Women's March

[Anomaly]

On 1/22/2017 at 1:35 AM, Ice_nine said:

I don't buy this. Women being homemakers and men being breadwinners is not ancient tradition it's the tradition of a narrow slice of human history.  I think if your called to be a mother, great. I think if you're a woman and called to be a leader, like Joan of arc, who was a total bad ass, you should do that too.

I had a decent struggle accepting that I was female because of this narrow pontification about what femininity is. Because I wanted to be strong, be a leader. I've never liked delicate, flowery, or stereotypically girly things. It was a significant identity crisis of my youth.

I'm a woman because I have two x chromosomes and a body that matches that. Not because my personality aligns with some stupid culturally-contingent characteristics.

I'm sorry to be so fiesty. You seem very sweet and docile, while I'm kind of a hard-nosed pain in the are. Don't take it personally.

I find your understanding of femininity offensive, but I know you're well-intentioned. I can also empathize with these dirty feminists though, when these type of attacks are levied against them. You may see motherhood as the epitome of what it means to be feminine, but it doesn't seem the converse (that fatherhood is the epitome of masculinity) is really promoted.

So while you may genuinely believe that "the hand that rocks the cradle rules the world." To me it seems like a patronizing slogan designed to placate women rather than a genuine elevation of womenhood. The may see it as lowering women to brood mares. I think many women have talents they should share with the world and the wider community that do not involve their reproductive or homemaking abilities.

Think about it. Under your ideal world, I presume, men can be leaders, pioneers, warriors, adventurers, preachers, kings, basically people out in the world making grand changes while women must stay in the home and be content with raising a handful of humans that dad, who is out most of the time providing materially for his family and/or changing the world, has final authority over anyway. 

Maybe your friend thinks your entire worldview is sexist? Rather than merely your pro-life stance? I don't know enough about you to conclude if your views are somewhat anti-women (not against all women, just against the ones that don't fit your proscribed version of femininity I.e. most of us), but it might be. Have you considered that?

When the pro-life movement becomes wrapped up in this culture war of traditional gender roles it loses focus, and actually hurts the pro-life cause for reasons already stated. 

 

BTW welcome to phatmass

Ice, 

Chillax.   You don't have to change everyone's minds to be who you need to be.  Ain't ever going to happen.  In the one hand yo lament about stereotyping female roles, then rant with your own stereotypical perceptions that leaders are exclusively male.  

You dismiss a respectful statement for the value and power of maternal nurture as mere placating.  That isn't very kind or open minded or even very fair. 

Everyone stuggles to be who they want to be and it really isn't ever easy.  We all have our perceptions and personal baggage, whether we want to or not.  Fighting to be who you want to be shouldn't be about being dismissive and demeaning of other people's choices. The 

[hotpink]

The thing I don't get about this is that besides a few terrible things Trump said, it all comes off as a big temper tantrum.  Its a pre-protest, as if it has any weight or meaning.  The thing is, in a few weeks no one will care, because almost none of these people care for each other.  They just want to make a point.

The feminist movement was very whitewashed and very focused on bettering life for middle-class white women.  Until the past few years, many women of color wouldn't touch the feminist movement with a 10 foot pole.  The march bent over backwards to include them and give them a voice on things...but as some pointed out that felt more out of appeasement.

Trump is trying to change the government.  Trying to take the federal voice out of things.  His picks for secretary of state and secretary of education have views that scare disabled people and parents of disabled children.  Yet, for the most part, they've done nothing to deserve it....expect question some things that have happened in education.  Some of the things they question are things that have been positive, like inclusivity.  It scares them that this could be taken away.

It scares people that "locker room talk" could come back.  But to that I say--you can't legislate morality.  You can't legislate someone into believing what you do.  And public shaming of that kind of speech won't really help, either. It has to be internal and complete change in a person.

I think the media sees this as some sort of catharsis for getting the bet on who the next president would be wrong.  They need to feel they are doing something although a "show of force" is meaningless without real action.  And quite frankly, I'd be surprised if more than a dozen people out of the millions do anything to actually change the lives of women, especially those who are of color or have views that oppose them.

[Ice_nine]

2 hours ago, Anomaly said:

Ice, 

Chillax.   You don't have to change everyone's minds to be who you need to be.  Ain't ever going to happen.  In the one hand yo lament about stereotyping female roles, then rant with your own stereotypical perceptions that leaders are exclusively male.  

You dismiss a respectful statement for the value and power of maternal nurture as mere placating.  That isn't very kind or open minded or even very fair. 

Everyone stuggles to be who they want to be and it really isn't ever easy.  We all have our perceptions and personal baggage, whether we want to or not.  Fighting to be who you want to be shouldn't be about being dismissive and demeaning of other people's choices. The 

I know I don't have to change everyone's mind. But sometimes I feel lonely in my worldview and I get defensive. Depending on what's going on in my life and in my head at the time. Sometimes I go a little crazy. 

I already apologized to the person I was responding to. I hate when third parties feel the need to be like "hey you're being kind of an ass." I know, I already admitted as much and apologized for it. Sheesh.

And I wasn't really saying that it [the power of maternal nature] is placating, but I can see how it might be construed as such. I didn't think Jubilate was placating. But when it comes from other people it can feel that way. Two people can say the exact same sentence an have different intentions/meanings/purposes behind it. And sometimes it's a little guesswork as to what those meanings are. It's not an exact science. And it's not fool-proof. And I'm the first one to admit my guesswork just might be wrong,

[Papist]

What makes this "Women's Rights" differ from Human Rights?  

[Nihil Obstat]

17 minutes ago, Papist said:

What makes this "Women's Rights" differ from Human Rights?  

The right to kill very young children, apparently.

[Papist]

4 minutes ago, Nihil Obstat said:

The right to kill very young children, apparently.

That's not equal rights. 

[dominicansoul]

The March doesn't seem to have had an affect on President Trump:

 

http://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/abortion/315652-trump-signs-executive-order-reinstating-global-gag-rule-on

 

[beatitude]

Ice, I understand your frustrations. I also think that people on all sides of the debate have a tendency to construct straw women. To be honest I've met hardly any secular feminists who degrade motherhood, and they do care about a whole lot of things rather than just abortion. These are stereotypes that get shouted out a lot as a substitute for listening to what they're actually saying. The same goes in reverse: women who think human rights extend inward to the womb as well as outward get written off as people who think all women are obligated to be pregnant constantly, stay at home, and only do what men tell them. It can be very frustrating to be a pro-life religious feminist, because we get caught in the middle and get mud slung at us from multiple directions. Looking on the bright side, if we're perseverant enough, I think we can provide an evangelical witness and do some social good from what is sometimes an uncomfortable position.

[Socrates]

On 1/21/2017 at 1:39 PM, havok579257 said:

Well to be fair their fear is similar to what the conservatives expressed during Obama's presidency bfore it even started.  The conservatives (I am a conservative) have no one to blame for people not giving Trump a chance before he even does anything because they did not give Obama the benefit of the doubt, which many are calling for, for Trump.  Most of the things liberals are doing before Trump does anything in office are the same things conservatives did for Obama.

I must have somehow missed all the big violent conservative riots and looting after Obama's winning the election, and all those conservative professors calling off classes so their students can wallow in their grief, and all those GOP congressmen "boycotting" his inauguration. . . .

[Peace]

2 hours ago, Socrates said:

I must have somehow missed all the big violent conservative riots and looting after Obama's winning the election, and all those conservative professors calling off classes so their students can wallow in their grief, and all those GOP congressmen "boycotting" his inauguration. . . .

Aww. Is Socrates upset because everyone won't bow down and worship your Dear Leader?

[KnightofChrist]

lol I guess that's one way to look at acts of violence.

[havok579257]

3 hours ago, Socrates said:

I must have somehow missed all the big violent conservative riots and looting after Obama's winning the election, and all those conservative professors calling off classes so their students can wallow in their grief, and all those GOP congressmen "boycotting" his inauguration. . . .

also to be fair the vast majority of the the protests did not turn to riots.  taking a small number of people and then extrapolating it to encompess the whole group as bad, is dumb.  not to mention the riots that broke out on the day Trump was swore in had nothing to do with any cause.  the people doing the rioting told reporters they were just here to be heard.  they had no cause.  they just used the election as an excuse to do damage.

 

also bringing up anything a congressman does (republican or democrat)  and tying it to the voting public is dumb.  the congressmen don't represent our views.  they stick to their platform and do whatever they can to get votes.  just because th alt right says something dumb or Nancy Pelosi lies about the catholic church doesn't mean the voting public agrees with them.  politicans now a days don't represent the average american and only say what they say if it will improve their chances of getting elected.  not to mention how many republicans said derogatory things about Obama?

 

the fact is the liberals are acting no different than the conservatives did when Obama got elected.  conservatives cant cry liberals are not being cooperative when they refused to cooperate when Obama was in office.

 

also one more thing and this might blow your mind.  wait for it.... liberals are not always wrong and conservatives are not always right.  both have good ideas and both have bad ideas.  

Edited January 31, 2017 by havok579257

[Amppax]

17 hours ago, havok579257 said:

also one more thing and this might blow your mind.  wait for it.... liberals are not always wrong and conservatives are not always right.  both have good ideas and both have bad ideas.  

 

[Jack4]

On 1/31/2017 at 8:55 AM, havok579257 said:

liberals are not always wrong and conservatives are not always right.  both have good ideas and both have bad ideas.

Depends on what you mean by the terms. 

[havok579257]

2 hours ago, Jack4 said:

Depends on what you mean by the terms. 

there is no depends.  if you honestly think conservatives are good and liberals are evil then you are just being thick.  conservatives have good idea on how to run the world.  liberals have good ideas to run the world.  conservatives have bad ideas on how to run the world.  liberals have bad ideas on how to run the world.  anyone who honestly can not admit that has serious problems how they perceive things.  the world is not my side is 100% right on everything and your side is 100% wrong on everything. its more shades of gray.

 

if either side was 100% correct and the other side was 100% wrong the church and her bishops would only side with one group when they make public statements on public policy.  that doesn't happen.  the church and her bishops take the side of who is right.  so far the church and her bishops have not always sided with the conservatives or the liberals.  one side has not always been right.