"i Need Feminism Because..." Cambridge University Students Sha

[Gabriela]

But you can do that with one type of body wash and one type of shampoo.

 

Are you hitting on me? I am old enough to be your mother, young man!

[Amppax]

Well he IS a fetus...

[Basilisa Marie]

Feminism is an unnecessary social movement. It has created more problems than it's solved. Why a Christian would bother with it when following Christ achieves all the same ends without any of the problems, I do not understand. Please help me to do so.

 

Because even non-Christians need to know that treating women like crud is wrong.  And plenty of Christians treat women like crud, often cherry-picking scripture to justify their actions.  Ergo, they aren't doing Christianity right, or they won't be doing Christianity in the first place.  Feminism addresses the problem directly, and may or may not include Jesus with it, depending on how you want to do feminism.  For example, New Feminism emphasizes the complementary differences of the sexes while working to end sexism and promotes the dignity of ALL human persons, includes a lot of Catholic thinkers, and many new feminists base their ideas off of the writings of Catholics, like John Paul II.  That's the point of feminism, at least according to myself, a pro-feminism type of person. 

[Gabriela]

Because even non-Christians need to know that treating women like crud is wrong.  And plenty of Christians treat women like crud, often cherry-picking scripture to justify their actions.  Ergo, they aren't doing Christianity right, or they won't be doing Christianity in the first place.  Feminism addresses the problem directly, and may or may not include Jesus with it, depending on how you want to do feminism.  For example, New Feminism emphasizes the complementary differences of the sexes while working to end sexism and promotes the dignity of ALL human persons, includes a lot of Catholic thinkers, and many new feminists base their ideas off of the writings of Catholics, like John Paul II.  That's the point of feminism, at least according to myself, a pro-feminism type of person. 

 

Calling oneself a Christian does not equate to actually following Christ. It seems to me that the energy spent on attempting to get people to embrace feminism would be better spent on attempting to get people to embrace Christ—but really embrace Him, i.e., really follow Him, not just assume the name "Christian". That would bring with it all the advantages of feminism, and none of the disadvantages.

 

Don't get me wrong: I don't think that attempting to create social change is a bad thing. But I do think it should be done in His name, not the name of some secular movement. I am myself a Libertarian, and a staunch one at that, as many people here know. The difference I see between Libertarianism and feminism is that feminism is almost exclusively a social movement that tells us how men and women ought to behave towards one another. But the Church already tells us that. Libertarianism, on the other hand, proposes not a social arrangement, but what the limits of government power ought to be. The Church says some things on that, but not nearly as much as She does about social relationships, and what She does say about government is thoroughly consistent with Libertarianism—not so much with either Democrats or Republicans. Thus, the main difference is that Libertarianism, while a "movement", picks up where the Church leaves off. Feminism presumes to establish things that the Church has already taught (sometimes, taught against). Why, then, should we promote justice for women under the banner of feminism when we can and ought to promote it under the banner of Christ?

 

Here's the objection I see coming: Feminism is also active at the government level. Yes, I understand that feminists do seek to influence government. But what they seek to influence at the government level is the regulation of social relationships. Which brings us right back to feminism's primary concern with how men and women treat one another. Which has already been taught by the Church.

 

If you want justice for women, turn people's hearts towards Christ. That will be much more effective than the constantly changing, bickering, culture-dependent social whims of feminism—or any secular movement, for that matter.

[Lil Red]

we need feminism because of stuff like this:

 

The "Christian movement" that tells husbands to spank their wives "to correct misbehavior"

 

The trend is called Christian Domestic Discipline and much of what is known about the practice is published on the website Learning Domestic Discipline, published by husband and wife CDD duo, Clint and Chelsea.

 

The website states: 'It is an arrangement between two adults who share the belief that the husband is the head of the household and with that position comes the right to enforce his authority.'

 

In the packet they describe CDD as a ‘practice between two consenting life partners in which the head of household (HoH) takes the necessary measures to achieve a healthy relationship dynamic.’  

 

That translates to all methods of punishment, not exclusive to spanking. Clint and Chelsea advocate lecturing, removing privileges, corner and bedroom time – essentially the ways most people discipline their children. 

 

For CDD enthusiasts, this type of punishment isn’t sexual in nature.

 

(more at the link)

Edited June 23, 2013 by Lil Red

[Lil Red]

and here's the source article: http://www.xojane.com/issues/christian-domestic-discipline

 

[Socrates]

Feminism may not be necessary to prevent bad behaviour against women, but it is necessary to prevent bad ideas about women and men. Like this idea of chivalry and manhood and honour, which has done a lot of harm to both genders. Those are old ideas, true. They predate feminism by centuries. And they belong there in the past.

 

I'm sure I'd disagree with you quite a bit regarding what ideas are bad and good.

 

Ideas of chivalry and honor actually did quite a lot to civilize men and lessen barbaric and brutal practices, as well as elevate the status of women in society - so any historically informed "real feminist" would actually do well to respect such ideals, rather than disparage them.

 

Also, the oldness or newness of an idea has little bearing on whether it is good or bad, true or false.

 

 

Today, we like to disparage "old-fashioned" ideas of honor and virtue - and then we act shocked that so many act utterly dishonorably.

[Socrates]

Finding examples of crazy fringe un-feminist groups and such does not prove that "we need feminism."

You could just as easy use examples of the many ridiculous and sometimes outright evil excesses of feminists to prove that we all need to oppose feminism.

 

This is no more logical than saying the existence of Communism means we need Nazism, or vice versa.

 

I agree with all those who pointed out that all that is really needed is to follow the teachings of Christ's Church.

Edited June 23, 2013 by Socrates

[the171]

I lost count of how many times I was cat called in my one day in NYC. I'm not a dog. I'm a woman.

[Gabriela]

we need feminism because of stuff like this:

 

The "Christian movement" that tells husbands to spank their wives "to correct misbehavior"

 

The trend is called Christian Domestic Discipline and much of what is known about the practice is published on the website Learning Domestic Discipline, published by husband and wife CDD duo, Clint and Chelsea.

 

The website states: 'It is an arrangement between two adults who share the belief that the husband is the head of the household and with that position comes the right to enforce his authority.'

 

In the packet they describe CDD as a ‘practice between two consenting life partners in which the head of household (HoH) takes the necessary measures to achieve a healthy relationship dynamic.’  

 

That translates to all methods of punishment, not exclusive to spanking. Clint and Chelsea advocate lecturing, removing privileges, corner and bedroom time – essentially the ways most people discipline their children. 

 

For CDD enthusiasts, this type of punishment isn’t sexual in nature.

 

(more at the link)

 

Search deep, deep inside you, Lil Red. What is it that tells you that this practice is wrong? Your relationship with Christ, the Bible, and Church teaching, or feminism?

[Gabriela]

I lost count of how many times I was cat called in my one day in NYC. I'm not a dog. I'm a woman.

 

See Socrates' posts. Or mine: Just convert these people and your problem will be solved.

 

I have to say, I'm quite shocked that Christians would argue that feminism is necessary, when Christ Himself has told us that He is all we need. To struggle for just treatment of women as a Christian places Christ at the center of that justice—not just ideologically, but also practically and spiritually. To struggle for just treatment of women as a feminist—i.e., a "femin-ist", a "woman-ist"—places WOMEN at the center of that struggle. As if women are an end in themselves. It is that confusion between Christ as center/end and women as center/end that leads to the prioritization of women's desires over children's lives.

 

Remove women from the center of your arguments and put Christ there. The rest will follow.

[the171]

I've read your posts. Not impressed. Sorry.

[Gabriela]

I've read your posts. Not impressed. Sorry.

 

In other words: You believe that Christ is insufficient?

[the171]

Word games are fun for you, aren't they?

[Gabriela]

Word games are fun for you, aren't they?

 

There's no need to get catty. I am serious. (And to answer your question: Yes, they're a blast. But I'm not playing one right now.) If you believe that Christ is sufficient for salvation, but not sufficient to turn us into good people who love and pursue justice for all, then...

 

That is my point.

 

For the sake of total disclosure (which I hope will snuff out the resentment I sense in this thread): I was a militant feminist in college. It is from that experience that I came to see what allegiance to such a secular perspective can do to a person's soul. I became a terrible person. Certainly, not every feminist's story is as extreme as mine was. But any attachment to a secular view of justice can seriously harm our understanding of Christ's total sufficiency. I understand where a lot of those arguing for feminism in this thread are coming from. But I see their arguments as the outgrowth of an attachment to a worldview that feminists have told them is necessary for justice. It is not. If you prayerfully consider that together with Our Lord, I have no doubt that you will come to agree.

[Ice_nine]

we need feminism because of stuff like this:

 

The "Christian movement" that tells husbands to spank their wives "to correct misbehavior"

 

The trend is called Christian Domestic Discipline and much of what is known about the practice is published on the website Learning Domestic Discipline, published by husband and wife CDD duo, Clint and Chelsea.

 

The website states: 'It is an arrangement between two adults who share the belief that the husband is the head of the household and with that position comes the right to enforce his authority.'

 

In the packet they describe CDD as a ‘practice between two consenting life partners in which the head of household (HoH) takes the necessary measures to achieve a healthy relationship dynamic.’  

 

That translates to all methods of punishment, not exclusive to spanking. Clint and Chelsea advocate lecturing, removing privileges, corner and bedroom time – essentially the ways most people discipline their children. 

 

For CDD enthusiasts, this type of punishment isn’t sexual in nature.

 

(more at the link)

 

I spent a few years entrenched in the internets forums with the born-agains, baptists and evangelicals and there's a lot of this crap in those circles. I know some Catholics might subscribe to this crap to. Ugh, cannot say I'm surprised.

 

Also this is only a little less creepy than purity balls and that's saying something.

[Nihil Obstat]

I spent a few years entrenched in the internets forums with the born-agains, baptists and evangelicals and there's a lot of this croutons in those circles. I know some Catholics might subscribe to this croutons to. Ugh, cannot say I'm surprised.

 

Also this is only a little less creepy than purity balls and that's saying something.

 

What is a purity ball?

[Dr. Bombay]

Women, again, are not suited for certain occupations; a woman is by nature fitted for home-work, and it is that which is best adapted at once to preserve her modesty and to promote the good bringing up of children and the well-being of the family. -- Pope Leo XIII, Rerum Novarum

 

Listen to your Papa.  He knows what's good for you.  Go read the whole thing, you will achieve enlightenment.

 

http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/leo_xiii/encyclicals/documents/hf_l-xiii_enc_15051891_rerum-novarum_en.html

[ardillacid]

I'm moving this to the debate table...

[Ice_nine]

It's like a father daughter dance, only really weird. Lots of emphasis on fathers protecting their daughters' purity until they are under the protection of their husbands. You can youtube it but, although I think purity balls are totally weird, most of the docs are like ZOMG RELIGION IS TARRIBLE! COMPREHENSIVE SEX ED! CONDOMS!