[Natalie]

Let’s talk about misogyny in Fundamentalism. 

It’s so ingrained in the culture that it might as well be written in the church covenants (you know, those cute not-so-little manifestos still in old churches).

We hear about it a lot in politics, but I want to address the effects of it having grown up in Fundamentalism.

It’s preached over and over that we’re here for the purpose of a man. So, that is later translated that men can dictate not only the direction of our lives, but our clothes, our hair, our money, etc etc.

We have to watch what we eat. Why? To please a man. We have to “pretty up”. Why? To please men. Heaven help we gain some weight and grow older. No, then we have to starve ourselves and get plastic surgery. Why? Because our purpose, according to Fundamentalism, is to please a man. We’re told we’re too quiet. Too outspoken. Too something, but not enough of the other. Because, loving ourselves and being content with ourselves doesn’t please mankind. 

I’m sorry. I can’t look at life that way. I have a deep-rooted thought process that tells me I’m to be someone’s commodity, and that thought process started early in Fundamentalism.

I think it’s time for some mental housecleaning. After all, isn’t housecleaning what we women are good at?

[WalrusWrangler]

Preach! I was once set up with a girl (she was 18, I was 22, it was awkward), and the only thing she talked about was how she was trying to learn how to cook and clean because she wanted to be a good wife. She said that her mom had failed to teach her these things, but now they're both trying to learn together. Talking about being a good wife before we've even been on a date was enough of a red flag, but I tried to dissuade* her still. I explained that I know how to cook and clean. I expressed a desire to share those responsibilities with my future wife (without implying that she would be that person). Still, she was adamant that her purpose in life (and the purpose of any woman, bless God) was to support a husband and kids. She wasn't from my old IFB, but I knew the one she was from. The pastor really pushed that sort of BS, harder than most. It didn't work out, and she married a good ol' IFB boy a year later. They went off to Bible college together.

*Not from learning how to cook and clean, because I think those are essential skills for any adult, man or woman. More so to dissuade her of making that her purpose in life, and to encourage her to find things she's interested in. Be true to herself and all that.

[EnlightenedMK]

Don’t even get me started on this topic. It drives me crazy! I was raised in exactly that kind of household and taught that I needed to consider everything that my future husband might want. While I was allowed to move out on my own (mainly from necessity as apposed to permissiveness, when your parents are missionaries it’s hard to meet guys if you’re living in a foreign country) I was discouraged from going to college “cause I was just going to be a wife and mother anyway”

Thankfully the man I married liked the fact that I had a mind of my own and encouraged me to use it. And even encouraged me to go back to school after we had our kids and get my degree.

Just the last couple of months my husband and I took the enneagram and discovered that we are polar opposite of the fundy gender typical personality types...explains why we were so uncomfortable for so long.

Also I’ve been watching the Handmaiden’s Tale, oh my word the similarities are scary!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Workin' Mama]

Amen to all of you!

Misogyny is woven into nearly every fiber of fundamentalist doctrine, practice, and culture.  What could be more blatantly sexist than openly banning women from leadership, preaching, and teaching? What could be more blatantly sexist than telling women to obey their husbands and that their entire purpose in life is to please their husbands? What could be more blatantly sexist than telling women that their bodies (and hence, their very physical existence and presence) are stumbling blocks to the virtue of every man who lays eyes on them?

In secular settings (such as the secular workplace), sexism is much more subtle, much more under the surface. In religion, it can go totally unchecked.

I know, I know. 'Cause the Bible says so. But at the end of the day, no matter how many Bible verses they can quote against women, they CHOOSE what they do and what they believe. They choose which parts of the Bible to emphasize, which parts to ignore, and how to interpret and apply it.

Of course I also believe in religious freedom. These misogynistic bigots can preach and teach whatever they want to. Women are free to believe them and to follow their teachings. But those of us who have left -- I think we need to tell everyone who will listen about how fundamentalists treat women (and how they treat everyone else under their influence, too).

Religion may not be the only source of sexism, but it is a major source of it. A reservoir of poison, if you will, that stores up the bigotry of past generations, protects it, lets it ferment, and then lets it ooze out into the soil of the larger culture. We can't fix it with legislation, but we can try to neutralize it as we work towards creating a better culture.

[Natalie]

(07-03-2018, 11:56 PM)Workin Mama Wrote: Religion may not be the only source of sexism, but it is a major source of it. A reservoir of poison, if you will, that stores up the bigotry of past generations, protects it, lets it ferment, and then lets it ooze out into the soil of the larger culture. We can't fix it with legislation, but we can try to neutralize it as we work towards creating a better culture.

Yes! And uses the Bible to justify bigotry and sexism.

It all boils down to one thing. Treating people as humans and not objects. We women are not objects. We’re not trophies or commodities. We’re people who should be given the same respect that men give each other.

Plain and simple.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[EnlightenedMK]

Personally I think they take scripture and apply their own meanings to it. Because there are many examples in the Bible of strong independent women who lead and taught men. Rebecca (received visions when her husband did not) Deborah, Abigal, Hulda, Phillip’s daughters, Priscilla, Lydia (it is assumed that it is she who ran the church at Phillipi and who Paul wrote Philippians to). Not to mention all the ones who aren’t mentioned by name, John writes one of his letters to a deaconess, Joel speaks of sons and daughters prophesying.

My personal favorite is the Proverbs 31 woman. Who is a strong independent businesswoman, who hires people to care for her children and do her housework but they try to make her into the perfect little stay at home mom.

I truly believe that the laws in exodus were there not to harm girls or put them in their place but rather to protect them. Particularly when we look at them in light of the culture in which they were written. Does that mean I think we should go back to those laws, absolutely not. What it means is that we have to look at things not with our own culture as reference but with theirs. For instance a man caught having sex with a woman was required to marry her that wasn’t to force her to marry her rapist, that was to protect her from a man tricking her into having sex with him (with a promise of marriage) and then abandoning her and her life being ruined, since during that time and culture she was reliant on a male relative for protection and livelihood.

Additionally I believe in the New Testament Paul addresses out of control behaviors in their context and that his words were never meant to be applied for everyone.

And since the Bible provides numerous examples of women prophets and teachers without any caveat or preamble it can be assumed that it was part of the normal. And that later men started to ignore the examples given and twist the words to fit their own selfish desires.

[co_heir]

I remember hearing sermons about how men had fallen into "Sin", and so many of them centered on the women who had led them astray. Women were presented as either meek submissive servants or as Jezebels waiting to lead a man to his doom. If a preacher did preach about Adam and Eve, it was all about Eve being a "helpmeet" (whatever that means) rather than someone who completes the man and is his equal. I heard far more sermons about the woman submitting to the man, than I did about the man loving and cherishing his wife. Of course, back then the culture was misogynist and the fundy message was right there alongside.

[Natalie]

Yep, and the mental carnage that this preaching causes to women is sickening. How dare someone teach girls from an impressionable young age that not only is their importance limited, but they’re the cause of man’s downfall.

So, what would happen if women decided to cite Paul, refuse to be a fundy wife, and then turn these “men’s” words against them stating that they don’t want to be man’s hindrance. All of a sudden, they’d become SO important, wouldn’t they?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Miss TTU Runner-Up]

Oh, it’s all our fault!
The Fall
The downfall of society (single moms raising wimpy boys, feminism, etc., etc.)
A man cheating on you
A man raping you
Men leaving the church (too girly)
Men acting like jerks
Men getting distracted
Men leaving their families
Men not acting like men
Requirements for the military becoming more lax

Feel free to add more. I’m tired of it. Tired of “sanctified testosterone” (John Piper). Tired of God being portrayed as a man (do they think God has genitalia?). Tired of being treated as though my vagina prevents me from using my brain...or having one.
Mostly just tired after battling with my preschooler over bedtime AGAIN. And PMSy. *sigh*

[Workin' Mama]

Here's a thought.

Does a preacher use his penis to preach? Does a pastor or church elder use his penis to make decisions about the future of the church?

If the answer is NO, then there is no reason why someone without a penis cannot perform these roles.

If the answer is YES, then they have no business being in church leadership to begin with.