Arguing With the Inmates

People of course can lose their minds, but so can cultures. An individual can lose his grip on reality (as we used to put it so quaintly), but it is also possible for the solons of a particular generation to lose that same grip. And as these solons circle the drain, remnants of the older order float by them—and so they try to appeal to those, trying to get the same cachet that “arguments” used to have, trying to get us to feel outraged by all the oppression. But we just can’t anymore.

That’s because oppression is just a social construct. Everything is a social construct. How can men oppress women when, by this time tomorrow, everyone could in principle be a woman? How can we smash the patriarchy when the patriarchy is a social construct? We could “smash” it today and the whole thing could be rebuilt the day after tomorrow. Not only that, but we have the authority to rebuild the whole thing to our very own specs. We could even specify that Patriarchy 2.0 would have the “women” staying home baking pies and having babies, and in this next social construct they would all like it.

If biological sex is one thing, and gender is another, then this admits of limitless possibilities. Putting someone on the rack is one thing, and turning the crank is another. Torture is a social construct.

The problem is that when anything can be x, the necessary consequence is that nothing can be x. When anyone can be a woman, what’s the big deal about being a woman? When all the parts are interchangeable, what’s the big deal about changing the parts?

In this world that is descending into madness, you tell me—what isn’t a social construct? And, having drawn an arbitrary line at whatever spot you wanted to maintain (for now), tell me why that particular line has any authority whatever. Authority is a social construct, particularly yours.

So I am back to the point that was implicit in my first paragraph. Feminism is not simply a mistake. It can be merely that on an individual level, but promoted to the levels of arbitrary cultural authority it now enjoys in the public square, feminism is mental illness, the kind of mental illness that is rooted in a defiled conscience. It is the kind of madness that came to Lady Macbeth. Feminism is insanity on stilts. Cultural feminism is what happens when demented women are flattered as though they were not demented. It is the sort of thing that ends badly. Recall that Pentheus gets torn apart.

When a culture devolves to that point, remember, order must be maintained with a club. No one can police themselves anymore in accordance with the rules of a social order because social order is a social construct, and the whole thing might shift on you.

Arbitrary change, capricious reversals, and you are an intellectual outlaw for not keeping up. Genital mutilation is a crime when Muslims do it—for now—but genital mutilation is au courant if you are an upscale liberal with a femmy little boy. Only troglodytes opposed the establishment of women’s sports on college campuses a few years ago, and only troglodytes today fail to see the wickedness of such a binary establishment. What’s next? Colored drinking fountains? Actually . . . that’s not a reductio. We are now back to racial segregation on our campuses. But if everything is a social construct, then race is a social construct. So what happens when Shaun King gets thirsty?

And good luck charging them all with intellectual inconsistency. Consistency is a social construct. Expecting consistency in these times of ours is like going down into the basements of Bedlam, finding the most isolated cell, way in the back, and taking up an argument to expose the flaws in the case of the man who thinks he is the king of Neptune. “But,” you say, “that does not line up with what you said yesterday. I made a special note of it . . .”

Sure. The inmates need to be locked up, but so do the people who argue with the inmates.

If you are an intellectual outlaw for not keeping up, then what are you for refusing even to make the attempt? What are you besides a threat to democracy, I mean?

411
Leave a Reply

avatar
 
15 Comment threads
396 Thread replies
0 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
42 Comment authors
SavedByGrace1689steghorn21mktjillybeanME Recent comment authors

  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
Capndweeb
Guest
Capndweeb

And so, when we throw God out of our society and forget that truth is reality as defined by God truth itself becomes a social construct and we stand before Jesus, our hands thrown in the air like Pilate muttering, “What is truth?”

adad0
Member

Whew! Good thing I don’t self identify as a social construct!
????????????

Capndweeb
Guest
Capndweeb

:) “A” dad is a great self-identity.

adad0
Member

‘Couldn’t have happened with out “A” mom either!

Kind of implies the whole precocious personable patriarch thing don’t it?
????????????????????

Anyway, let’s not argue, that way we won’t be confused as inmates!

Capndweeb
Guest
Capndweeb

“A” mom and “A” dad…. You’re so cis-gender non-inclusive.

adad0
Member

Yes! Cis’ is a social destruct that as a dad, I can’t propagate!????

Jill Smith
Member
Jill Smith

I wanted to work at the zoo, but they told me that my koalifications were irrelephant.

Enriquetaafenn
Guest
Enriquetaafenn

Google is paying 97$ per hour! Work for few hours & have longer with friends and family! !dt168c:
On tuesday I got a great new Land Rover Range Rover from having earned $8752 this last four weeks.. Its the most-financialy rewarding I’ve had.. Follow this link for more information
!dt168c:
➽➽
➽➽;➽➽ http://GoogleFinancialCashJobs458MediaFaceGetPaid$97/Hour ★★★✫★★★✫★★★✫★★★✫★★★✫★★★✫★★★✫★★★✫★★★✫★★★✫★★★✫★★★✫★★★✫::::::!dt168c:….,….

Nat
Guest
Nat

I can’t remember the source but possibly Van Til or Bahnsen or Doug once remarked that in order to argue against the God of the Bible, we must stand upon His laws and precepts-sort of like a child climbing into his Daddy’s lap to be able to reach high enough to slap his face.

Zachary Skrip
Member

Van Til. Bahnsen quoted it all of the time in his lectures.

Karen
Guest
Karen

This makes even less sense than Wilson usually makes. So, you’re in favor of beating feminists now? Commander of the Faithful Doug Wilson will lead the Sons of Jacob to establish the Republic of Gilead? How long until you prohibit girls from learning how to read?

Ian Miller
Member

I think part of the disconnect you are having is that Wilson does not believe that the feminist narrative of history is true. Yes, some of the injustices that feminists claim were the norm happened, but he believes that there was just treatment between men and women before feminism, and we should strive to find that just treatment rather than believe in a Marxist dualism of men = always oppressing women/woman = always oppressed until feminism.

Karen
Guest
Karen

Before feminism women couldn’t vote, enter the professions, own property — even when they inherited it, if they were married — or obtain an education beyond the most rudimentary ability to read and write and quite often not even that much if they weren’t upper class. They had no rights to leave a husband who beat them. I know history. I know how women were treated. Is that what Wilson wants?

Ian Miller
Member

Before feminism, many men couldn’t vote or own property either. Professions are not always a form of power – ask coal miners a hundred years ago if they really think women would benefit from joining them.

Has Wilson stopped beating his wife, you say? Maybe you should read his letters to a fictional abuse survivor to see what he believes about women who are abused.

Karen
Guest
Karen

Oh, I HAVE read those. I would drag any friend of mine bodily away from anyone giving her that kind of advice.

Ian Miller
Member

Where in those letters, disagree with them though you may, do you see Wilson saying that an abused wife or daughter should stay with their husband or father?

Karen
Guest
Karen

I see plenty of “you are obligated to forgive the bastard and find a man who will rule your life for you because you’re a stupid girl.” I find a lot of “don’t blame men or the church.” I see lots of “stay in the toxic culture that put you in danger and it’s your job to keep men from ever thinking anything sexual about you at all because all men are helpless horndogs unable to control themselves but nevertheless should be in charge of the entire world.”

Ian Miller
Member

1) Christians are obligated to forgive. This is a gender neutral obligation, and has nothing to do with anything but getting our own souls right with God. Forgiveness does not mean continued submission to their abuse, nor does it mean a healed relationship.

2) Do you blame all men for the sin of a small percentage? Do you blame all women for the women who ruin men’s lives through divorce?

3) Where does Wilson say that his fictional abuse survivor is stupid? Or is this a tone argument?

Karen
Guest
Karen

1. True, but it would be nice if someone told the girl that she could forgive her father and never, ever see or speak of him again. She has to forgive but she certainly doesn’t have to tell her father that part. 2. No, but then I also think men are capable of controlling themselves even in the presence of a woman in a bathing suit. Even if she’s kissing him. 3. Wilson endorses patriarchy which REQUIRES that women be kept stupid and weak. Men have to be stronger and smarter because no person will take orders forever from someone… Read more »

Ian Miller
Member

I believe that Wilson has nowhere advocated that the girl must see her father again. If I am remembering incorrectly, I apologize.

It’s so weird that Wilson has encouraged and published his wife and daughter’s work, and women teach at the college he helped found. He must really want his students and the people who read his wife and daughters to receive stupid and weak teaching.

Patriarchy is not “taking orders.” Submission is not self-immolation. The conflation of these ideas is part of the problem in this discussion.

Jane
Member

The problem with repeating something over and over again that was never true in the first place is not only that it doesn’t come true, but it becomes more obviously untrue as more evidence piles up against it, over time.

Ian Miller
Member

Ah, but Dunsworth, you are clearly a “Serena” from “The Handmaid’s Tale,” a woman who has internalized misogyny so much that she wishes to impose it upon all others.

Are you played by Yvonne Strahovski, too? ;)

holmegm
Guest
holmegm

I saw that movie (the original). How anybody could see it now and think it is about Christians baffles me.

Muslims are like the imaginary bogymen “Christians” of feminist nightmares, but come to life. They really are the anti-women theocrats that Karen so desperately wishes Doug were.

Ian Miller
Member

I do wish the the liberals would realize that the radical Muslims they so desperately think are a race would like to wipe them out first.

As for the Handmaid’s Tale, it appears to be incredibly typical 80s dystopia about how evil Reagan was, with little to no understanding of what would happen if someone like Reagan ever actually achieved dictatorial power.

Jill Smith
Member
Jill Smith

(1) Wilson has said that she never has to see him again. (2) What do you mean by self-control in this case? If you mean that the man being kissed by a girl in a bathing suit has no right to rape her, you will find no disagreement here. If you mean that she has every right to be outraged if he kisses her back, that’s completely unreasonable. (3) How much of a normal marriage is spent taking orders? You have developed a mental picture of a brute in a torn undershirt yelling “Bring me a beer and be quick… Read more »

steghorn21
Guest
steghorn21

I find your remarks distinctly sexist.

Jill Smith
Member
Jill Smith

Isn’t that kind of imposing your will on hers? Isn’t that kind of assuming that your friend isn’t smart enough to make her own judgments about the quality of the advice she is receiving? It sounds a little matriarchal to me.

Karen
Guest
Karen

And because men had it rough does that make it right? Because coal mining is a terrible job we should keep women from being doctors? How does that make anything like sense? Maybe give the coal miners better, safer jobs?

Ian Miller
Member

The coal mining still has to be done. I’m fairly certain that we differ enough on history and interpretation of history that further discussion isn’t going to be very profitable. (inb4 “Well, yes, our views of history are different, mine are based on facts.” Very droll.)

Karen
Guest
Karen

Nice way to avoid answering the question. Do you think that women should be doctors?

Ian Miller
Member

Yup. Do you think women should be trash collectors?

Karen
Guest
Karen

Good. We’re getting somewhere. What do you think women should NOT be allowed to do?

Ian Miller
Member

I think women should not be allowed to:

1) Be men.

2) Kill people. Including the people in their wombs. Yes, I do accept “in the case of the life of the mother” as an exception.

3) Sin in general (though this one is for men and women).

So. Female trash collectors?

Karen
Guest
Karen

1. I presume this means you don’t accept sex changes. Is there anything else?

2. So, no soldiers or police officers?

3. Not really responsive to the original point, but okay.

Ian Miller
Member

1. Yes, that is part of what I mean. But I also mean the encouragement that women reject being wives and mothers in favor of becoming functional men in the workplace and sexual marketplace.

2. You are right. I should have said “murder”.

3. Well, that’s the only other thing I could think of that women shouldn’t be allowed to do in general. But I did want to clarify that it’s not that women must be holy and men don’t have to be.

Karen
Guest
Karen

1. What is a ‘functional man?’ If women can be doctors, then shouldn’t we be allowed to practice our professions?

2. Thanks for the clarification.

3. We can agree that this one applies to everyone.

Ian Miller
Member

Functional man: not capable of being a wife or mother. Capable of fornicating with multiple partners without any direct physical consequences. (Please note that I still advocate #3 for both sexes. Men should not be doing this either.) Rejecting commitment and responsibility. (Please also note that this is a functional, not a virtuous or admirable man. This is, in fact, the man that feminists both loathe and want to normalize as a standard of behavior for women.)

wtrsims
Member

Clarification for me: Does #2 mean yes, women can be soldiers and police?

Ian Miller
Member

I am waffly on this issue, unfortunately. I do not believe women should be in combat, and I believe a co-ed military is a rape and assault machine. I have not thought as much on women in the police force, but examining my assumptions, it seems that I’m pretty okay with female police officers. Again, because these are assumptions, I’m not really sure about them, but I was deeply uncomfortable with John Piper’s articulation that women should not be police officers relatively recently. That discomfort does not equate to an argument, however. tl,dr: I’m not sure, but I’m generally against… Read more »

BJ
Guest
BJ

I was tracking with you until the military and police thing.

Allowing the only ones who can populate the world (women) to chase down the most evil and violent among us to keep the men safe is extremely backwards, and dare I say quite antagonistic to women. If my wife or daughter wants to attack the home invader while I stay in bed and hide, I ignore her silly request and protect her anyway. Only someone who fails to value their wives and daughters does that.

Jill Smith
Member
Jill Smith

But there are a lot of roles that don’t require actually chasing the bad guys. Most women who have experienced assault are much more comfortable speaking to a female officer.

I think that, in a secular society, my preference that women not be in combat or boxing rings is largely irrelevant. But I do believe that, if women want to be fire fighters, navy seals, etc., they should meet the same physical standards.

Ian Miller
Member

There’s the knotty issue. I’m against women in combat, but if they want to be in combat, by golly they’d better be ready for it. But the people who are pushing for women in combat do not share my scruples, so they’re vitiating the standards that make our soldiers combat ready to fit their insane denial of reality – but because I’ve vacated the field of battle (metaphorically) by thinking that women shouldn’t be in combat in the first place, it’s difficult for me to really say anything about meeting the standards.

Jill Smith
Member
Jill Smith

It is incredibly difficult. I think it is inevitable eventually because, sooner or later, guys are going to challenge draft registration laws. I can’t think of a valid secular argument that totally excuses women from military service while potentially requiring it of men. But I don’t think it is a good thing, any more than I think women guards in men’s prisons is a good thing (or the other way around).

Ian Miller
Member

Excellent points. I am against the draft for men as well, except in truly extreme circumstances (like actual invasion). But if it has to be in place, I’m not sure why you would exempt women given the assumptions our military currently makes. But I’ve had some longer conversations with a feminist coworker and friend about military and the equal pay arguments, and it’s kind of shocking how nakedly irrational the argument has become. The feminist argument about equal pay is now that women shouldn’t be expected to work as much as men are expected to work – and that we… Read more »

BJ
Guest
BJ

Now you are catching on.

Ian Miller
Member

:)

Jane
Member

On a purely selfish level, I’m thankful my youngest daughter just turned 19. If SS/draft for women ever comes, it will almost certainly bypass her. But that doesn’t mean I don’t care.

Jill Smith
Member
Jill Smith

I have mixed feelings. While I don’t like the idea of women in combat, or of co-ed navy ships, I have this secret desire to have the Israeli Defense Forces do a Private Benjamin on the Snowflake. I would watch from afar while she told some drill instructor that she needs 70 minutes every morning to do her makeup, and another 30 in the late afternoon to freshen up. Outraged, she would demand to call her mother and her congressman and perhaps the ACLU when they told her there is no resident manicurist on the base.

OKRickety
Member

Aren’t there military colleges that take women? Maybe you should have sent her to one of those rather than that expensive school. :)

Jill Smith
Member
Jill Smith

Yes, I think so! Although drama school is quite ruthless, and you would have to be a lunatic to try talking back! She is really a very sweet girl, and kind as kind can be. Just a little bit privileged, and for that I’m sure her mother bears most of the blame!

BJ
Guest
BJ

Women very much played a role during wartime in just about every war. If half of the male population leaves to fight, they have much more to do. I never suggested that they women couldn’t play a role, but the idea that they have to be part of the formal military, carrying weapons, wearing the uniform, working in hostile war zones, are all silly and backwards.

Ian Miller
Member

Here, C. S. Lewis got to me soon enough that I still think wars are ugly when women fight.

Still waffly, though.

My Portion Forever
Member

Women in the military do not fight unless they are in certain career fields. They certainly should not be allowed to be in career fields in which they will face combat though! Terrible idea

Ian Miller
Member

I agree. I was mostly speaking of the hypotheticals, and the direction that many feminists seem to want to take the military. I apologize if I implied otherwise.

Jill Smith
Member
Jill Smith

I thought of that when I read about Lynndie England and saw the pictures. To think that she was once somebody’s little girl. I doubt she would have done those things unless she felt a need to prove she was tougher than any of the guys.

Ian Miller
Member

That story just gets uglier the more you look into it.

Jill Smith
Member
Jill Smith

Yes, but think of the WRENS in the second world war. I think women providing necessary support to the military during wartime probably are more effective when they are part of a disciplined unit. The uniforms and structure serve a purpose. But the WRENS weren’t armed, and they didn’t go to combat zones.

On the other hand, army nurses did and probably still do.

BJ
Guest
BJ

I am all for women’s units contributing to war efforts. They can wear a uniform and train like necessary. Let’s just not integrate them with the male units, whether combat or not. Plus, let’s keep them out of harm’s way.

My Portion Forever
Member

Do you support co-ed workplaces anywhere?

Jill Smith
Member
Jill Smith

Life would be very dull without them! I was well behaved in the workplace, but I certainly enjoyed both male and female companionship. I spent 18 months working at a defense plant, and there were 10 men for every woman. Whoa!

My Portion Forever
Member

Well, that’s pretty much what the co-ed military is like! The odds are good, but the goods are… odd…

BJ
Guest
BJ

I am not openly opposed to them. I currently work in one. I am one of three pastors on staff with several females who work in the office.

The military is a different bird altogether, but we must be careful in general. It simply is not surprising that when women entered the workforce en mass that the incidences of adultery likewise went up en mass.

My Portion Forever
Member

I can see how co-ed workplaces increase opportunity for adultery as well as sexual assault or extortion. I don’t think the Air Force, by and large, is that different from the general workplace in this area, except for the young Airmen who live in dorms. I imagine then it is similar to college dorms, which isn’t saying much. Except we get it drilled into our heads 4 times a year not to sexually assault or harass anyone or let anyone else do it either.

wtrsims
Member

And someone’s gotta cook!

Ian Miller
Member

As I said, I’m waffly, and have not examined all of my assumptions as carefully as I ought. Sadly, I don’t feel the oughtness enough.

Karen
Guest
Karen

Of course. We do it for free all the time; we might as well get paid.

Ian Miller
Member

Not what I meant at all. I’m pointing at the fact that the feminist argument seems to only apply to the glamorous, exciting jobs that lead to higher-class existence. No insistence that women enter the low-class jobs upon which our society depends.

Jill Smith
Member
Jill Smith

That is one of the things that makes me uncomfortable. Women who combine motherhood and a demanding career are depending on the availability of uneducated, female low-paid labor to make it happen. No one is fighting for paid maternity leave for nannies and house cleaners.

Karen
Guest
Karen

Well, fathers might consider stepping up, but everyone here agrees that laundry soap dissolves penises.

Jill Smith
Member
Jill Smith

Can you engage with what anybody is actually saying? Or is that an unfair imposition of masculine rules of debate?

Karen
Guest
Karen

No, but your assertion that somehow nannies can’t get maternity leave is wrong. One option is allowing people who work in jobs not subject to FMLA to claim unemployment insurance for maternity and sick leave. Republicans oppose this.

As for the remark about penises, you all are the ones obsessing about sex roles and enforcing rigid boundaries of behavior. I think traditionally feminine activities like baking and needlework are enjoyable. I’m going to teach my son to knit this summer.

Bro. Steve
Guest
Bro. Steve

Huzzah! That is SO right!

Add to that: In certain areas such as D.C., a sizeable proportion of those low-wage child care workers are Moslem women.

So — show of hands here — who’s in favor of Moslems rearing children of Christians in lieu of their Christian mothers who feel the need to be liberated into the world of salaries?

Karen
Guest
Karen

The media portrayals have all done so. Feminists would love to see more women electricians.

Ian Miller
Member

Where do you see that?

BJ
Guest
BJ

Feminists might, but women generally don’t. Women in the western world are freer than any in history to pursue their interest. What do they overwhelmingly choose? Teaching young children, medical fields that involve caring for people like nursing, elder care, veterinary medicine, and psychology, food prep and catering, and marketable artistic fields like interior design, wedding planning, etc. What do they overwhelmingly avoid? Engineering of all types, construction, truck driving, manual labor fields like logging, trash collections, and carpentry, as well police and military work. They do this in the face of very imbalanced incentives to move them in that… Read more »

Jane
Member

I have two daughters that were high-performing in STEM classes in high school, and though neither of them were interested in STEM type careers, they received a lot of pressure from adults to pursue that, to the point where it was annoying. There may be corners of our society where women are still overtly or tacitly discouraged from those areas, but in general, if anything, they’re overtly or tacitly discouraged from “traditional” female careers to a much greater degree.

BJ
Guest
BJ

Point well taken. I do know that women can excel in male dominated fields or that they can learn those skills. The problem is that nature (read God’s design) lends them in a different direction. Is it really surprising that the half of the population that is biologically designed to carry, birth, and feed the young are inclined to care for, feed, and comfort the rest of humanity? Is it really odd that the other half, whose job it is to provide and protect from harm the half of the population that they place into a vulnerable position through pregnancy,… Read more »

Jane
Member

And yet that is the primary economic fruit of feminism: women forced out of the home, often against their will, into unpleasant, poorly paid service and manufacturing jobs, because one income no longer supports a family.

Ian Miller
Member

I have heard, though haven’t researched, that because of nanny/daycare fees, second incomes are often not even as helpful in that regard.

In addition to the sex role destruction, the immaturity of our culture leads to widespread financial idiocy.

Not to mention the utterly horrifying notion that some liberal politicians are attempting to actually legally ban stay at home moms in some places.

Jane
Member

At the bottom of the scale, nanny/daycare fees are less of an issue because people make it work with relatives, or subsidized daycare. But middle class and above, that’s definitely true. And of course the kids eventually grow old enough to go to school and/or mind themselves, but the second income is still often needed.

Ian Miller
Member

Would it be needed if people were making better financial decisions, or is pay simply not high enough period? I was not of the understanding that two incomes were absolutely necessary – but that’s perhaps because I grew up in a mostly single-income family, with 8 children, and while it was tight at the beginning of my father’s career, it generally hasn’t been for the past 20 years or so. (Also, I was homeschooled, and am not of the opinion that children should be turned over to the state schools for childcare).

Jonathan
Guest
Jonathan

To be honest, there is very little coal mining that needs to be done if at all, and what is left is primarily automated.

The entire American coal industry combined employs fewer people than Arby’s, it is getting killed by natural gas and renewables and will continue to get killed, and yet it still produces an insane amount of toxins and hazardous waste sites.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environmental_impact_of_the_coal_industry

Ian Miller
Member

Coal mining was more a synechdoche than an actual profession I was wanting to argue about. It represents all of the dirty, dangerous jobs that are necessary for society to function but don’t have significant monetary or class rewards, so feminism doesn’t march around saying “We need more female coal miners.” Because more female coal miners wouldn’t produce higher “wages for women.”

adad0
Member

Still, many feminists spend a lot of time trying to dig themselves out of the holes they have created! ????
Still others seem to be mining for dirt!

Jill Smith
Member
Jill Smith

Please tell me who is preventing women from being doctors. Over half the people currently enrolled in medical school are women.

Is there some new secret piece of legislation intended to force women back into their domestic prison? The last time I was in court, the judge, the bailiff, and both sets of lawyers were women. Nobody was picketing with placards saying “Men rule, women drool.” Where are you getting this stuff from?

Karen
Guest
Karen

Exactly. Thanks to feminism half of our doctors will be women. And you all want to send us back to the kitchen.

Jill Smith
Member
Jill Smith

Can you show me where I, or anyone else on this thread, has said that? You are arguing with yourself.

ashv
Guest
ashv

Civilisation can continue without female doctors.

Civilisation cannot continue without mothers.

Ian Miller
Member

I agree.

OKRickety
Member

Was that Family/Divorce Court? If so, with all the women, do you suppose the judgments might be biased toward women?

Jill Smith
Member
Jill Smith

No, actually it works the other way round. For a divorce like mine, my best hope was for an avuncular male judge who would have watched my blue eyes well up with tears and decided that my husband needed to suffer! Women judges are indifferent to ladies whose blue eyes fill up with tears, and they are much more likely to think they can go back to work. Still, I did fine. The bailiff stood behind me patting my shoulder, and the court clerk called me honey as he brought me boxes of kleenex. Of course, ending a 30-year marriage… Read more »

OKRickety
Member

“My husband and I sat holding hands, …”If I was the judge, I might be irritated, too. I’d probably ask for an explanation, if nothing else, because that is so incongruent with the situation.

Jill Smith
Member
Jill Smith

I know. I think what my ex-husband actually wants is a harem, but he had the good sense not to tell that to the judge!

Jill Smith
Member
Jill Smith

Are you taking into account the fact that, outside the universities which did refuse to admit women, education was almost entirely a question of social class and not gender? If you study illiteracy rates in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, they reflect poverty, social class, and the demand that working class children enter the labor force as early as possible. Very few agricultural laborers and mine workers could read and write. The Sunday School/Ragged School movement sought to provide basic literacy to both working class boys and girls on an equal footing. By the 1840s, there were charitable boarding schools… Read more »

FeatherBlade
Guest
FeatherBlade

I have to admit I have no idea where anyone gets the idea that women couldn’t go to university.

The University of Idaho’s first graduating class way back in 1890-whatever was 50% women.

Jill Smith
Member
Jill Smith

That’s amazing. English and Canadian universities were much slower. Even after they admitted women, they still refused to give them degrees.

Jane
Member

I graduated from Moravian College, which was founded as a women’s college in 1742. At that time, “college” for women was more like high school, but by 1863 the college was granting baccalaureate degrees to women.

ashv
Guest
ashv

It’d be better than what we have now. (Where was divorce for cruelty forbidden? Certainly not in Christian countries.)

Jill Smith
Member
Jill Smith

In England, once divorce was removed from the purview of canon lawyers, it required an act of parliament until fairly recent times (mid to late 19th century). This made it so insanely expensive that only the richest people could get one. However, legal separation was possible. The real difficulty was that, even when there was serious physical violence, the woman would not take her children with her when she left. Most women would not leave children alone with a brute even to save their own lives.

ashv
Guest
ashv

Sure. I would just point out that this would reflect imperfect execution of justice rather than a denial of it entirely.

BJ
Guest
BJ

Maybe it was not legally forbidden, but men were not allowed, by cultural enforcement, to leave their cruel wives. In Christian countries, this was especially prevalent since defending oneself from their wife with physical violence was considered shameful.

http://www.medicaldaily.com/domestic-violence-against-men-women-more-likely-be-intimate-terrorists-controlling-behavior-290662

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2011/jun/07/feminism-domestic-violence-men

ashv
Guest
ashv

Well yes, of course, but that’s happened since the law has forbidden husbands to rule over their wives as they should. I would be surprised if this occurred frequently in 17th century England, for example.

Karen
Guest
Karen

You are at least consistent. Patriarchy requires that men beat their wives.

ashv
Guest
ashv

Cocaine is a heck of a drug.

Katecho
Member

Karen wrote:

Patriarchy requires that men beat their wives.

Or rather, Karen is giving us a lesson in what feminism requires.

Jill Smith
Member
Jill Smith

True, but ashv is provoking her!

John
Member

He sure is pressing her buttons!

Karen
Guest
Karen

So how does a man exercise authority over his wife if he can’t beat her?

Katecho
Member

Karen asks: So how does a man exercise authority over his wife if he can’t beat her? Consider the example of Christ, who exercises His authority over His bride, the Church, by provisioning her, and by fighting the dragons that pursue her, even to the point of laying down His life for her. She looks to Him, and follows Him obediently, as her Guardian and Savior and Provider. This is the model for masculine headship, not that wives must go through husbands for salvation, but that men can model what it means to rescue their beloved from all troubles. Karen… Read more »

ashv
Guest
ashv

Have you considered being the kind of wife that doesn’t provoke a beating?

Nat
Guest
Nat

Girl! You make all these wild, hair on fire, hysterical, crazy comments. Everyone keeps asking you to document just one. Please get a hold of yourself and enter into a rational in context discussion. You seem to be suffering from an advanced case of the flying flaming fantods. Bourbon, deep breaths, let it out slow. Come on over for some laughs and bar-b-cue.

Oscar Schneegans
Guest
Oscar Schneegans

You’re giving Karen far too much credit. She (assuming she really is a she) started off with “So, you’re in favor of beating feminists now? Commander of the Faithful Doug Wilson will lead the Sons of Jacob to establish the Republic of Gilead? How long until you prohibit girls from learning how to read?”

She’s a liar and false accuser, plain and simple.

Ian Miller
Member

I don’t know if she is saying something she believes to be untrue with the purpose of deceiving others. It seems more likely to me that she’s drunk with the ear-tickling of the feminist narrative of history, and if that’s her perspective, Doug’s worldview is incredibly hostile to her.

Oscar Schneegans
Guest
Oscar Schneegans

If she actually believes it’s true that Pastor Doug advocates wife beating, let her produce evidence to support her accusation, i.e. a direct quote.

She hasn’t. Why not? Because it doesn’t exist, and she knows it.

She’s a liar and false accuser. There’s no need to pretend otherwise.

Ian Miller
Member

From her (evil) perspective), the patriarchy ennables these things.

Also, I think she’s a crummy reader because of her outrage.

She may be a liar, but I don’t currently believe that.

Oscar Schneegans
Guest
Oscar Schneegans

So what if that’s her perspective? The burden of proof rests with the accuser. She didn’t just accuse “the patriarchy”. She accused Pastor Doug individually, personally. That means she can either:

1. Provide evidence to support her accusation (she hasn’t, because it doesn’t exist), or…
2. Be proven a liar.

So, where’s the evidence?

Ian Miller
Member

I also believe that Karen subscribes to a more collectivist model of reality than I do. So Doug, as part of the patriarchy, is more responsible for acts of beatings in her perspective than mine.

I don’t agree with Karen in any way, but I don’t think assuming bad faith is a useful way to discuss things.

Oscar Schneegans
Guest
Oscar Schneegans

Who’s assuming? Either the accusation is true, in which case she’d provide the evidence to support her accusation, or she has no evidence, in which case the accusation is false, and she knows it.

You’re doing exactly what Pastor Doug warns against in this post. You’re arguing with the inmate.

Ian Miller
Member

Oh, now this I find amusing. Being told by ME and yourself, for opposite reasons, to stop talking to Karen.

Oscar Schneegans
Guest
Oscar Schneegans

Where did I say, “stop talking to Karen”? Can you provide a quote?

Ian Miller
Member

You say I’m doing what Doug says not to do. No, you do not give me a command, but you at least say what I’m doing is foolish.

Oscar Schneegans
Guest
Oscar Schneegans

Because it is foolish, which is not the same thing as me telling you “stop talking to Karen”, which I never did.

The facts remain:
1. Karen made accusations against Pastor Doug
2. Karen provided zero evidence to support her accusations

When someone – anyone – makes an accusation, the sensible thing to do is demand supporting evidence. Indulging a false accuser by attempting to understand their fact-free, fantasy-filled perspective without demanding evidence is not only foolish, but a slap in the face to the falsely accused.

Ian Miller
Member

Doug doesn’t need my white knighting. :)

Jonathan
Guest
Jonathan

He already has a white knight here anyway. :P

Oscar Schneegans
Guest
Oscar Schneegans

So, requiring evidence of an accuser is “white knighting” in your book? Does that rule apply to all accusers, or does it only apply to those who falsely accuse a brother in Christ?

Ian Miller
Member

In what fantasy universe did I actually accept Karen’s argument or understanding of the facts?

Am I feeding a troll right now?

Oscar Schneegans
Guest
Oscar Schneegans

In what fantasy universe did I actually state that you “actually accept Karen’s argument or understanding of the facts?” Can you provide a quote? If not, can you stick to addressing statements I actually made instead of tilting at straw men?

While you’re at it, can you answer the questions I asked based on a statement you actually made?

“Doug doesn’t need my white knighting. :)”

Is requiring evidence of an accuser is “white knighting” in your book? Does that rule apply to all accusers, or does it only apply to those who falsely accuse a brother in Christ?

Ian Miller
Member

I don’t need you quarterbacking my conversations. If you wish to have conversations with others, you are free to do so in the manner you require. I find your pedantry incredibly annoying, and would request that you stop.

Oscar Schneegans
Guest
Oscar Schneegans

Did you request that Karen stop slandering Pastor Doug, or at least require that she provide evidence to support her accusations? If not, why not?

Ian Miller
Member

Why do I need to, when you did?

Oscar Schneegans
Guest
Oscar Schneegans

You actually have to ask why you need to defend a brother in Christ from slander? Seriously?

Ian Miller
Member

You are annoyingly literal and pedantic, as I have requested you to stop being. I was challenging her narrative, which was WHY she was saying false things about Doug.

Oscar Schneegans
Guest
Oscar Schneegans

“I was challenging her narrative… ” And you failed to demand evidence. 1 Timothy 5:19 Do not entertain an accusation against an elder unless it is brought by two or three witnesses. Do you know what witnesses are? They’re a form of evidence. Do you know what it means to “entertain an accusation”? It means to “give attention or consideration to (an idea, suggestion, or feeling).” In violation of 1 Tim 5:19, you gave Karen’s baseless, slanderous accusations of Pastor Doug (a church elder, and your brother in Christ) abundant attention without demanding evidence. When (not if) you find yourself… Read more »

Ian Miller
Member

Wow.

I asked, metaphorically, in what fantasy universe I was accepting her arguments. That does not, for the annoyingly literal, mean “Oscae Schneegans lives in a fantasy universe.”

I know I will definitely ask that Oscar Schneegans be kept far, far away from me if I ever face lies and accusations.

Oscar Schneegans
Guest
Oscar Schneegans

“When”, not “if”.

And my name is spelled Oscar, not “Oscae”.

Ian Miller
Member

According to you, I deserve it for not standing up for Doug. I will be rightly attacked for my failure.

Oscar Schneegans
Guest
Oscar Schneegans

“Deserve”? In what fantasy universe did I actually state that you “deserve it?” Can you provide a quote? If not, can you stick to addressing statements I actually made instead of tilting at straw men?

Ian Miller
Member

You are very angry with me for not “demanding evidence” from Karen. This anger drives you to constantly post about my failures as a Christian and a man.

Please stop. I have not bothered you. I bear you no more than passing annoyance. I don’t know why I have provoked so much from you.

Oscar Schneegans
Guest
Oscar Schneegans

Angry? I’m not even “annoyed”. Not even “passingly”.

Also, I’m not the one who commanded “do not entertain an accusation against an elder unless it is brought by two or three witnesses.” Paul did that. I merely quoted his words for you. Was he wrong?

Ian Miller
Member

I chose to respond to Karen with a directed line of reasoning about her fundamental assumptions. Why don’t you ask her for proof, instead of demanding that everyone who talks to her do so? Why are you so obsessed with me asking her for proof? And don’t ask me again whether I agree with Paul – I do – but I don’t think Karen’s comment was best responded to with your suggestion, or that Paul’s words applied. And no, I will not answer why I think it wasn’t the best choice – I’ve already stated my reasons for my response… Read more »

Oscar Schneegans
Guest
Oscar Schneegans

Oh, so Paul’s words don’t apply? That’s interesting. Let’s look at Paul’s words again.

“Do not entertain an accusation against an elder unless it is brought by two or three witnesses.”

I don’t see an exception clause in that statement. Apparently, you do. Can you point it out to me?

Ian Miller
Member

What part of “don’t ask me again” didn’t you understand?

Oscar Schneegans
Guest
Oscar Schneegans

What part? Maybe it’s collocated with that exception clause. Can you point it out for me? Here are Paul’s words again.

“Do not entertain an accusation against an elder unless it is brought by two or three witnesses.”

Ian Miller
Member

Don’t ask me again. About any of it. Ask Karen, if you are so determined to have her answer that question.

Oscar Schneegans
Guest
Oscar Schneegans

Paul’s words aren’t directed at the false accuser (that would be Karen). They’re directed towards Christians who might entertain (“give attention to”) the false accuser’s false accusations (that would be you).

So, can you point out the exception clause? Here are Paul’s words again, just in case you forgot.

“Do not entertain an accusation against an elder unless it is brought by two or three witnesses.”

Ian Miller
Member

Why haven’t you asked Karen these questions?

adad0
Member

C’mon Oscar, it was “The Russians”! ; – )

insanitybytes22
Member

I never asked you to stop talking to Karen, Ian. I think you are kind and rational. I think you are exactly the kind of person who should be talking to Karen.

I was trying to point out that dismissing women as crazy,deceitful, liars is not only false, it doesn’t win hearts and minds. Alas, I am allegedly crazy since no one here ever does that.

Welcome to the nut house. :)

Ian Miller
Member

Aha! I am actually guilty of misreading Oscar and ME! :)

Thank you.

I think dismissing anyone for having bad faith, unless it’s really clear that they do have bad faith, is dumb. Which, now that I think of it, does impose itself upon me when certain claims (mostly about “miscegenation”) instantly put my back up, and I assume bad faith on the part of those who denigrate it.

Winning hearts and minds. Sometimes I am hopeful. Other times, I despair. Today, thankfully, is a more hopeful day. :)

Jill Smith
Member
Jill Smith

I don’t think she is lying in the sense of saying something she knows is false. I think she is blinded by her prejudices.

Ian Miller
Member

I agree with that assessment.

Jill Smith
Member
Jill Smith

I think she sees things that aren’t there. All the denials in the world will not convince her.

Oscar Schneegans
Guest
Oscar Schneegans

If she actually believes that her accusations against Pastor Doug are true, why hasn’t she even attempted to provide a single shred of evidence to support her accusations?

Jill Smith
Member
Jill Smith

I am guessing here, Oscar, because I don’t know for sure. But this is my conjecture about what is going on. Karen wants to believe that all you Christian men are wife-beating brutes because it gives her an excuse to despise you all. Because, if you’re just nice ordinary people, then what has she been making all this fuss about? She doesn’t believe what anyone here says unless it fits with her idea about what Christian men are like. So, the more people deny that what she is saying is true, the more she doubles down and says it has… Read more »

Oscar Schneegans
Guest
Oscar Schneegans

All of which still makes Karen a false accuser and a liar, unless she provides evidence to support the accusations she made against Pastor Doug.

She hasn’t. Nor will she. Because the evidence does not exist. Just as ME’s supposed screen shot of your supposed comment doesn’t exist.

insanitybytes22
Member

“All of which still makes Karen a false accuser and a liar”

Whew Jilly! Good thing nobody ever calls women crazy liars on this board. That would be crazy.

Oscar Schneegans
Guest
Oscar Schneegans

I never called “women crazy liars”. I called Karen a liar and an accuser. Do you have a quote from Pastor Doug that proves her accusations against him are true? If so, produce it.

By the way, where’s the screenshot you claimed to have taken of jillybean’s comment?

JP Stewart
Member

I certainly haven’t. Only women who habitually lie and never own up to it or repent. I’ve never used the term for Jilly, Dunsworth, Valerie or many, many other women who post here.

OKRickety
Member

That seems quite familiar. Maybe because it often happens on this blog? Just change the name and the complaint, and voila!

JP Stewart
Member

I see a pattern here…

jsm
Guest
jsm

In your Liberal utopia everything is a social construct. There are no girls or maybe everyone feels like being one every other day of the week.

FeatherBlade
Guest
FeatherBlade

It’s almost a pity that there’s only a date stamp on the original post and not a time stamp.

It would be amusing to see how much time elapsed between the appearance of the post, and the appearance of the first feminist to confirm everything the post said.

Karen
Guest
Karen

Do you believe in beating women for refusing to be the doormats Wilson wants us to be?

FeatherBlade
Guest
FeatherBlade

I think that if any man tried to beat me, I’d pull out my gun and shoot him for it.

Karen
Guest
Karen

Good. So would I, if my eyesight were better.

FeatherBlade
Guest
FeatherBlade

You do realize that the fact I can own a gun and shoot a man for attacking me (provided that that action met the legal criteria for self-defence) is a course of action /state of affairs of which Wilson himself spoke of approvingly not two posts back.

Karen
Guest
Karen

I’m sure he said he was okay with women using guns, at least until one actually does shoot her abuser and then it will be a crime against nature for women to touch the Manly Things.

FeatherBlade
Guest
FeatherBlade

Do you actually listen to your own words?

I ought to follow this rule more often myself, but it’s usually a bad idea to post on the internet when you are in the grip of strong emotions.

ashv
Guest
ashv

In my culture, “touch not the Manly Things” means that she cooks in the kitchen and I cook on the outdoor grill.

Jill Smith
Member
Jill Smith

In my marriage it meant that I didn’t usually get to handle the TV remote!

John
Member

That’s just called “maintaining marital harmony.”

Jill Smith
Member
Jill Smith

Yes, and patiently enduring endless Star Trek re-runs. He liked Shatner, I liked Picard. Oh well, at least we both liked Bonanza re-runs, as long as Little Joe had only a minor part.

John
Member

Wife is gone temporarily and she refuses to watch movies that are subtitled but I discovered Polish, Dutch and Russian movies that concern WW2 and the Holocaust. They have an interesting take on the war and it is much more nuanced than American films dealing with the same topics. Not that that has much to do with the topic here. lol

Jill Smith
Member
Jill Smith

I see her point on subtitles. By the time I find my glasses, the movie is over.

John
Member

True and you can’t take your eyes off the screen or, like me, the rewind button becomes your best friend. If you can find it watch a movie called “Run Boy Run.” True but simply unbelievable. Tissues could be required.

John
Member

Shatner is Canadian!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Jill Smith
Member
Jill Smith

Well, I know, but he always got on my nerves a bit. So was Lorne Green, and he did too. Every Canadian can tell you, probably within the first five minutes of meeting, exactly who in Hollywood and everywhere else hailed from the great white north. Did I mention kd lang? Her initials don’t actually stand for Kraft Dinner, even though Canadians lead the world in eating it (on average, twice a week, and I can see why). Sometimes we can go back through the generations. Walt Disney? Ah yes, his great-grandfather was Quebecois. Naismith who invented basketball? Born in… Read more »

Nat
Guest
Nat

The best thing to come out of Canada was The Band after they got picked up by Levon Helm-greatest rock group ever. No one close.

Jill Smith
Member
Jill Smith

“Up on Cripple Creek” was a great song.

adad0
Member

“A drunkard’s dream if I ever did see one!”

Jennie
Member

Joni Mitchell?

Oh, Canada-AH!

My mom was the same way about Welsh actors and singers, “He’s Welsh, you know.” No one was allowed to speak when Tom Jones was on TV in case he uttered something in Welsh.

Jill Smith
Member
Jill Smith

“Down the road I look and there comes Mary,
Hair of gold and lips like cherry…”

I guess you heard that a few times while you were growing up!

Jennie
Member

Like a Lady whoa whoa whoa.

Jill Smith
Member
Jill Smith

How about the Bwbachod and Tylwith Teg?

Jennie
Member

Ha. I had to look them up. I remember coming home from school one day to find my mom sitting in her chair, pale as a ghost and weeping. She said in a hushed voice, “There was an owl hooting down the chimney,” but she wouldn’t tell me what it meant. I’ve always wondered about that.

Wales is an enchanted land though. No doubt about it.

Jill Smith
Member
Jill Smith

I think I might know about the owl. In many cultures, the sound of an owl hooting up close is said to presage imminent human death. There is a really good novel about an Anglican missionary priest who ministered to the First Nations people off the coast of British Columbia, and he got a fatal disease and died bravely. It’s called “I Heard the Owl Call My Name.” Maybe your mum had heard a similar story. I knew about the TTs and Bwbachods from my Brownie pack when I was a child. We were divided into sixes, and each had… Read more »

JohnM
Guest
JohnM

But Captain Kirk is Iowan.

http://www.roadsideamerica.com/story/2081

John
Member

Is this heaven?

Ho it’s Iowa.

Go Hawks.

Nat
Guest
Nat

Yeah but he lives in Kentucky now.

adad0
Member

Known to some as the “BOP”. Box of Power!

wtrsims
Member

I sometimes wish it meant car keys.

Nat
Guest
Nat

Share with us if you will exactly where Pastor Wilson advocates beating anyone in his post. If you can’t then you are a perfect example of Doug’s post male or female.

Jennie
Member

It was the cartoon. Did you not see that BatMAN is slapping his domestic partner, Robyn? As in Robyn Red BREAST.

Do I have to explain everything to you people?

ETA: This is sarcasm.

Jill Smith
Member
Jill Smith

Yes, you do! I didn’t even notice the cartoon. It’s worse than that; Robin is his UNDERAGE domestic partner.

Ian Miller
Member

In a move that will no doubt reveal the real source of my waffliness on the subject of women in law enforcement, I will say that in comic books my favorite Robin is a girl. But she did not re-title herself “Robyn.”

Jill Smith
Member
Jill Smith

My favorite Robin is from Monty Python and the Holy Grail:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BZwuTo7zKM8

Ian Miller
Member

Ahaha. But he was a cannibal! They ate the minstrels and there were much rejoicing! ;)

Jennie
Member

That was a blast from the past! Thank you!

JohnM
Guest
JohnM

My favorite is a Turdus.

Nat
Guest
Nat

Yes. I saw the cartoon. A proper reading would seem to indicate the one doing the slapping as an advocate of the “social construct” culture (feminists etc). The red breast thing is merely an extension of faulty logic. If you keep “thinking” like that, yes, I’m afraid you will have to explain it to me. Tortured “logic” has never been my strong suit. My request stands “Share with us if you will exactly where Pastor Wilson advocates beating anyone in his post”. In your example he is showing the cartoonish non-logic of the feminist, p.c. lefty crowd. Oh, BTW should… Read more »

Ian Miller
Member

I think JL was being sarcastic?

Jennie
Member

I apologize, Nat. I was being sarcastic. As an ex-pagan, tortured logic was once my strong (pant)suit, and so I can’t help looking for it in ‘Where’s Waldo’ fashion. It is a curse in a way, but I try to make the best of it. :) It is a comment on the times that something that should be obviously sarcastic is so easy to believe. This is not a comment on your response, but on how crazy the world has gotten that such obvious nonsense would make sense in any segment of the population. Again, I apologize for not putting… Read more »

Nat
Guest
Nat

See my response above!!

Nat
Guest
Nat

Growing up I always had a problem hitting the curve ball! I apologize for limping to a conclusion. A while back The Onion had an article stating that they were shutting down because it was growing impossible to come up with stuff weirder than reality. I believed it! Increasingly I read responses to Pastor Wilson’s writing and am just appalled at the …I really can’t describe it of many folks.It got so bad a while back that I asked my wife if she thought I was crazy. She said “No, definitely not.” I take great comfort in that because she… Read more »

ashv
Guest
ashv

Hm.

What do you think the bounds of appropriate punishment for disobedience are?

Jill Smith
Member
Jill Smith

When I was a high school teacher, I had really quite good classroom control. People who thought I was soft and flighty used to marvel at it. A teacher asked one of my students how I did it. He said, “It’s the puppy eyes. Nobody can endure the puppy eyes.”

It worked equally well when my daughter was disobedient.

ashv
Guest
ashv

Not all of us are of such highly-civilised stock as Canadians are. I’m reminded of a post from a New Zealander against spanking I saw recently. Might be fine for some, but he didn’t try raising me or my siblings. :)

Jonathan
Guest
Jonathan

And thus you group up into the kind of guy who believes that one group of people must be able to physically dominate another group of people for there to be control in American society.

It does make sense as part of the cause-and-effect.

Nat
Guest
Nat

No. Some people just need the …beat out of them. I speak as one who did and God graciously supplied the ones who did it including my Daddy, several football coaches, and a class mate. Now understand I said “some” not “all”. I suspect ASHV might be a relative!!

JP Stewart
Member

You’ve described the post-Obama Left quite well.

Jonathan
Guest
Jonathan

You’ve described the post-Obama Left quite well. Are you unaware that one of ashv’s strong beliefs is that people need to know their place and some people should be dominating others, with one example being that American Whites should be dominating and controlling American Blacks? He’s not shy about that, and while pretty much everyone in power tries to do it to some extent, it’s certainly not a theoretical principle of mainstream leftist thought. I have no idea what you think the post-Obama left is. Mostly they look like chickens with their heads cut off. During the election you had… Read more »

adad0
Member

Sounds like the inmates are running that asylum!

lndighost
Member

The rhetoric is sanctimonious and depressing. (I don’t know which article you read but I’ve seen a hundred like it.) Children should be treated like miniature adults, every tantrum carefully validated, and you should at all costs avoid using these 500 phrases, including the word ‘No’ because you might hurt their feelings. How to create a monster.

Karen
Guest
Karen

I don’t believe that obedience has any place at all in marriage.

Katecho
Member

Karen wrote:

I don’t believe that obedience has any place at all in marriage.

Meanwhile, Scripture says:

… to be discreet, chaste, homemakers, good, obedient to their own husbands, that the word of God may not be blasphemed. — Titus 2:5

Is Karen simply advertising that she’s an unbeliever?

Jill Smith
Member
Jill Smith

You probably don’t carry that out in practice.

“You’ve been complaining about that toothache for weeks. Make a dental appointment today!” “Get the dry cleaning today, honey, I really need that dress for tonight.” “Don’t move! There’s a scorpion on your ankle.”

You don’t think this kind of exchange is pretty common in a normal marriage?

Katecho
Member

jillybean wrote:

You don’t think this kind of exchange is pretty common in a normal marriage?

Didn’t realize there were so many scorpions in Canada, but I see jillybean’s point. :-)

Karen
Guest
Karen

So how is that gendered?

Jill Smith
Member
Jill Smith

It isn’t. It’s an illustration that obedience is part of a normal marriage, and typically flows back and forth between two people who love each other. You have visualized a complementarian marriage as one in which the man gives orders and the woman obeys. My point is that, in a healthy marriage, spouses are always obeying each other. When a wife says “Please don’t leave a spoon in the ice cream container,” she expects that her husband will do as she asks. I don’t believe that any of the men who post here would reply to that by saying, “Hey!… Read more »

demosthenes1d
Member

People have different models and conceptions, as should be expected. But I think a complementarian marriage is best imaged as a dance. There is a complex interplay but the man provides the direction. Man and wife are focused on their partner and attentive to subtle cues. And the whole thing takes place within a universe of acceptable behavior and social rules.

A dance where both partners are wrestling for control is not enjoyable. I should also note that dances, and marriages, where natural sexual differences between men and women are accentuated rather than supressed are more beautiful and enjoyable.

Jill Smith
Member
Jill Smith

I agree. Most feminist criticism of traditional marriage overlooks the playfulness that accompanies the dance. They make it sound so dreary and grim, like an endless policy debate.

Nat
Guest
Nat

I suspected that might be the case. Submission between two folks is normally a mutual thing but when all is said and done there must be a deciding “vote”.

Capndweeb
Guest
Capndweeb

Do your children agree?

Jill Smith
Member
Jill Smith

I don’t think formal punishment inflicted by a spouse has any place in marriage. If a husband or wife is really dishonoring the wedding vows, there are civil and even religious remedies.

I say “formal” because, even if we don’t intend to, most of us have “punished” our spouses with angry outbursts or prolonged sulks. Or less than appetizing dinners or unwashed cars.

Garett
Guest
Garett

I read the post 4 times and the only part I could remotely see where “beating feminists” could have possibly come from is: “When a culture devolves to that point, remember, order must be maintained with a club. No one can police themselves anymore in accordance with the rules of a social order because social order is a social construct, and the whole thing might shift on you.” However, simple reading comprehension skills would be sufficient to understand that this is referring to how a society maintains order in a culture that is constantly shifting it’s moral stances and what… Read more »

ashv
Guest
ashv

Well, let’s start with asking who kept you from learning how to read.

insanitybytes22
Member

Karen,I wrote about Gilead just the other day if you’re interested.

https://insanitybytes2.wordpress.com/2017/05/23/the-handmaids-tale/

Rob Steele
Guest
Rob Steele

The fear of Yahweh is the beginning of wisdom. And the middle and the end too for that matter. But starting anywhere else leads straight to contradiction and relativistic nonsense. There is an absolute and he is it.

Matt
Guest
Matt

These kinds of posts just read as extended “The far left is crazy”, which granted it is. The strange thing is that righties like yourself are so eager to publicize their crazy ideas. And where did you get the idea that feminism has cultural authority? Feminism has one of the worst reputations out there, one that is constantly having to defend itself with lines such as “Feminism is the belief that women are people”. More accurate is that feminism has a lot of cultural authority among those right wingers who can’t stand that people who disagree with them are allowed… Read more »

insanitybytes22
Member

“Cultural feminism is what happens when demented women are flattered as though they were not demented. It is the sort of thing that ends badly…..When a culture devolves to that point, remember, order must be maintained with a club.” Who made us crazy, Pastor Wilson? Who raped our children even in our churches? Who got teen age girls pregnant and then mocked them as sinners? Who twisted and perverted scripture until it appeared to justify abuse and oppression? You want to take a club to a war that actually calls for some grace and humility. You want to be arrogant… Read more »

ashv
Guest
ashv

Who flattered the demented women? (Wilson is not blaming women for feminism.)

FeatherBlade
Guest
FeatherBlade

If you want to identify yourself as a demented woman, ME, you are free to do so.

Those of us who are not demented would appreciate if you don’t lump us in with yourself.

Oscar Schneegans
Guest
Oscar Schneegans

“If”?

Katecho
Member

ME wrote:

You want to take a club to a war that actually calls for some grace and humility.

ME, some time ago, lost any credibility to tell us what Wilson wants. If ME really believes in the power of grace and humility, let her start to model what she thinks it should look like.

Ben
Guest
Ben

I’ve talked about this before, but I’ll say it again: feminism is a giant sh*t test. Western white men need to understand this. Children test boundaries to see if their parents love them. These deranged, broken women, having not had a loving, disciplinary father figure, are simply acting out this childhood impulse on a collective, political level. I used to criticize women, especially younger white women, for the destruction I believe they have wrought both from their sexual anarchism and their leftist voting patterns, including their support for open borders and bringing in third world, low-IQ refugees. However, it was… Read more »

Ian Miller
Member

Nope nope nope.

^&*( test, obsessive focus on race, analogies of women to children.

I disagree with ME’s analysis of the causes and reactions to feminism, but this post here is exactly what she’s talking about, and it’s disgusting.

ashv
Guest
ashv

Get that, folks?

It’s disgusting.

Ian Miller
Member

I mean, are you surprised?

insanitybytes22
Member

Gah! I absolutely hate having to speak in defense of anything remotely pillian, but minus the racial vain glory, arrogance, and the male ego, Ben is right in a cultural context. That is the essence of social politics, the root so to speak.

Ian Miller
Member

Now I’m very confused…

Jill Smith
Member
Jill Smith

I, too. I have no idea what that means, and I hope ME will elucidate.

insanitybytes22
Member

“I interpret feminism and multiculturalism as women giving their men a battle to fight. They want to be rescued. They want us to show ourselves worthy.”

Feminism is a giant no confidence vote that just screams revoked authority. Total defiance. You are NOT worthy, meaning men. Smash the patriarchy, demolish biology, bend the very nature of reality if necessary. It’s often rooted in rape,sexual abuse, absent fathers,a million deep seated reasons why one might feel compelled to make manifest in the world one’s own rejection of any and all male authority.

Jill Smith
Member
Jill Smith

Don’t you think that some goals, which might be described by some as feminist, have nothing to do with either rejecting or searching for male authority? It’s possible that a woman wants to work as a neurosurgeon because she is very, very good at what she does, and that she is not remotely interested in the patriarchy. I think that, even if men had wielded their authority extremely well, there would eventually have been a dawning awareness that many women need work beyond the domestic sphere in order to flourish. Do you think Ben is right about multiculturalism as being… Read more »

insanitybytes22
Member

I think all feminism is about rejecting male authority,and ultimately,rejecting God’s authority. You mentioned working outside the home,well feminism is really an invention of the upper class, the elite. My great grandmother worked,she would have laughed at the idea that feminism somehow gave her the right to work. Poor women have always worked, all the way back to Proverbs 31. This idea about the domestic sphere being a tiny place is really a post war notion, one Betty Friedan helped to fuel with her Feminine Mystique,the bored upperclass house wife, trapped in her gilded cage. Multiculturism is far too big… Read more »

Jill Smith
Member
Jill Smith

Friedan is considered middle class, and I think she spoke for college educated women–as she was–who found unrelenting domesticity pretty deadly. If you delight in discussing Sartre over black coffee for hours on end, it is tough to suddenly spend your days matching up socks. I disagree with Friedan’s solutions, but I think her analysis of the problem was pretty reasonable. My female ancestors were mostly poor, but they didn’t work outside the home. However, the work they had to do inside the home was grueling, and the stresses of poverty made life hard. But, with universal education and better… Read more »

JohnM
Guest
JohnM

“It does not take very long to become an expert cook and seamstress, and then what?”

You cook and sew of course.

Jill Smith
Member
Jill Smith

Very well, if it does not sound like bragging (or even if it does). The minute the engagement ring was on my finger, I surveyed my accomplishments and took immediate remedial action where necessary. I also knit, quilt, and can operate a spinning wheel. And I clean houses for extra cash. However, the list of what I can’t do is much more impressive, as I am finding out now that I am single. This includes changing washers on faucets, repairing stuck windows, filling out a tax return, removing spiders from the house, and figuring out why the garbage disposal is… Read more »

JohnM
Guest
JohnM

Don’t feel bad. I probably can’t do many of the things you can’t do, and I don’t want to do most of them. Fortunately, what I can do, if it does not sound like bragging, is hold down a decent paying job, so I can hire things done. As for spiders, I’ve been known to bring them into the house.

Ian Miller
Member

I’m really confused. You seemed to be rejecting Wilson because he was saying “all men are evil,” but here you seem to be saying “feminism exist because all men are evil.”

insanitybytes22
Member

1. I am not rejecting Wilson. 2. I never said all men are evil. There is cause and effect going on here. Feminism is the result of something. I think Ben summed it up nicely, “They want us to show ourselves worthy.” Pastor Wilson is the one who seems to believe men are evil and yet feminism sprung forth from nothingness and women just need to put their faith in men. That’s the logical fallacy. Karen shows up on this board and people are once again playing whack-a-mole, get the feminist, much like Pastor Wilson does in a broader sense.… Read more »

Ian Miller
Member

Hmm. I can vaguely see your narrative, but I don’t think he thinks it came from nothingness – I think he ascribes it to the Curse in Genesis 3.

Ben
Guest
Ben

What was racially vainglorious and arrogant about what I said? (I’m not being defensive, I’m just curious.)

insanitybytes22
Member

I think it was your tone. Anytime we speak of “Western white men, tribal loyalties, low IQ refugees,and white women,” the fragrance smells like racial vain glory.

Jill Smith
Member
Jill Smith

If I can have a go at this, your assumption that refugees have low IQs sounded a bit racially vainglorious. My own country took in a lot of Indian refugees when Amin kicked them out of Uganda. The ones I knew were quite remarkably intelligent. I have also met Mexican lawyers and health care professionals whose IQs would pass muster in the most demanding circles.

Ben
Guest
Ben

It wasn’t an assumption. Look up the average IQ’s of those countries.

Jill Smith
Member
Jill Smith

The average IQ here is under 100, which strikes me as pretty dismally low. What makes you think that the people who leave their own countries to come here are at the bottom of the pack? Do you think we should accept only those immigrants whose IQs surpass our national average? And, if we did that, you would probably be complaining that they’re stealing the best jobs!

ashv
Guest
ashv

The purpose of taking in immigrants should be to improve the overall well-being of the polity they’re moving into. This requires selectivity and care.

Jill Smith
Member
Jill Smith

I can see that, although I think refugees in fear of their lives come under a different category. And, yes, I realize we can’t take all of them.

But, there really is no pleasing some people. Canada has taken in highly intelligent, skilled immigrants from India and Hong Kong, and people complain when their children outperform their own kids. Or complain when the doctors in remote northern communities are mostly Indian.

ashv
Guest
ashv

Refugees are not immigrants. I think it’s reasonable to expect neighboring countries to a war zone or whatever to provide emergency shelter, for a limited time, to women and children (but not military aged men). That’s different from allowing them to be immigrants.

Seems entirely reasonable to me that people would complain about being displaced by immigrants. Why should they feel good about it? Is wanting a doctor who shares your culture and language that horrible?

JohnM
Guest
JohnM

If native born people find the children of immigrants are outperforming their own children, you’re right, they should feel bad about their children, and probably themselves too. I, on the other hand, am happy to access to smart doctors.

ashv
Guest
ashv

Nobody is complaining about access to smart doctors.

Ian Miller
Member

That, I am fairly certain, is not true. People love to complain about smart people who belong to a different tribe all the time.

Jill Smith
Member
Jill Smith

No. But they should bear in mind that Canada admitted the Asian doctors in order to solve the problem of homegrown physicians refusing to serve in isolated northern communities.

There is a certain amount of hypocrisy. When Hong Kong reverted to the mainland, Canada offered landed immigrant status to anyone with a certain number of million dollars to invest. The Chinese who came were often lavishly generous, endowing universities and equipping hospitals. I find it unseemly to complain about them now that their children are smarter and harder working than ours.

ashv
Guest
ashv

In the short term that can be a good choice, but as you say the downstream consequences bear considering. Canada will probably lose Vancouver to China in my lifetime if there isn’t a drastic U-turn in policy.

Jill Smith
Member
Jill Smith

There is still a large population of rich dual income white people. The people who have done well out of this are seniors selling their houses. Just the interest on the sale of my mother’s house keeps her in a luxury retirement hotel. But most of us who grew up in Vancouver could never afford to live there now. On the other hand, the suburbs are okay and there is excellent mass transit.

JohnM
Guest
JohnM

Does China have designs on Vancouver? If so, I think immigrants from Hong Kong who never wanted to be part of China in the first place could prove useful to Canada’s resistance.

ashv
Guest
ashv

You might look up how much of Vancouver is currently owned by Chinese.

JohnM
Guest
JohnM

Owned by Chinese is not the same as lost to China.

jonmnoel
Member

Ashv,
I agree with your statement concerning the purpose and criteria for bringing in immigrants. Prior to 1960 or whenever the immigration act changed things, we pretty much just allowed in European Immigrants, from what I understand. Obviously, it doesn’t make any sense to allow Muslim invaders to come in; but it seems like it would not make much more sense to allow in Europeans in, who are only intent on destroying their land and culture as quickly as possible.
What kind of criteria would you suggest for immigration? Eastern Europeans only? Christians only?

ashv
Guest
ashv

I think we should try a couple decades with no immigrants and see what the downsides of that are, and then we’ll have a better idea.

Dave
Guest
Dave

That is a hard sell right now ashv! Just remember that our politicians and media have been using the same number of 11-12 million illegal immigrants for decades.

ashv
Guest
ashv

Hard sell to​ most people with political​ power today, sure. But The Wall was the campaign promise that put a reality TV star in the Oval Office.

OKRickety
Member

I don’t know why you would be surprised that the average IQ in the USA is under 100. The population is certainly large enough to avoid statistical anomalies, and, as I’m sure you know, IQ tests are scaled to make 100 “normal”. But, it’s not a perfect Bell curve because it is skewed by the exceptionally stupid [e.g. mentally incapable), so the average is less than 100.My favorite IQ joke is the New Zealander being asked “Why don’t you move to Australia and raise the average IQ of both countries?”.

Jill Smith
Member
Jill Smith

I wasn’t actually surprised as I understood from my psychology classes, five decades ago, that most IQs are clustered close to the 100 mark. I thought that, by definition, every IQ of 130 is offset by an IQ of 70, but I may have remembered that incorrectly. What I find surprising is that anyone is concerned about low IQ immigrants. It’s not as if we were a nation of brilliant people and that immigrants with IQs under 110 are going to be unemployable. I am also puzzled by these statements that a national IQ is 107 or 95. A really… Read more »

JP Stewart
Member

How about ME’s serial lying? Did you see her recent interaction with Jilly, which was certainly not her first lie on here? Is that not disgusting? If so, why don’t you and A Dad call her out on it?

insanitybytes22
Member

I think MKT is a really good example of why I said what I did, “Who made us crazy, Pastor Wilson?” If MKT was how I defined the patriarchy, I’d be donning my pink taco hat and out smashing it myself. The idea that all women are crazy and all women are liars is a deeply rooted and ingrained social narrative, one that even women perpetuate. You’ll notice MKT has been deeply invested in trying to dismiss ME as liar for some time now. You’ll notice ME has totally revoked his authority and dismissed him as a pathetic moron. That’s… Read more »

lndighost
Member

I’m engaging against my better judgement to point out that ‘the idea that all women are crazy and all women are liars’ is something I have not seen said or implied on this board at any time. You seem to regard yourself not only as cruelly oppressed and slandered on this board (something I have also not seen) but also as representative of all women.

I do agree with you though that there is a strong analogous relationship between how feminism works and the way you interact with mkt and others.

insanitybytes22
Member

I do not regard myself as cruelly oppressed or slandered.

I am not accusing anyone of anything, (except mkt.) I simply said, “all women are crazy and all women are liars is a deeply rooted and ingrained social narrative.” That is the truth. The fact that you don’t see it, does not make it untrue.

Jill Smith
Member
Jill Smith

Who here says that all women are crazy liars? Very few people in the course of my long life have suggested that I am either crazy or a liar.

Ian Miller
Member

There was a very poorly articulated fellow who came on the boards last year (I think) claiming that women were terrible as a whole. It’s very few, I agree – but the Manosphere seems to have a highly concentrated dose of them.

lndighost
Member

You’ll notice I didn’t say that it was not a social narrative anywhere, only that it was not on this board. I’m willing to accept that it may be a deeply ingrained social narrative in some quarters, but I believe you mistake mkt if you think it is his view.

insanitybytes22
Member

“You’ll notice I didn’t say that it was not a social narrative anywhere, only that it was not on this board.”

Oscar in the comments below has just said of Karen, “She’s a liar and false accuser, plain and simple.”

MKT has accused me of lying repeatedly,and bearing false witness.

Myself and many others have been accused of having mental health problems. That is NOT a complaint or an accusation, it is simply an observable fact.

OKRickety
Member

‘Oscar in the comments below has just said of Karen, “She’s a liar and false accuser, plain and simple.”‘The fact that some commenters here have said some women are liars is extremely weak support for your claim that the “social narrative” is “deeply rooted and ingrained”. And, if those women really are liars (that is, observable fact), it is a statement of truth, not a result of the “social narrative”, although it does, of course, align with it. When a woman lies, it supports the “narrative”. Given the fact that some women lie (and men, too), it is not really… Read more »

insanitybytes22
Member

“If the “social narrative” exists, then such action would cause its demise soon enough.” Wouldn’t that be lovely? Unfortunately narratives and bias do not just disappear like that. For example, you cannot dispel the myth, “all men are rapists,” by simply not being a rapist. Both myths, all women are liars, all men are rapists, assign malevolent intent to both parties, they assume the worst. When we are busy assuming the worst, we are trapping people in our own subjective reality and there is no escape. You cannot be a good enough non-rapist man anymore than I can be a… Read more »

OKRickety
Member

Yes, it would be lovely. Does vociferous complaint dispel myth and bias any more quickly? Isn’t that the opposite of how you say people, especially women, should be treated in order for them to respond positively and change for the better?

insanitybytes22
Member

Ideally we would start dialoguing, discussing these issues, wouldn’t we? Isn’t that how you win hearts and minds? Well, one can’t very well speak the truth if one is forever going to be dismissed as a liar and crazy. I’m not accusing anyone of anything, Pastor Wilson simply says, “feminism is mental illness, the kind of mental illness that is rooted in a defiled conscience. It is the kind of madness that came to Lady Macbeth. Feminism is insanity on stilts.” Whether the man intended to imply it or not, “don’t argue with the inmates, they’re all crazy, and bring… Read more »

OKRickety
Member

I don’t doubt you believe that dialogue and discussion will win hearts and minds. I suspect different methods work for different audiences. Regardless, your comment got me to look at what the Bible says. The whole of Matthew 23 is anything but an “invitation to the table”. Apparently, Jesus was not willing to enter into a discussion with those who were not open to the truth. Lest you get any ideas, however, it is important to know that Jesus knows the truth, but we humans are not so omniscient.

JP Stewart
Member

So 6 paragraphs of drivel, but still no response to Jilly’s challenge? Bottom line: you attributed quotes to her that she didn’t say. You couldn’t back up your claims. So yes, you’re a liar, as shown for the umpteenth time–red herring attempt notwithstanding.

And if anyone is going to “revoke my authority” (how does one do that in a largely anonymous disqus world, anyway?), it won’t be you. I don’t listen to fools (Biblical definition) or liars, much less attribute any authority to them.

Ian Miller
Member

There are a number of responses I could have to this. 1) I could immediately believe you, and begin treating ME as evil. This, no doubt, is your desired outcome. 2) I could immediately disbelieve you, and continue as before – commenting on things I agree with, and questioning those I do not. 3) I could immediately begin a crusade to find out The Truth of the matter. Option 2 seems the best, to me. ME has not, to my knowledge, lied to or about me – that is, said something she believed to be untrue with the intention of… Read more »

JP Stewart
Member

Option 4 is to simply view her conversation with Jilly and note how she made a false claim and failed to provide links or evidence. She’s done this many, many times. How about calling a spade a spade instead of rambling and obfuscating?

Ian Miller
Member

Nope, that’s option 3. I am curious – if you found ashv or Barnabas behaving in the way you accuse ME of, would you be as passionate about decrying them to their perceived allies as you are of ME, who I believe you consider not only morally, but intellectual bankrupt?

JP Stewart
Member

Yep. And if you’re going to let her lie like there’s no tomorrow, and continue to be “encouraged” by her, you’ve got some issues as well.

Ian Miller
Member

I’m honestly curious – what about my posts made you think I would be receptive to your attempt to make me hate ME?

JP Stewart
Member

I’m not trying make you hate anyone. I’m just shocked someone can get away with violating the 9th Commendment over and over, and still be respected a commenter. It’s quite telling that Ben’s comment “disgusts” you, but you apparently have no problem with someone lying repeatedly.

Ian Miller
Member

Since it’s so “telling”, why are you surprised that I distrust your account of ME’s behavior?

I have a problem with lying. I do not see ME doing what you claim.

OKRickety
Member

Well, I have seen ME lie on occasion. When called on it, I have never seen her admit it. That unwillingness is pride, one of the “seven deadly sins”. However, I choose to not call her a liar or a serial liar, although I will clearly say that she has lied.. Perhaps you would recognize the times that she lies if you would consider the possibility rather than immediately jumping to her defense.In my opinion, you consider ME more highly than you should. I don’t know why you do, but, as a result, I find your frequent support of her… Read more »

Ian Miller
Member

I am willing to consider the possibility. I do not recall seeing any instance of lying, though I have not sought them out, nor do I particularly wish to seek them out. I consider ME as someone who has said things I agree with and disagree with, and often does so in an intelligent way. I also consider that her testimony appears to be of a faithful Christian, with all the sins and struggles against sin that implies. Considering that the people who accuse ME of sin tend to be those who love evil in the form of racial and… Read more »

Jane
Member

“Considering that the people who accuse ME of sin tend to be those who
love evil in the form of racial and sexual vainglory, I have a difficult
time distinguishing between philosophical animus towards her and actual
sin she’s committed.”

Apparently you’ve missed some of my interactions with her.

Ian Miller
Member

If you believe I am acting wrongly in my attitude with respect to ME, I will evaluate the situation more thoroughly. I think I do recall you interacting with her, but I haven’t tracked conversation on Doug’s blog closely for a few months.

Jane
Member

Per your other comment, I’m not asking you jump in anywhere or respond in any particular way. I’d just ask you to evaluate how much you want to invest in defending her.

Ian Miller
Member

I have been, thank you.

OKRickety
Member

I will look for evidence that you are truly willing to consider that possibility. Thus far, you seem very reluctant. For example, your choice to discount statements about ME primarily because they come from “those who love evil”. It is wise to test, but the goal is to discern the truth, even when you dislike the source.“… often does so in an intelligent way.”That is very debatable. For myself, I think ME is intelligent. However, and I am hardly alone on this, she is very often illogical in her arguments. I think that, just like the lying, you seem to… Read more »

Ian Miller
Member

I am reluctant to join mkt in a campaign against ME. I recall an interaction where you were surprised that I voiced disagreement with ME, several months ago. It’s not the only time I’ve disagreed with ME, but unless I am particularly exercised in a case, I will often choose not to disagree with someone. ME often makes statements I disagree with, or does so in a way that I disagree. I don’t think it’s incumbent upon me to always insert myself into such a disagreement, unless I see a strong tendency of a community towards a particular evil. I… Read more »

OKRickety
Member

Some (and I think ME is in this camp) believe that failure to speak out against sin and evil is tantamount to approving it. I understand the thinking, but I don’t agree. Silence does not signify approval or disapproval, but allows others to make suppositions. However, stating a position prevents misinterpretation of your position. If, for example, you were to choose to acknowledge publicly that you disagree with ME, it might influence her to reconsider. I wonder if you often choose not to disagree with ME because you perceive it would align you with “those who love evil”. If nothing… Read more »

Ian Miller
Member

I generally don’t refrain from commenting on ME’s posts because I want to avoid being allied with ashv or Barnabas or Wesley or whoever. I generally refrain because I am here to talk about specific issues, and by the time the posts become about people rather than their ideas, I’ve lost interest and motivation for talking about it unless I was involved earlier in the conversation. I can’t change your perception that I am in “lockstep” with ME. If I happen to agree with her more than I agree with other posters in your opinion, please know that I agree… Read more »

JP Stewart
Member

For the record, it’s pretty hard to lump me in with the “racial and sexual vainglory” camp since my wife (and thus children’s) racial makeup is far from blue-eyed Aryan.

wtrsims
Member

So all blue-eyes Aryans are racist?

That’s racist, mkt.

JP Stewart
Member

Ha, well yeah, aren’t they the only ones who can be racist?

Jill Smith
Member
Jill Smith

I tend to distrust anyone who claims never to have a racist thought or impulse. I try my very best, but even so, I fail sometimes. Usually it is in the positive direction, like assuming that every Asian is good at math!

Ian Miller
Member

As I said, I cannot check your post history, and don’t recall previous interactions.

JP Stewart
Member

And therefore, it’s NOT a good idea to assume I’m wrong re: ME because I “love evil.” I’m certainly a sinner, but calling someone out for bearing false witness isn’t normal behavior for an “evil lover.”

Ian Miller
Member

Accusing someone of evil is certainly the tactic of both the good and the evil. I apologize if I have lumped you in with the alt-right contingent on this blog if you are not a partisan in their corruption.

Jill Smith
Member
Jill Smith

My preference would be to move on. I take no pleasure in any conflict; it is something I have seldom encountered in my life, and it makes me unhappy.

OKRickety
Member

By “this post”, do you mean Ben’s statement (which I would call a comment), or Wilson’s original post? I really am uncertain.

Ian Miller
Member

You are correct. I am disgusted by Ben’s comment, not Wilson’s post.

BJ
Guest
BJ

Not that I agree with everything he said, but what do you find so disagreeable about Ben’s comment?

Ian Miller
Member

1) The assumptions of most of the people I have heard use the term “^&* test” is that women are by nature manipulative and probably evil, and men are by nature straightforward and honest and good. Just like the assumptions of feminism that men are by nature bullies and evil, and women are victims and good, I reject this as not being consistent either with the universal Image-bearing of men and women, and the universal fallenness of men and women. Men and women are equally sinful. I also find the concept unnecessarily vulgar and offensive in phrasing. 2) The immediate… Read more »

Jennie
Member

Thanks, Ian Miller.

Is this a historical trend within the church that you’re addressing here?

Ian Miller
Member

Point 3 does not, in my experience, have a particularly Christian history. Points 1 and 2 are particular to the alt-right movement (two different segements of that movement, from what I can tell, but they do tend to go hand in hand), and I am deeply worried by the portion of the church that seems to have embraced the alt-right in the past two years. I’m not aware of the church having a particular drift in that direction before the alt-right movement brought it to my attention, although the anti-“miscegenation” movement obviously has the history of Bob Jones University connected… Read more »

Jennie
Member

Thanks.

Would you say that the alt-right movement is a response to feminism? Also, is it mostly young men who are being drawn to this movement?

Finally, with no accusatory tone meant at all, why do you think men gave up authority within the church, particularly over the last 50 years?

Ian Miller
Member

The alt-right movement is mostly a response to the toxic lumpen conglomerate of Marxism that has been poisoning our society – but unfortunately, they have basically decided the best way to oppose that lump is to adopt its attitudes in the reverse. So where feminists think that men are evil, they think women are evil. Where radical racialists think whites are evil, they think all non-whites are evil. Where socialists think violence against their opponents is good, they think the exact same. They’re a mirrored lump of Marxism with all the values swapped. I think there are a lot of… Read more »

Jennie
Member

Thank you very much. I realized that you and Jilly were responding to some nuances/history that I was unaware of. I really appreciate you taking the time to explain it so clearly. I know from reading the Old Testament that God often sends plagues to his people when they have erred, and I see the feminist/egalitarian movement as one of them. The difficulty is that it’s so subtle and takes place over such a long period of time. The saddest part to me is that the church has taken on a left/right paradigm and have responded to each other in… Read more »

Ian Miller
Member

I’m not completely convinced that the egalitarian movement is a plague. The overemphasis upon it definitely is a sin, and as a movement, it’s definitely part of God’s plan for the church, which often involves punishment by consequence.

I do think there seems to be a profound lack of maturity in our culture today that’s evidencing in our corporate unwillingness to love each other despite differences. I am very worried and saddened by this.

Jennie
Member

I understand about the egalitarian movement. I almost edited that, but decided against it because it has become an idol in many ways within the church. I think there are valid concerns raised by this movement that could have been addressed, but it has taken a wrong turn IMHO and has practically divorced itself from the traditional church, at least from what I’ve seen so far.

Ian Miller
Member

I do agree that equality is just as much of an idol as authority, and currently is probably a greater temptation for the majority of the church than the latter. I think part of the problem is that feminism is a symptom, not a cause – I don’t call it part of a toxic lump of congolomerated Marxism because it’s fun (though there’s that too ;) ). The rise of an unhealthy narrative of history as a binary zero sum game between oppressor and oppressed is not limited to men vs. women, and until we have a healthier understanding of… Read more »

Jennie
Member

I agree.

Reading Scripture totally messes up the Marxist narrative. I wonder if Babel was the first society like that.

Ian Miller
Member

There’s so much we don’t know about ancient societies. I would not at all be surprised if it weren’t the first.

jonmnoel
Member

The egalitarian movement, as you call it, certainly is a plague, tearing down families, churches and society itself. God has put distinctions in the world, between races, between sexes, between generations, between those in authority and those under authority, and it is the rebellion of sinful man that wants to tear down every distinction and level every difference. Instead of embracing the station and boundaries that God has put into the world, we see these things as evil. But man can’t erase what God has appointed, and the end is only confusion.

Ian Miller
Member

The idolatry of egalitarianism is a plague. The idolatry of authority is also a plague. The Bible speaks of not trusting in kings or chariots as well as giving to Caesar what is Caesar’s. Unless you’re completely against the expansion of the franchise from property owners, equality is something that is a value to God, just as authority. The tension between the two is a mark of the Fall – equality between men is not in and of itself evil.

jonmnoel
Member

Equality between men is a mirage; God hasn’t created men equal.
That’s not Biblical language or a Biblical idea, that’s Enlightenment/Declaration of Independence type thought.
Authority however, is from God.

And yes, I am against the expansion of franchise.

Ian Miller
Member

Well, at least you’re consistent. I believe men are created equal in value before God – their souls are equal. Their abilities I would agree are not equal, and their authority in life will be different, but we are not to treat men differently based on their wealth or position, according to the Bible – why? Because we are equally God’s children. That’s the Bible. And while there was some Englightenment corruption in the founding of our country, much of the thought was driven by the Bible through the philosophies of Christians like John Locke, not only Deists like Jefferson… Read more »

jonmnoel
Member

Well, you may be right that it might not be a fruitful discussion given where we’re coming from, but I would challenge some of your thoughts as being less than Biblical. We all need to be challenged when our beliefs don’t align with God’s word. “Men are created equal in value before God.” Where in the Bible do you get this idea? What do you mean by it? “We are not to treat men differently based on their wealth or position” We do and ought treat men differently based on their wealth or position. We are given specific ways that… Read more »

Ian Miller
Member

Yes, I’m afraid I disagree with the basis of every single one of your statements and questions here.

jonmnoel
Member

Isn’t it our responsibility as Christians not to agree or disagree, but to wrestle to align our thinking with God’s word? Or are we all just picking teams and arguments that we like? Isn’t that part of why people comment here, to hear and weigh other’s arguments in terms of their conformity to Christ’s word? I might quite normally disagree with Jonathan, but he at least is wrestling with what God’s words says and means. God intends for us to grow, and not stay immature in our thinking.

Ian Miller
Member

Yes. I don’t find answering questions designed to push me in the direction of authoritarian idolatry wrestling, rather sophistry. And yes, I know that’s dismissive and not an argument.

jonmnoel
Member

Well you’re certainly free to not engage, but it seems rather immature to not be willing to defend and examine your thinking. And apparently you’re willing to assign me to the ranks of authoritarian idolators without being willing to identify what is wrong and sinful and idolatrous in my thinking.
It seems to me that you have imbibed some of our culture’s ideas and values somewhat uncritically.

Ian Miller
Member

“Like and equal are two entirely different things.” Madeleine L’Engle, A Wrinkle in Time.

BJ
Guest
BJ

Thank you for the response above. I think you may have looked more into Ben’s comment than he actually said, but I do appreciate the thoughts. To this comment, I wonder why you place the blame for the growth of feminism at the feet of men. Why is there no concerns of female usurpation and rebellion? When sinners rebuff God’s command to submit to Jesus Christ, we don’t blame Christ. Now, men are not Christ, but the one doing the sinning must take responsibility for it. I think this type of attitude, a reluctance to hold women accountable for sin,… Read more »

Ian Miller
Member

I blame men and women equally for the rise of feminism. I was specifically asked about men giving up authority, which is why I was talking about that. I think the desire of Eve for her husband’s place is equally culpable to men’s laziness and tyrrany in the rise of feminism. I have heard a lot about women not being held to account for sin, particularly vanity, from the manosphere. While I do reject the feminist innocent victim narrative, I find the negativity towards all women just as unhelpful. As I said – I think the alt-right is just Marxism… Read more »

BJ
Guest
BJ

If one looks at voting patterns and support for the movement and its sinful beliefs, it is overwhelmingly female driven. Men do bear some blame, but again, we don’t blame Jesus for human rebellion. You still seem a bit squeamish about pointing out female sin. Let me ask you this, then. Do you agree that the Bible teaches and establishes a patriarchal family and societal structure? If so, do you see this as a good thing, or a thing to be overcome? I ask because I don’t think we have a neutral middle. We are either trying to establish the… Read more »

Jennie
Member

Why does the argument always go have to go outside of the church?

BJ
Guest
BJ

I guess I don’t understand what you mean?

Jennie
Member

It would help if I structured the properly, sentence! What I mean is can we talk about this within the context of the church? What happened within the church that women wanted to respond to feminism? What happened within the church that men didn’t stop it? (Maybe I’m assuming men had more ability to stop it than they had. That’s part of why I’m asking.)

BJ
Guest
BJ

Men lost the ability to stop it when the culture stopped enforcing the biblical structure. The biggest move was no-fault divorce. Men lost all recourse to stop their wives from leaving, and as a reward they now have to pay almost everything to the rebellious wife for the rest of their lives.

Within the church, there was nothing they could do. They were not the government.

Dave
Guest
Dave

BJ, no fault divorce was a factor in breaking up the family, as was the current welfare system, but I would put more emphasis on abortion being a key turning point in Christian behavior as exhibited in our society.

1970 No fault divorce in California
1973 Kill your kid throughout the USofA

Ian Miller
Member

I believe the Bible teaches that the husband/father is the head of the family. I think this is a good thing. I think working towards training men and women to be Godly in their family relationships is essential – but I think it’s not the same as “establishing a Biblical patriarchy.” I’ve wrestled with feminism since I was a teen, and while I have relatively recently come to the belief that men and women are different in more than biological ways, I’m still very much resistant to the ideas of university masculine or feminine sins. This may be where you… Read more »

BJ
Guest
BJ

First of all, male headship is patriarchy. The Bible is pretty clear that this patriarchy starts in the home and extends outward to the church and the community. So, there is that. Regarding gender, I think women and men are different on very fundamental levels, by design. Of course many women are very intelligent and I have also stated that I think women can work outside the home. But, the current culture trend is one that runs very much in the direction of feminine rebellion (meaning at the cultural level, not necessarily the individual). Careerism, avoiding children and marriage, sexualized… Read more »

Ian Miller
Member

All of the sins you are talking about – careerism, avoiding children and marriage, immodesty, usurpation, and sexual profligacy – I condemn with a good will. I also condemn avoiding children and marriage, immodesty, and sexual profligacy in men – and will note that it takes two to tango in most of these sins. What are the “race realists” saying that is true in any meaningful Christian way? I’m not asking people to seek out interracial marriage – but I do think it is evil to say that an interracial marriage is wrong. More challenging? Possibly. I would never tell… Read more »

BJ
Guest
BJ

What are the “race realists” saying that is true in any meaningful Christian way? I am not 100% sure who you mean, but the answer is simple. It is not sinful to want to marry and grow a family with someone who shares your ethnicity. Now, I would never condemn an interracial marriage, but why is it that you would want to condemn someone who makes the claim that groups of people who marry within their own ethnicity are happier, which is the claim I have seen being made. (It is an empirical question. I don’t know the answer to… Read more »

OKRickety
Member

Authority is “the power or right to give orders, make decisions, and enforce obedience.”. Is it possible that authority has been taken away (by a subset of misguided men) from men, not given up?

Jennie
Member

I think it was both. In the Garden, Eve usurped authority, and Adam allowed her to.

My questions are not to assign blame. It’s just that I already have a decent understanding (I think) of where women went wrong! I don’t understand why men gave up their authority.

Put another way. Eve was wrong in eating the apple. Why didn’t Adam stop her?

OKRickety
Member

If a subset of men (e.g. church leaders) have the authority to force all other men within the church to “give up” their authority as husbands and fathers, then those other men did not “give up” their authority, but it was taken from them. From another angle, how could these other men keep their authority, if the leaders and women are not willing to recognize that authority? It’s all fine and good to say that God gave men that authority but, in reality, how would one enforce obedience if neither the church, society, or government allows it? One reason: People,… Read more »

Jennie
Member

Thank you!

What I’m hearing you say is that the men at the tops of denominations guided the church into a ditch. Where have we heard that story before?

That’s strange though. The flesh tendency is to consolidate power, not to give it up to someone of a different group. I wonder what they were thinking – were they responding to pressure from outside the church? If so, what kind of pressure was applied to them?

OKRickety
Member

I doubt the leaders believed they were losing power. If nothing else, they may have gained power because those misled by feminism would now support them. I have little doubt that the church is influenced by the world far more than is realized. The pressure would not have been initially overt, but more along the lines of the government has legislated that women have equal opportunity, and God says there is neither male nor female, therefore the church should at least keep up with the world and allow women to have equal authority. Today, the pressure is likely more direct,… Read more »

Jennie
Member

Oh, OKRickety, this is heartbreaking.

I can’t imagine what struggles godly men have gone through by being disrespected by their wives and betrayed by the church leadership.

Thank you for taking the time to explain.

OKRickety
Member

Of course, the above is my opinion. There are undoubtedly a multitude of variations of opinion, and, probably, many variations in various locations and situations.

Jennie
Member

Too late! You’re on the hook! :) I have noticed on here a bitterness? frustration? on this subject, and I couldn’t understand it. Now at least I have a framework. I recognize that the history we’re writing about is much more nuanced than we can address here. I remember my dad having to deal with this in some respects and being completely out of his depth, coming from a practically cloistered PA Dutch community, having a child when he was 50, and then having to deal with not only her rebellion, but with a culture that encouraged it. You definitely… Read more »

Jill Smith
Member
Jill Smith

This sounds very Red Pill. One of the Manosphere sites I read gave dating advice. If the woman you are dating says anything remotely perceptive or clever, you must immediately (verbally) slap her down. Because, in her secret heart of hearts, she despises that Pulitzer she won for her reporting on political corruption and she is hoping you will personally see to it that she never again has an intelligent thought. I have no idea what you mean by “loyal to their tribe.” Am I supposed to have more in common with a white meth head who dropped out of… Read more »

Ian Miller
Member

Yup. That’s why I was so upset when I read it.

Jennie
Member

Jilly, I actually think Ben has a point, although I doubt we came to similar understandings via the same logic. How do social trends start? It starts because there is a perceived lack in the personal lives of many people. One by one this lack is vocalized, usually along with advocacy by some authoritative figure, and then boom, everyone agrees and a social trend is born. How are social trends stopped before they take hold? When within the smaller units of society, home, church, school, people with authority put their verbal foot down. What if there was an imbalance to… Read more »

Ian Miller
Member

Who’s Matt?

Jennie
Member

Doh! Second screw up on this thread. I’m outta here! After I change Matt to Ben of course. Thanks.

Jill Smith
Member
Jill Smith

Hi JL, I did think you were referring to Matt, whose post seems to have disappeared. I don’t actually agree with anything Ben said, and I think it imposes so unhealthy an understanding on traditional marriage that it ends up being food and drink to people like Karen. Women are not children, and any assumption that they are (or should be) is wrong. There is nothing in scripture to support the idea that women need a firm hand to keep them in line, or that God values emotional or intellectual immaturity in people who ought to have put away childish… Read more »

Jennie
Member

I had to read it again. I didn’t get that Ben was saying that husbands are supposed to be fathers also. I agree with you that that is icky. My understanding from Ben is that he is suggesting poor discipline as children is a root cause of feminism (spoiled brats that want to remain that way.) As to the second paragraph, I can see what you’re talking about with respect to the Manosphere ideology. I’ve done a couple of transcriptions of interviews with guys that run these websites. i have no doubt they are the ones who sent away for… Read more »

Ben
Guest
Ben

I was using the word “tribe” as a synonym for race.

Jennie
Member

Thanks, Ben. My tribe consists of Christians. Our race consists of all who are descendants of the second Adam, namely Jesus Christ. As such, I do my best not to look at these issues from a secularist standpoint except to understand their thinking and also occasionally mock. When I was a secularist, I was one of the white women advocating for everyone but white men, so I agree that this attitude has contributed to the immigration mess we’re in now. I’m not speaking about IQ here, but rather the immigration standards that arise from advocating for anyone but white men.… Read more »

ashv
Guest
ashv

My tribe consists of Christians. Our race consists of all who are
descendants of the second Adam, namely Jesus Christ. As such, I do my
best not to look at these issues from a secularist standpoint except to
understand their thinking and also occasionally mock.

In other words, you’re very white.

Jennie
Member

ashv so white he don’t even eat yella’ grits.

Our sins are like scarlet, but He will wash us white as snow.

ashv
Guest
ashv

My point is that, by and large, only white people (most especially American Midwesterners) think this way.

Jennie
Member

I lived in the South, by the grace of God, for the biggest part of my life. I’m missing your point.

I like yellow grits with red eye gravy. :)

Ian Miller
Member

Though I am a Midwesterner.

Billtownphysics
Guest
Billtownphysics

I have to disagree with you there. I know a lot of non-whites, non-Midwestern Americans who do not view racial markers as very important, and see their “tribe” as the body of Christ.

JohnM
Guest
JohnM

Is it yella’, or yaller?

Ian Miller
Member

I’m not very white. Only half. And I agree with JL completely.

Billtownphysics
Guest
Billtownphysics

I didn’t like his “low IQ immigrant” comment either, but I don’t think he was saying that husbands should be “fathers” to their wives necessarily. His comment about children is that many of these women are acting out in childish ways because they likely did not have good fathers. I think that was his point.

Ben
Guest
Ben

When I said that white women were still “loyal to their tribe,” I was talking about how, with all of the white male shaming being done by white women (whether they’re loudly protesting in public or just passively accepting and going along with the narrative), at the end of the day, they still exhibit just as much in-group preference as any other race when it comes to dating. They still want white men, regardless of what they say.

Jill Smith
Member
Jill Smith

Which white women are doing all this white male shaming? What does this even mean? Complaining about their husbands not taking out the trash, or bewailing that their boyfriends don’t want to commit? According to a 2015 Pew Research study, only seven percent of white woman marry outside their race (the number is the same for white men). But only 12% of black women marry out. Only for American Indians of both sexes does the intermarriage rate get above 30% or so. Thirty-seven percent of all Americans polled for the study believe intermarriage is beneficial for society, and only nine… Read more »

Billtownphysics
Guest
Billtownphysics

Jilly, you need to get out into some liberal college campuses a little more if you don’t see any young white women doing white male shaming. Watch the video in this article… http://www.theblaze.com/news/2017/05/26/students-demand-firing-of-college-professor-who-objected-to-event-that-kicks-white-people-off-campus/

BJ
Guest
BJ

I agree with you in the sense that feminism is a power play. Feminists are playing on discontent among women to further a cultural and political goal. Beyond that, it is merely virtue signalling that they are enlightened.

The fact that matriarchal societies are basically short lived and almost nonexistent show that this type of thing is not sustainable. Eventually, any society that adopts this type of backwards thinking either dies out, changes, or is taken over by another.

HC
Guest
HC
Ian Miller
Member

Interesting. I didn’t know what Veith was up to for the past decade.

Jill Smith
Member
Jill Smith

Oh my. I had always thought that my loathing for physics was due to a congenital inability to understand anything more complicated than Schrodinger’s cat (and I lost interest in that the minute I realized that no actual cat was involved), but now I understand why I found it repellent. But we can’t stop there. Mathematics, with its tiresome insistence on right answers and proofs, imposes a typically masculine linear understanding on me. Biology insists that DNA is destiny, and tells me that I am doomed to be XX until the day I die. Chemistry gives us hierarchical electron shells,… Read more »

Jennie
Member

Astronomy is racist.

Art
Guest
Art

ONLY a Sith deals in absolutes. ;-)

Ian Miller
Member

Peace is a lie, there is only passion… ;)

Jennie
Member

Are you absolutely sure about that?

Ian Miller
Member

If you’re not with me, you’re against me!

OKRickety
Member

Jesus said: “He who is not with Me is against Me” [Matt. 12:30 NASB]

Ian Miller
Member

Well, Anakin said it too. ;)

ashv
Guest
ashv

You know those movies were Jedi-produced propaganda, right?

Ian Miller
Member

Yup. That’s why they obscured the true hero, Wedge Antilles. ;)

Jennie
Member

Can we have Ellen back? Please?

ETA: Kidding.

wtrsims
Member

Ellen doesn’t help me melt the fat away, JL

Andrew Lohr
Member

Where does Rachel Dalziel get a drink? (“Everyone that thirsteth, come ye to the waters…”)

adad0
Member

She does not self identify as thirsty. ????

Enriquetaafenn
Guest
Enriquetaafenn

Google is paying 97$ per hour! Work for few hours & have longer with friends and family! !dt168c:
On tuesday I got a great new Land Rover Range Rover from having earned $8752 this last four weeks.. Its the most-financialy rewarding I’ve had.. Follow this link for more information
!dt168c:
➽➽
➽➽;➽➽ http://GoogleFinancialCashJobs458MediaFaceGetPaid$97/Hour ★★★✫★★★✫★★★✫★★★✫★★★✫★★★✫★★★✫★★★✫★★★✫★★★✫★★★✫★★★✫★★★✫::::::!dt168c:….,…..

Michelle
Guest
Michelle

In terms of identity politics, captives to Christ renders us inmates of a different kind, and not the quarrelsome kind. Once again, it’s not whether but which… Not whether we will be inmates, but Whose inmates we will be.

daveme7
Guest
daveme7

So this is theology?

Jane
Member

Yes.

insanitybytes22
Member
Jill Smith
Member
Jill Smith

Did you listen to the audio? I can’t tell from the short blurb because, although he says hate is a Christian virtue, he refers to evil rather than to people. In other words, he says we must love our enemies but we can hate evil. If evil is an abstraction rather than an individual, I don’t think that is a problem. But he might go a lot further than this, and I can’t tell without downloading.

insanitybytes22
Member

The fact that you can’t even take a stand against a white supremacist who calls Anders Breivek a hero and preaches that hatred is a Christian virtue kind of does speak to the problem.

Jill Smith
Member
Jill Smith

Hold on. I didn’t remember that he is a white supremacist, or that he called Breivek a hero, when I clicked on your link. Not all of us are as familiar with the alt-right as you have become! I read only the sentences that were there. I hope you don’t really believe that I support racial bigotry, let alone the doctrines of white supremacy. I can’t imagine what I could possibly ever have said to give you that perception of me. I asked in good faith because I did not see a problem with the actual words. I believe that… Read more »

insanitybytes22
Member

I heard the actual tape. I do not believe you are a hater. My point being, our theology and our powers of discernment are pretty darn important when we start preaching that it’s okay to hate in Christ’s name. That it’s okay to body slam a reporter or punch some antifa girl in the face,or execute 70 children in cold blood. The fact that you don’t see a problem with the actual words IS the problem. WTH am I trying so hard to explain to Christians that violence and hated are NOT Christian values? Because I’m a bloody moron, that’s… Read more »

Jill Smith
Member
Jill Smith

I see a problem with the three acts you mention. I think I am not explaining myself very well. If we love goodness, we hate evil. That doesn’t mean we should hate evil people. It means that we hate the evil that they do. When I look at pictures of abused or murdered children, I hate the evil that was done to them. If I find myself momentarily hating the person who hurt them, I recognize my feeling as sinful. But I think that Jesus also hates the evil in the world that caused the death of a child. Not… Read more »

JP Stewart
Member

Is calling someone a “pathetic moron” because they called you out for lying good theology? I’d be careful with the hate charges…planks and specks and stuff.

steghorn21
Guest
steghorn21

Feminism is indeed insanity. In fact, I work with insane people and they make more sense than the feminists I encounter. What we have today is incredible “anger”. Everyone is a victim, everyone feeds of hating Trump. I believe this is an existential crisis: people have no meaning in their lives, but feeling angry, aggrieved, excluded gives them that sense of meaning. Interesting times, folks.