Strength and Honor

[CrossCuT]

I want Voris to start posting haha

I don't agree that gender roles are just made up by society. Men and women have differences and gender roles are expressions of this truth. If we take away the expression of a truth, perception of a truth begins to disappear in that society. But it doesn't mean some idea that men should lift weights online and can't do something like be a painter. It's not objectively feminine to be a painter. It depends what we'retalking about. For myself I believe in my conduct and appearance reflecting who I am, and I'm a woman so trying to be like a guy is like I'd be lying. 

I think the expression of truth lies within goodness and love; not your poodle skirt or your Clark's.

[MarysLittleFlower]

speaking of 2000 years ago . . .

In every piece of art I've seen women and men in the time of Christ, and for centuries afterwards, seemed to be wearing the same tunic-type thingy-ma-bobbers. It seems to me there was more distinctions in dress between your social class than there were between the sexes. I'll welcome any fashion historians to correct me if I'm wrong, but if I am wrong you should probably tell about every single artist who paints or sculpts Mary/Joseph/Jesus etc because they all look like they're wearing the same thing to me.

I tend to think these matters are trifling.

I think since the Bible says not to mix clothing there were differences... I remember researching this and though they were both tunics, they were still different in ways. You could easily identify the women for instance.  

[Ice_nine]

I think it's interesting how he paints "critical thinking" as masculine and "emotion" as feminine. Good thing I'm not on my period or I might have to send him some scathing hate mail.

[MarysLittleFlower]

I think the expression of truth lies within goodness and love; not your poodle skirt or your Clark's.

I said the expression of who we are... In addition to being kind or loving we are also men or women. Expressing that reality externally is something I was lead to believe in my personal journey with God. Its notsomething i thought before. 

[Ice_nine]

I think since the Bible says not to mix clothing there were differences... I remember researching this and though they were both tunics, they were still different in ways. You could easily identify the women for instance.  

 

yeah you could trow a man and a woman in some burlap sacks and 9 times out of 10 I could easily tell the difference too but I'm not buying that dress was drastically different among the sexes particularly around the time of Christ.

[CrossCuT]

I said the expression of who we are... In addition to being kind or loving we are also men or women. Expressing that reality externally is something I was lead to believe in my personal journey with God. Its notsomething i thought before. 

 

I have a vagina and a uterus which means I am a woman. I dont need to wear what the fashion industry has decided is feminine for this season just to appease your expectation of my gender role. Being a woman in itself is enough to BE A WOMAN and likewise for men. If you are deluded enough to think that the clothes you wear are an intricate part of your gender expression, then please go ahead and buy into the materialistic aspect of this rotten world but leave me out of it.

[Guest]

Mr. Voris strikes me as the type who would judge the heck out of me if he didn't like what I wore to Mass. Maybe I'm wrong though.

[MarysLittleFlower]

Its not materialistic in the way I describe and if you saw me you wouldn't say I'm following the fashions. Actually i ignore most of them   Yet I only wear skirts and that was something that I was lead to for a spiritual reason. I'm not interested in debating about it, its not some idea I got from society but contrary to our society. My society didn't teach me this. CrossCuT it seems to me like your posts sounds defensive (sorry if I misunderstood) but what I said is... This is my belief and I what I was lead to in my life. You may call me deluded or materialistic or other things but I'm not sure why, I just said what I believe and what I do. I don't feel threatened if a woman wears pantaloons and I never called anyone any names, yet I feel like whenever I say what I was drawn to in my relationship with God, people speak as if I personally insulted them. Look I was drawn to other things like not wearing makeup and living a particular lifestyle - is this threatening? I'm saying what my journey has been. That's all that's what I believe, if you disagree, I'm not saying anything about you. 

[Guest]

I agree though that dudes dressing like women is whack.

[MarysLittleFlower]

I don't know it just bothers me whenever people say they believe certain things about modesty or gender roles they get labeled as judgemental. Isn't THAT judging? People who talk about this usually don't talk about peoples hearts. But people then discuss their intent. A woman can wear only skirts for instance and yet not judge women in jeans. Just as amodestly dressed woman wouldnt necessarily judge someone in a bikini. She doesn't need to wear a bikini to show she's not "judgemental". Using this logic we should have no beliefs at all. I just don't understand why people get so upset when someone mentions modesty or gender roles as if they feel judged. If someone is judging that makes sense. But if someone just said - this is their belief - that's just a statement about what they feel to be true and God's Will for them. 

[marigold]

I think it's interesting how he paints "critical thinking" as masculine and "emotion" as feminine. Good thing I'm not on my period or I might have to send him some scathing hate mail.

Hah!

[Lilllabettt]

Gender roles are constructs of society put in place to control how people act and think. The ultimate goal is to be a good, loving person; the attire you choose to wear is irrelevant. A woman who wears "manly" colors and bootcut pantaloons is no less feminine than a woman who wears dresses and pumps (that ish is uncomfortable, sorry not sorry). Likewise a man who enjoys the arts or non physically demanding roles is not the product of "wussification" as well as a woman who wants to work construction or get her hands dirty is not a butch. Supporting such things is an extreme detriment to the vast diversity of thought and personality that is all humans.

I think Voris should stay away from PM.

 

I am going to ask you a very difficult question for liberal feminists.  Think through your answer carefully. If you think the answer to this question is easy, you are a faux feminist. 

Being a woman, according to you, is not about whether a person wears a dress or likes the color pink. It is not about a preference for dolls over trucks, or being quiet instead of loud. It is not about being more emotional or nurturing. It is not about putting on makeup, having long hair, or walking in high heels. Further, it is not about being interested in a job in a traditionally female dominated field. And vice versa, being a man is not about having more rational reasoning habits of mind, or liking blue, or playing cowboys and indians, etc.

What then can liberal feminists have to say about transgendered people? Hmmmm? Accepting all the above as true, what can liberal feminists say but that transgender identity is  a mental disease, a psychological problem produced by internalization of the patriarchy?

 

Edited July 17, 2015 by Lilllabettt

[Lilllabettt]

I think it's interesting how he paints "critical thinking" as masculine and "emotion" as feminine. Good thing I'm not on my period or I might have to send him some scathing hate mail.

Michale Voris is, as usual, windbagging this one.

But it is a reality that women as a group reason through dilemmas emotionally while men more often apply logic. 

Women focus on emotional facts, focus on individual cases, and the people and relationships involved in a dilemma. Men focus on logical facts, and apply abstract principles to dilemmas. Our society values men's way of reasoning. That's the patriarchy. But there is nothing to say that women's reasoning habits are not equally valuable if not more so.

Let's name some other differences in gender found by our friends in peer reviewed science. 

Men take more risks. Men are more assertive of their rights. Men are more competitive. If given a choice men prefer justice to mercy. Women are risk-averse. Women tend to choose personal sacrifice if it will lead to reconciliation. Women prefer collaboration. If given a choice women prefer mercy to justice.

Obviously the distinction between the genders is represented in different ways in different cultures.

If a woman is consciously deciding to move outside her gender role as her society traditionally defines them, she should interrogate her motives carefully. Is she trying to reject the reality that there are distinctions between the genders? (Unscientific) Is she seeking to be more like a man because traditional female gender roles are not good enough for her? (Capitulating to the patriarchy). Is she putting aside traditional gender roles because doing so will allow her to scale the ladders of power that have been erected by patriarchy? (Praiseworthy.)

 

 ---> all of that is assuming a woman is consciously rejecting something as part of a gender role.In other words, "I'm not going to wear a skirt, its too girly" and "I'm going to wear pantaloons, cuz girls can do anything!"  VS  "My legs are cold, I'm wearing pantaloons." 

 

 

Edited July 17, 2015 by Lilllabettt

[Ash Wednesday]

I changed my mind on voting it down, but this is the first time I've ever felt the need to downvote anything, because I find the notion that anything feminine is weak, inferior, or "wussified" to be very offensive. 

Distinguishing between the sexes is fine. Appreciating and promoting exemplary masculinity is a great thing. It can be done in such a way that doesn't come across as being so insulting to women -- examples here: (http://www.artofmanliness.com/, http://www.catholicgentleman.net/, http://thosecatholicmen.com/)

I understand what Voris is trying to say, and he makes some valid points. But one does not have to lift up masculinity by putting down women and the feminine. And that is basically how I am interpreting some of the nuances there from both of you. I don't think it's done deliberately with malice towards women, but choice of wording is very important, and coming from the perspective of many women that are anything but "wusses" -- it's demeaning and condescending towards us to the point where I think it undermines the overall message.

[MarysLittleFlower]

I think I figured out what I wanted to say in this thread. Internal things are expressed through external things. Being a man or woman is more than an appearance, but conduct and appearance are an expression too. Its vain to concentrate on them more than the internals. But if one of the purposes of them is expression of what we do not see, it makes sense for internal and external to match in a person.

I know many people would say that certain gender roles or clothes are just made up by society but I think it depends on what you're talking about. Even if a society made it up, where did they get an understanding that such things should be made up? And this is a consistent thing throughout history. I believe though that certain things are truly feminine or masculine. But I'm not saying people should be clones or caricatures. Their qualities can easily shine through traits that are in the end not alien to them but are an expression of their nature. I also don't mean those improper and vulgar versions of femininity or masculinity in our culture .. But examples like Our Lord, Our Lady. Jesus is the perfect Man. He is masculine yet also gentle and kind. Our Lady is feminine, in the truest way. She is motherly, modest, yet has a strength of character and resolution.  

If you are angry reading this I invite you to think just about the concepts. You may still disagree but I'm hoping this discussion could be not a debate I'm not out to get anyone or judge. This is just what I felt was the truth when I approached the topic in general and about myself. God bless!

Just to add I don't see anything wrong with traditional femininity. Why do people get upset about it and disagree with it? Maybe each person has their different reason but there is nothing wrong with a woman being feminine. It doesnt make her weak or silly. Women who are mothers for example and stay at home moms are dedicated beautiful examples of love for their family. God made femininity too! Its not bad. I also don't understand anger at ideas like a man being the head of a family or men traditionally serving at the altar. When I'm at church I don't feel I must prove my worth by such things. If I'm praying in my pew is it not an imitation of Our Lady - the Queen of Heaven and Earth! Femininity is beautiful and exalted through Our Lady. Traditional roles are not here from oppression to women from those "evil men". Some men have abused their power yes. But that's not what patriarchy is. Masculinity and true patriarchy is like Our Lord, like St Joseph... Maybe some men abused this much yes but let's not throw away the good with the bad. When women want to be like men they are implicitly stating "men are better" while trying to state equality. Equality is not being the same. And femininity can be expressed in different ways - we are not barbie dolls. There is no threat to ones uniqueness. 

Edited July 17, 2015 by MarysLittleFlower