Feminism & Christianity

[Gendou Ikari]

Inspired by Nick's thread: http://www.christianforums.net/f17/christian-marriage-wives-submitting-godly-husband-why-not-32771/ I realized that for me submitting to my future husband is an honor and a way to submit myself to the Lord. It seems easy! Why do feminists make it such a big deal? Then I realized, I have no idea what this means to submit to your spouse or what submitting to your spouse looks like. Can anyone offer some insight?

Wives: What does it mean to submit to your husbands?

Husbands: What does it mean for your wives to submit to you?

Feminists, such as myself, have a profound problem with it, precisely because it creates an irrationally division between males and females. St. Paul created a hierarchy: Females --> Males --> God. Anybody who thinks this does not mean St. Paul considered females to be below the stature of males, hasn't been reading their Bible. Even in the Torah, monetary value is assigned to boys and girls, with girls being worth less than boys. Feminists believe that there are more similarities between men and women than we care to admit, especially when you throw the brain chemistry of non-heterosexuals into the mix.

Another problem we have with sexism, is that it is an arbitrary and absolute division. For example, women have historically been forbidden from serving in the military, because on average females are less able to perform in combat than are men. Yet, this distinction is foolish. There are plenty of women who can and do serve in the military with far superior ability than I (as a male) could ever. Just because the majority of women are not fit for military service, does not mean some of them aren't. Likewise, we could make an arbitrary distinction to place a height requirement on military service or for who gets to lead a marriage. Nobody under 5'8'' will be able to serve in the military. Everybody who has watched Rudy knows how foolish this is.

 

[jasoncran]

Re: Wives submitting to husbands

Feminists, such as myself, have a profound problem with it, precisely because it creates an irrationally division between males and females. St. Paul created a hierarchy: Females --> Males --> God. Anybody who thinks this does not mean St. Paul considered females to be below the stature of males, hasn't been reading their Bible. Even in the Torah, monetary value is assigned to boys and girls, with girls being worth less than boys. Feminists believe that there are more similarities between men and women than we care to admit, especially when you throw the brain chemistry of non-heterosexuals into the mix.

Another problem we have with sexism, is that it is an arbitrary and absolute division. For example, women have historically been forbidden from serving in the military, because on average females are less able to perform in combat than are men. Yet, this distinction is foolish. There are plenty of women who can and do serve in the military with far superior ability than I (as a male) could ever. Just because the majority of women are not fit for military service, does not mean some of them aren't. Likewise, we could make an arbitrary distinction to place a height requirement on military service or for who gets to lead a marriage. Nobody under 5'8'' will be able to serve in the military. Everybody who has watched Rudy knows how foolish this is.

so you are saying that a small 80 to 100 lb girl that doesnt lift weights. take steriods. could lift her entire body weight in gear and trek mountains? and not be destroying joints slowly.

one can wish that level of equality all they want , doesnt work.

i have a canadian friend of the female persuasion who is my age, flies, and can fix the birds the air force has(canadian) and has had both knees replaced and her hip.

and she admits to me that she has paid a price for her "equality"she has not asked(nor will) to be treated as a female but held to male standards.

that has caused her some issues.

hip and knee replacements only last maybe 10 yrs and she hasnt hit menopause yet.

and cant retire as she only has a few yrs in.

 

[Gendou Ikari]

Re: Wives submitting to husbands

so you are saying that a small 80 to 100 lb girl that doesnt lift weights. take steriods. could lift her entire body weight in gear and trek mountains? and not be destroying joints slowly.

You missed the entire point. On average, there are going to be more men in the military than women; that is why I cannot support a draft that includes women (I am a pretty realistic feminist). Yet, a guy who is 5'7 and weighs only 100lbs is no more able to be in the military than a woman of the same statistics.

 

[theLords]

Re: Wives submitting to husbands

Feminists, such as myself, have a profound problem with it, precisely because it creates an irrationally division between males and females. St. Paul created a hierarchy: Females --> Males --> God. Anybody who thinks this does not mean St. Paul considered females to be below the stature of males, hasn't been reading their Bible. Even in the Torah, monetary value is assigned to boys and girls, with girls being worth less than boys. Feminists believe that there are more similarities between men and women than we care to admit, especially when you throw the brain chemistry of non-heterosexuals into the mix.

Another problem we have with sexism, is that it is an arbitrary and absolute division. For example, women have historically been forbidden from serving in the military, because on average females are less able to perform in combat than are men. Yet, this distinction is foolish. There are plenty of women who can and do serve in the military with far superior ability than I (as a male) could ever. Just because the majority of women are not fit for military service, does not mean some of them aren't. Likewise, we could make an arbitrary distinction to place a height requirement on military service or for who gets to lead a marriage. Nobody under 5'8'' will be able to serve in the military. Everybody who has watched Rudy knows how foolish this is.

What? You aren't a feminist! You are not even a woman! Why do men think they can come and meddle in the affairs of women?

 

[Alabaster]

Re: Wives submitting to husbands

Feminists, such as myself, have a profound problem with it, precisely because it creates an irrationally division between males and females. St. Paul created a hierarchy: Females --> Males --> God.

People tend to believe that is what dear Paul was teaching, but he wasn't. There is no hierarchy. There are roles in marriage, and equal service in the Church.

 

[handy]

Re: Wives submitting to husbands

It is precisely because so many don't read their Bible and don't read all of what Paul had to say regarding women that so many believe that Paul considered females "to be below the stature of males". It was Paul who sent Phoebe to Rome and told the Roman church to render her every assistance that was required of her. It was also Paul who stated that within the church, there is no male or female but that all are equal before God.

As Alabaster says, there is no "hierarchy" only differing roles within marriage. And, these came down from God, starting in Genesis, not from Paul.

 

[Gendou Ikari]

Re: Wives submitting to husbands

What? You aren't a feminist! You are not even a woman! Why do men think they can come and meddle in the affairs of women?

I take offence at that. I am very much a feminist. Feminism is a belief in the equality of men and women, nothing more, nothing less. Obviously, you do not believe in the equality of men and women, for if you did you would not have a problem with me holding these opinions simply because of my biological sex.

A funny story: in my Introduction to Political Science course last fall, the professor asked us to raise our hands if we considered ourselves feminists. Me and two other males were the only ones to raise our hands. No women did, despite there being more women than men in the class.

Anyways, would you mind steering clear of this thread. I would like it to remain a conversation about Godly submission and not an off topic debate about feminism.

You asked the question about feminism, so I thought it would be all right. I will refrain.

 

[theLords]

Re: Wives submitting to husbands

I take offence at that. I am very much a feminist. Feminism is a belief in the equality of men and women, nothing more, nothing less. Obviously, you do not believe in the equality of men and women, for if you did you would not have a problem with me holding these opinions simply because of my biological sex.

A funny story: in my Introduction to Political Science course last fall, the professor asked us to raise our hands if we considered ourselves feminists. Me and two other males were the only ones to raise our hands. No women did, despite there being more women than men in the class.



You asked the question about feminism, so I thought it would be all right. I will refrain.

Precisely, it's a woman's issue! Yet, men in their "manliness" do the opposite of what they intend and dominate the issue!

For women, by women, because of women, solely women, if you ask me.

 

[Gendou Ikari]

Re: Wives submitting to husbands

Precisely, it's a woman's issue! Yet, men in their "manliness" do the opposite of what they intend and dominate the issue!

For women, by women, because of women, solely women, if you ask me.

I just don't consider women alien to me. In fact, most of my closest friends are women. I don't think that just because somebody is a woman, that means I am separated from them. Conservatives sees things in hierarchies. I am much more egalitarian. What you're basically arguing is that I could not support civil rights in the 1960s or have any opinion on the matter, just because I am Caucasian.

 

[handy]

I don't mind men weighing in on feminist issues. I have pretty strong opinions about racism towards blacks and I'm white.

Gendou, I wouldn't have raised my hand either. I don't consider myself a feminist and feel that feminist movement, while righting some wrongs has also done a lot of damage, especially to the family and to sexuality. In no way, as a woman, especially a Christian woman, do I want to be identified as a feminist.

I do however believe that feminism is the fault of the church. I said this in another thread as well, but this thread is probably the best place for this.

The church, contrary to the examples given by Jesus and by Paul and the other apostles, totally bought into the suppression of women by men. Somehow we went from Jesus' loving examples of how to treat women with respect with the woman at the well, with the woman caught in adultery, with the woman who had the flow of blood, etc, etc, etc. and Paul's examples of telling the Romans to do whatever Phoebe required of them and warmly greeting women of the ministry such as Priscilla, Mary, Junias, Tryphaena, Tryphosa and Julia. Obviously, Paul had a great respect for women and looked upon them as fellow workers in building up the church.

How we got from the high respect the early Church had for women to the way women were treated by the Church during the last two millennium is beyond me.

It was during the women's movement of the 1970's when suddenly women decided that they just weren't going to take it any more that suddenly pastors decided that the Bible didn't say that women were to OBEY men and be second class citizens. But, it is to the shame of the church that it took worldly women to bring about more correct teaching regarding women in the church.

 

[theLords]

Re: Wives submitting to husbands

I just don't consider women alien to me. In fact, most of my closest friends are women. I don't think that just because somebody is a woman, that means I am separated from them. Conservatives sees things in hierarchies. I am much more egalitarian. What you're basically arguing is that I could not support civil rights in the 1960s or have any opinion on the matter, just because I am Caucasian.

No, I'm simply saying that men have this unholy need to dominate! I mean it's kind of funny right? I as a woman have my opinions of woman's rights, but you as a man are "suppressing" my rights and beliefs as a man supporting women. :D :wink3

Handy and Alabaster have already explained that this belief that "Christians see things in a hierarchy" is false. It's not Biblical.

Wives and Husbands have roles that they play for the purpose of glorifying God and teaching their children how to love and respect God.

 

[jasoncran]

Re: Wives submitting to husbands

You missed the entire point. On average, there are going to be more men in the military than women; that is why I cannot support a draft that includes women (I am a pretty realistic feminist). Yet, a guy who is 5'7 and weighs only 100lbs is no more able to be in the military than a woman of the same statistics.

ok, ever heard of weight training? a man can increase his mass. men produce muscle mass more quickly and more amounts then women. he will struggle but he can do it if he trains up to it.

i weighed 135lb when i joined the service, afterwards left active time 160!

i didnt lift at all just the normal training. I weigh 204 now.

keep in mind that men have more blood volume,denser bones and also faster reflexes.

yes if the men cant hack they go too, its happens but with pc in the army for girls its overlooked in the
"co ed " units.

no women are allowed in the line units.

ok enough of the education of the uniformed.

i'm for equal pay etc.

i am not for woman doing physical jobs that common sense tell thems that they wont handle.
yes women can turn wrenches. but i have problems lifting a tire at my age 37 as my back isnt what it used to be.

i'm talking about the 200 pounders(with air and rim) that when deflated up must be mounted.

and those arent the heaviest.

 

[Free]

Feminists, such as myself, have a profound problem with it, precisely because it creates an irrationally division between males and females. St. Paul created a hierarchy: Females --> Males --> God. Anybody who thinks this does not mean St. Paul considered females to be below the stature of males, hasn't been reading their Bible.

It is true that Paul puts men as head of the house and particularly in the area of things spiritual, but anybody who thinks that Paul makes blanket statements about women being inferior to men in nature have only been selectively reading.

Gal 3:28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is no male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. (ESV)

 

[Sparkey]

It's just because Adam was created first. That's all. No superiority, neither implicit nor implied, whatsoever. We know that we are 'tenting' in our bodies here and have our citizenship in heaven. It's temporary. Right understanding of gender wasn't the only thing lost in the dark ages. Confusion does not come from God.

At the time of our Lord women were not given a voice (could not even be a witness) in courts. The honor of being the first witnesses of the resurrection of Jesus went to women. God is no respecter of persons.

 

[Pebbles]

Re: Wives submitting to husbands

ok, ever heard of weight training? a man can increase his mass. men produce muscle mass more quickly and more amounts then women. he will struggle but he can do it if he trains up to it.
keep in mind that men have more blood volume,denser bones and also faster reflexes.

Reflexes are actually the same, Just making this point out. I do know this first hand.

You are correct about men begin able to build muscle quicker and to a somewhat greater extent however it depends on the physical attributes of the female, I've seen some absolute Tanks of women and toothpicks of men.

I'm not suggesting that the physical qualifications of the job be altered in the slightest, but I'm saying IF a female can keep up with those demands then regardless of her gender she should be afforded the same opportunities.

 

[jasoncran]

Re: Wives submitting to husbands

Reflexes are actually the same, Just making this point out. I do know this first hand.

You are correct about men begin able to build muscle quicker and to a somewhat greater extent however it depends on the physical attributes of the female, I've seen some absolute Tanks of women and toothpicks of men.

I'm not suggesting that the physical qualifications of the job be altered in the slightest, but I'm saying IF a female can keep up with those demands then regardless of her gender she should be afforded the same opportunities.

didnt i say that the canadian airmen does that? she does and has hip replacement etc

i disagree i read studies on that reflex and tatyana ali a boxer and daughter of m.ali is no chump and could take me in seconds has male sparring partners and has said that she cant handle them at full power.

 

[Gendou Ikari]

It is true that Paul puts men as head of the house and particularly in the area of things spiritual, but anybody who thinks that Paul makes blanket statements about women being inferior to men in nature have only been selectively reading.

Gal 3:28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is no male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. (ESV)

Yeah, but this strikes me as the Soviet Union calling themselves democratic. For example, when St. Paul wrote:

"But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman [is] the man; and the head of Christ [is] God."

It is pretty clear what he had meant. And saying that "Paul puts men as head of the house and particularly in the area of things spiritual" is a blanket assertion by St. Paul. He does not say that those most able to lead the household should lead, but that men should lead in a marriage. It is better to just admit that St. Paul was a sexist, than to try to hide it and make excuses. I don't care. The definition of sexism is, "attitudes or behavior based on traditional stereotypes of sexual roles." I grew up a Christian and my entire family is Christian. I expect these kinds of beliefs when I come to a Christian forum.

 

[Alabaster]

Yeah, but this strikes me as the Soviet Union calling themselves democratic. For example, when St. Paul wrote:

"But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman [is] the man; and the head of Christ [is] God."

It is pretty clear what he had meant. And saying that "Paul puts men as head of the house and particularly in the area of things spiritual" is a blanket assertion by St. Paul. He does not say that those most able to lead the household should lead, but that men should lead in a marriage. It is better to just admit that St. Paul was a sexist, than to try to hide it and make excuses. I don't care. The definition of sexism is, "attitudes or behavior based on traditional stereotypes of sexual roles." I grew up a Christian and my entire family is Christian. I expect these kinds of beliefs when I come to a Christian forum.

In that verse, Paul was speaking of origins. The word for 'head' in that passage represents the kind of head we use when we discuss the 'headwaters' of a river: the source.

God is the source of Christ, and Christ is the source of man, and man is the physical source of woman.

You are wrong about Paul, who followed Christ and elevated women in the Body of Christ.

 

[jasoncran]

In that verse, Paul was speaking of origins. The word for 'head' in that passage represents the kind of head we use when we discuss the 'headwaters' of a river: the source.

God is the source of Christ, and Christ is the source of man, and man is the physical source of woman.

You are wrong about Paul, who followed Christ and elevated women in the Body of Christ.

that makes so much sense.

we cant be equal.

query for the contra argument.

why cant a man carry a child and not be a women and yet remain male?(this has been done in america)
why would it be wrong? if both are equal.

rhetorical question and dont answer openly.

 

[Free]

Yeah, but this strikes me as the Soviet Union calling themselves democratic. For example, when St. Paul wrote:

"But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman [is] the man; and the head of Christ [is] God."

It is pretty clear what he had meant. And saying that "Paul puts men as head of the house and particularly in the area of things spiritual" is a blanket assertion by St. Paul. He does not say that those most able to lead the household should lead, but that men should lead in a marriage. It is better to just admit that St. Paul was a sexist, than to try to hide it and make excuses. I don't care. The definition of sexism is, "attitudes or behavior based on traditional stereotypes of sexual roles." I grew up a Christian and my entire family is Christian. I expect these kinds of beliefs when I come to a Christian forum.

And I expect your understanding of Scripture coming from a feminist--read only what suits your cause, failing to see the forest for the trees. Paul is not making blanket statements that men are greater than women in all things. Please, read all that he actually writes, in context, to get the full understanding.