on this point. I don't think his wife agreed to the god, spouse, child, family order of things or if she did, she must have changed her mind. I, personally, wouldn't have married a single mom. Be well, Barbara Regards... |
#384
|
|||
|
|||
pregnant 17 year old
Chris and agsf are misrepresenting Christianity here. I am a
conservative Christian myself, and our church does teach that the husband/father is the spritual leader of the family. But that does not translate into the father being tyrannical self-centered jerk. If one is really a Christian, one has made a committment to serve others including first and foremost one's family. This means putting the needs of one's wife and children above one's own needs. If one is a real Christian, leadership means service to others and Christ himself was a model in this regard. Chris and agsf are promoting some kind of selfish "everyone is a slave to daddy" crap which may be patriarchal but certainly doesn't have anything to do with Christianity. |
#385
|
|||
|
|||
pregnant 17 year old
"alath" wrote in message
oups.com... Chris and agsf are misrepresenting Christianity here. I am a conservative Christian myself, and our church does teach that the husband/father is the spritual leader of the family. But that does not translate into the father being tyrannical self-centered jerk. If one is really a Christian, one has made a committment to serve others including first and foremost one's family. This means putting the needs of one's wife and children above one's own needs. If one is a real Christian, leadership means service to others and Christ himself was a model in this regard. Chris and agsf are promoting some kind of selfish "everyone is a slave to daddy" crap which may be patriarchal but certainly doesn't have anything to do with Christianity. Thank you. That was well put. I apologize in that I may well have been the one to characterize conservative Christians as being more likely to subscribe to a "patriarchal" family model. I think that's true, but I think that many (if not most) conservative Christians believe that the father is the leader of the family exactly as you describe. Incidentally, I must observe that "unfeminized" countries with low divorce rates also tend to have at least one of the following characteristics (and usually more than one): * High poverty rate * Autocratic, dictatorial governments * Corrupt or unjust judicial systems, combined with extreme forms of punishment * Little or no freedom of either press or religious exercise * Both cultural and legal restrictions on personal freedom (e.g., arranged marriages, legally prescribed beard-wearing for men, etc.) Seems to me there are an awful lot of benefits to "feminized" societies (higher standards of living, democracy, and much greater personal freedom). It may well be that one of the prices we pay for those benefits is a higher divorce rate. But it's a price I think MOST of us are probably willing to pay (especially since each ONE of us is ultimately responsible for our OWN divorce rate--mine's still 0% and holding steady!). -- Be well, Barbara |
#386
|
|||
|
|||
pregnant 17 year old
alath wrote: Chris and agsf are misrepresenting Christianity here. For the record, I never stated that I represented Christianity or it's view points. Regards... |
#387
|
|||
|
|||
pregnant 17 year old
Circe wrote: Incidentally, I must observe that "unfeminized" countries with low divorce rates also tend to have at least one of the following characteristics (and usually more than one): * High poverty rate * Autocratic, dictatorial governments * Corrupt or unjust judicial systems, combined with extreme forms of punishment * Little or no freedom of either press or religious exercise * Both cultural and legal restrictions on personal freedom (e.g., arranged marriages, legally prescribed beard-wearing for men, etc.) Fascinating observation. The US, prior to the 1960's, does not represent the above, neither does modern day Japan. And if you are attacking countries like Saudia Arabia, Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan, India (actually they're doing well), then you will need to sit down and look at those societies and wonder why they have a strong family structure and if their way of life is really restricted or not. Seems to me there are an awful lot of benefits to "feminized" societies (higher standards of living, "Higher standards of living"??? Yes, single moms who raise godless children contribute to "higher standards of living". democracy, We didn't have democracy before? and much greater personal freedom). Really? You're just full of it today. It may well be that one of the prices we pay for those benefits is a higher divorce rate. But it's a price I think MOST of us are probably willing to pay (especially since each ONE of us is ultimately responsible for our OWN divorce rate--mine's still 0% and holding steady!). Try focusing on the family and not on the individual. After all, it's family that builds a strong foundation of society. -- Be well, Barbara Regards... |
#388
|
|||
|
|||
I almost made it to Pope! - was pregnant 17 year old
I ALMOST MADE IT TO POPE!
(Just kidding.) See below. Alath wrote: "Chris and agsf are misrepresenting Christianity here. I am a conservative Christian myself, and our church does teach that the husband/father is the spritual leader of the family. But that does not translate into the father being tyrannical self-centered jerk. If one is really a Christian, one has made a committment to serve others including first and foremost one's family. This means putting the needs of one's wife and children above one's own needs. If one is a real Christian, leadership means service to others and Christ himself was a model in this regard. Chris and agsf are promoting some kind of selfish "everyone is a slave to daddy" crap which may be patriarchal but certainly doesn't have anything to do with Christianity." AGSF replied: "For the record, I never stated that I represented Christianity or it's view points." Todd Gastaldo remarks: By age 15 I think it was, I had been Born, Baptized, First Holy Communioned and Confirmed Catholic (that's THREE Holy Sacraments)! I thought I was on my way to becoming Pope! (Just kidding - but it will make a good subject line.) It wasn't until much later in life that I heard others saying that Catholicism is not true Christianity. (One of my late mother's favorite jokes involved a tour of heaven. At the Catholic floor, tourists were told to be real quiet - "The Catholics think they are the only ones here.") The Jehovah's Witness's who came to my house assured me that the Seventh Day Adventists were a cult. (Maybe I have this backwards.) All this religious finger pointing - and after reading the same book (or versions thereof)!! Last night on the radio, I heard a so-called Christian preacher running down the Mormons - indicating they are not Christians - or not following the Bible... I don't really know who truly represents Christianity. I am currently reading two books about Gnosticism: The Laughing Jesus [2004] The Gnostics [198_] The Gnostics were apparently people who saw Christianity quite differently and got hammered by the Catholics. Gnostics called Cathars elevated both men and women to priest status ("Parfaits" and "Parfaites"). The Gnostic interpretation - so far as I can tell - is that Christ is all of us - even non-Christians - and The Laughing Jesus [2004] points to Gnosticism in VARIOUS faiths - a notion which makes sense if God is to make sense - or so I say. I'm not totally sold on Gnosticism - but the Gnostics point out HUGE flaws in Catholicism (for example) - which is probably why Gnostics were called "heretics" and killed by Catholics spurred on by Catholic clergymen. BTW, it is fascinating to me that - by stumbling onto the phony "babies can't feel pain" neurology of American medical priests/MDs - I discovered that MDs and Jewish mohelim are amputating far more infant foreskin than God originally/allegedly commanded. Religion sure makes for strange behavior toward human genitals! Just thought I'd chime in. I now return you to your regularly scheduled programming. Todd^^^ (^^^whose post is up to - perhaps over - 30% shorter than his usual posts - perhaps because of his slowly growing knowledge of Gnosticism : ) PS One last note: AGNOSTICISM appears to me quite similar to GNOSTICISM. Maybe there are Gnostics (or Agnostics) reading who know what I am talking about and can immediately correct me? |
#389
|
|||
|
|||
pregnant 17 year old
"alath" wrote in message oups.com... Chris and agsf are misrepresenting Christianity here. I am a conservative Christian myself, and our church does teach that the husband/father is the spritual leader of the family. But that does not translate into the father being tyrannical self-centered jerk. If one is really a Christian, one has made a committment to serve others including first and foremost one's family. This means putting the needs of one's wife and children above one's own needs. If one is a real Christian, leadership means service to others and Christ himself was a model in this regard. Chris and agsf are promoting some kind of selfish "everyone is a slave to daddy" crap That's news to me. which may be patriarchal but certainly doesn't have anything to do with Christianity. |
#390
|
|||
|
|||
pregnant 17 year old
wrote in message
oups.com... Circe wrote: Incidentally, I must observe that "unfeminized" countries with low divorce rates also tend to have at least one of the following characteristics (and usually more than one): * High poverty rate * Autocratic, dictatorial governments * Corrupt or unjust judicial systems, combined with extreme forms of punishment * Little or no freedom of either press or religious exercise * Both cultural and legal restrictions on personal freedom (e.g., arranged marriages, legally prescribed beard-wearing for men, etc.) Fascinating observation. The US, prior to the 1960's, does not represent the above, Women got the franchise in the US in 1920; quite a number of states had already extended the franchise to women well before then, however. Moreover, women in the US were far more "liberated' in the 18th century than their counterparts TODAY in most of the MIddle East and much of Africa. neither does modern day Japan. Japan is a notable exception in that it is both democratic and has a very low divorce rate. It also, however, has a fairly low marriage rate along with an exceptionally low birth rate (it has negative population growth at this point) and both are falling. So, while it's possible that Japan will always have a low divorce rate for cultural reasons, it doesn't look to me like that's contributing to particularly healthy FAMILIES, at least from a perspective of maintaining the current social structure. And if you are attacking countries I'm not ATTACKING anyone. I'm simply pointing out that the better educated and more enfranchised women are in a society, the better that society seems to do financially and in respecting civil rights. There's not a perfect one-to-one correlation. The US is still a patriarchal society, BTW. For example, we have never even had a serious female candidate for a president, while India had Indira Ghandi as prime minister way back in 1966! And the first woman prime minister was actually Siramavo Bandaranaike of Ceylon, now Sri Lanka, in 1960. Women have considerably more freedom in the US than in many other parts of the world, but they've nowhere NEAR achieved parity with men when it comes to political power. like Saudia Arabia, Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan, India (actually they're doing well), If you believe all of these countries are doing well in ALL the categories I listed above, you need a major reality check. I never said that extreme patriarchy and ALL the ills I mentioned go together, but that you generally see one or more of them in such countries. If you try to claim that Saudi Arabia is a democracy with freedom of religious expression and the press or that India doesn't have a high poverty rate, I shall have to laugh. then you will need to sit down and look at those societies and wonder why they have a strong family structure and if their way of life is really restricted or not. Honey, women in Saudi Arabia aren't allowed to drive or go out of their homes without a male escort. Men are expected adhere to the state religion (Wahhabism) and therefore must wear their beards at regulation length (one fist below the chin), among other things. Both genders live in a country without a functioning democracy or free press. That's a pretty darned restricted life and, quite frankly, whether it contributes to a "strong family structure" or not, I think most people who lived in what you term "feminized" societies would be unwilling to trade their rights and freedoms to get that kind of family structure. Freedom comes with a price. One of the prices is that people who are free to make their own decisions about their personal lives sometimes make bad decisions. But the alternative--to be stuck with a bad decision someone ELSE makes for you--is far worse! Seems to me there are an awful lot of benefits to "feminized" societies (higher standards of living, "Higher standards of living"??? Yes, single moms who raise godless children contribute to "higher standards of living". Some married people raise "godless" children, too. (My husband and I are Unitarian-Universalists, but we don't believe in "God" in the sense that any of the major world's religions would recognize.) What has GODLESSNESS got to do with poverty? democracy, We didn't have democracy before? When this country started, no, we did not have democracy. Only landed white men were permitted to vote. That's not a true democracy. That's not to say it wasn't pretty radical at the time. But until ALL adult citizens, male and female of all races, gained the right to vote, the US did not, in fact, have a government that would today be recognized as a legitimate democracy. But it's not my claim that egalitarianism with respect to gender CREATES democratic institutions and free societies. Rather, I believe that once democratic institutions are in place and societies become "free" for male citizens, more freedom for their female citizens and more egalitarian societal structure overall naturally begin to evolve. It may well be that one of the prices we pay for those benefits is a higher divorce rate. But it's a price I think MOST of us are probably willing to pay (especially since each ONE of us is ultimately responsible for our OWN divorce rate--mine's still 0% and holding steady!). Try focusing on the family and not on the individual. After all, it's family that builds a strong foundation of society. A family is made up of individuals. Individuals who, in our country, are responsible for their own choices and behaviors. -- Be well, Barbara |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Child Support Guidelines are UNFAIR! Lets join together to fight them! | S Myers | Child Support | 115 | September 12th 05 12:37 AM |
misc.kids FAQ on Breastfeeding Past the First Year | [email protected] | Info and FAQ's | 0 | September 29th 04 05:17 AM |
Pregnant 15 year old stepdaughter - I've had enough | kathy | Pregnancy | 22 | May 26th 04 07:23 PM |
Pregnant women warned of flu danger, urged to seek vaccine | Marciosos3 Probertiosos3 | Kids Health | 0 | December 12th 03 07:14 PM |
Pregnant (Legally Blonde) White House staffers... | Todd Gastaldo | Pregnancy | 0 | July 22nd 03 04:36 PM |