1) "God is love, But love can be hated when it challenges us to transcend ourselves. It is not a romantic 'good feeling'... it is not about basking in self-indulgence; on the contrary, it is a liberation from self-absorption. This liberation comes at a price: the anguish of the Cross" -- Pope Benedict XVI
2) So, I saw this article and said, "YES!"
And then a few days later I saw this article which sorta kinda contradicted or challenged that article, and then I said, "YES!"
So, I think I liked them both. Good food for thought in this crazy, confused, mixed-up culture.
3) Speaking of women and men and dating, I am pulling a matchmaker here again! This time, for a beautiful, brilliant Catholic woman who is having a heck of a time finding a good Catholic man. Seriously, this woman has got it all….
In her own words:
"I'm a 26 year old single catholic graduate student at [prestigious university] (PhD in mechanical engineering, research in surgical robotics) who can't seem to find a good catholic man. I'm adventurous, fairly outdoorsy - I love rock climbing, hiking, do long distance motorcycle rides with my Dad, and recently tried surfing and took up gardening! I also love dancing - especially country line dancing, although I'm not very good at it yet! I go to church every week, try to go to adoration a couple times a week, and I'm committed to purity, but I still like to go out and party with my gang on weekends. I'm looking for a smart, fun-loving, outgoing, adventurous, playful catholic man."
There simply must be a man out there who fits this description and who is ready to sweep this woman off her Catholic feet! If you are the man, or if you know someone who is, please email me at littlecatholicbubble@gmail.com, and please include a photo and pertinent info!
4) Christmas is the perfect time to make sure that every Catholic family has this DVD series in the home. I cannot stress enough my reaction to this set: WOW. WOW. WOW. WOW!!!!!!
Fr. Robert Barron's Catholicism DVD Box Set
Did I say? WOW!!!!!!!!!
I believe that every Catholic family should own it, and every non-Catholic should view it. Heck, when even PBS decides to run it, you know it's extraordinary, as the left is not so friendly to the Church. (And, if you order the set through this blog, every penny of commission goes to the orphans. Win-win!)
I hear tell that Fr. Barron is in process of making another documentary, this time about the New Evangelization, and when it comes out, you can bet I will be first in line.
5) Speaking of Catholicism (and needing more knowledge of it in this age of distortion and confusion!), if you have not read my shortened and photo-illustrated reversion story, please do, and please write your own experiences in the comment box. I want to know what you encountered growing up as a cradle Catholic, and if it was similar to what I wrote.
6) So, it turns out that one of the winning PowerBall lottery tickets was bought just a few miles down the road from my parents, in Fountain Hills, AZ. My dad even knows the store in which it was purchased! From what I can tell, winning that kind of money can actually be a curse, unless the vast majority of it is given away to those who truly need it.
Didn't we all dream about what we could have done with so many millions? I know I dreamed of funding all the orphans, which leads us to...
7) …a story that is so very urgent. She doesn't know I am doing this, but I will let the adoptive mother tell the tale of Adalyn.
 |
| Click my photo to help! |
If any lotto winner wants to help get this child home ASAP (or any regular folks, too), please consider dropping some dollars in their tax deductible account. I feel very helpless most days, but then I remember that together, we are not helpless. There is strength in numbers. Thank you from the bottom of my heart!
Next, are you or your child a Lady and The Tramp fan?
 |
| Click here to bid! |
Or are you looking for discontinued Spanish Lladro for cheap?
 |
| Click here to bid! |
Now, Adalyn and Ivan have families committed to saving them and trying to get there on time, but so many others still need mothers and fathers to find them.
Please meet three older children with HIV, who are fully functioning, normal kids, and who are only in orphanages because of their HIV status. Ironically, these kids are living perfectly healthy lives with a normal lifespan ahead:
Beautiful Estelle, age 14
Please click any of their pictures for more information, and please look here for quick FAQs about HIV. Although HIV is not spread by casual contact, hugging, kissing, being on the playground, or playing sports (the virus is not found in sweat, tears, urine, saliva, or snot), these children have no future in their home country once they age out of the system at age 16. I can't even bear to tell you what they face.
Please consider adopting an older child with HIV, as it really is their only chance. And please, help spread the word about these precious ones, who are just like the rest of us, in need of families and love and a future.
Have a blessed weekend, and thanks to Jen for hosting!
.
Please consider adopting an older child with HIV, as it really is their only chance. And please, help spread the word about these precious ones, who are just like the rest of us, in need of families and love and a future.
Have a blessed weekend, and thanks to Jen for hosting!
.
As usual, waking up to your blog makes my day and fills me full of praise and wonder. I hope you can find a good Catholic guy for the young lady above. If this works, you need to start a matchmaking blog!
ReplyDeleteI got to watch several episodes of the Catholicism series by Father Robert Barron on EWTN TV and hope to own it myself someday. It truly is amazing!
DD
Just bought the DVD series through you! Thanks for the recommendation! :)
ReplyDeleteI love love love these 7QTs! Fab quote from Pope Benedict to begin with and some gorgeous children, who I will most certainly pray for, to round it all off. I especially love your match-making skills. If you don't ask, you don't get. Have a great weekend :)
ReplyDeleteWould she consider a Catholic lawyer in Delaware?
ReplyDeleteAllison, I'm sure she would… email me! :)
ReplyDeleteNo discussion of the "war on men" is complete without reading Mark Regnerus. His book, Premarital Sex in America: How Young Americans Meet, Mate, and Think about Marrying | By Mark Regnerus and Jeremy Uecker is a must. It give strong evidence that just like in any marketplace, forces at work in society for the past 50 years have reduced the market value of sex, to the detriment of women. You should do an entire post on this book alone.
ReplyDeleteCan someone please tell me how feminism emasculated men? How women becoming members of society turned men into under achievers? And how men being intimidated from a little competition is women's fault?
ReplyDeleteI actually read Hanna Rosin's The End of Men, and she chronicled several lower middle class 'couples' who were going through hard times. In several instances the men had been laid off from the only thing they knew how to do--manufacturing, and when their girlfriends/wives went back to school, worked jobs they didn't like, fought and did whatever they had to put food on the table, the men all said they felt emasculated, because they werent the providers anymore! And because they didn't feel needed they decided to play video games all day long. Please tell me how this is women's doing?
Dear men of the world. if you want to be providers PROVIDE. If you want to be protectors PROTECT. If you want to be respected by your family. EARN it. But you can't expect to have women under perform so you can look tough.
~CS
Mary, that sounds good!
ReplyDeleteCS, did you not read the second article? I believe it addresses your point.
I read it, I was echoing it!
ReplyDelete~CS
Oh, good, ha ha! Yep, men need to be men, regardless of how women behave. A real man is always a gentleman, no matter what. Is it harder to be a gentleman in this culture? Absolutely. But that's no reason that they should stop, or that parents should stop teaching their boys well.
DeleteIf I'm not married by my golden birthday (5 years) I'm coming to you :)
ReplyDeleteIf this young lady can't find a good Catholic husband, there is no hope for the rest of us!
ReplyDeleteSomeone should try to match up that young woman with Officer Larry DePrimo. I'm only half-joking. He sounds like a virtues kind of guy. And with that Italian last name, he's probably Catholic.
Finally, something positive on the news! If I wasn't married already, I'd marry that guy myself!
DeleteWe're watching Father Barron's series for advent because there is no way my bitter ex-Catholic mil will allow it over Christmas. :(
ReplyDeleteThank you for broaching the war on men topic. I have been really disappointed lately in the viewpoints of several conservative Catholic and protestant men - men for whom I have a great deal of respect - who have seized upon the all-fault-lies-with-feminism paradigm with all their might. It's not that the core claims of the first article are wrong. It's just that they are woefully insufficient to explain the catastrophic loss of traditional notions of manhood even among conservative Christians.
What really scares me is that more and more I am hearing conservative men saying that if women want to be men, let them reap the consequences. Yikes. How un-Christian, and how very un-virtuous Part of what we seem to have lost is the idea that, unlike womanhood, manhood is socially constructed. It is an achievement, and does not derive from biology alone. Almost universally, cultures have insisted that manhood be earned, fought for, through some sort of training and trial. That no longer exists in our culture. The distinctive features of manhood are the virtues of courage, self-restraint, etc. But we have been raising boys to understand manhood- if they even believe in it at all- to be the state of nature. Most of us are more deeply infected with these notions than we think.
It takes a lot of artificial constructs and meddling to force women away from their core identities as women, but our culture is succeeding! But it takes a lot of artificial constructs and meddling to make men out of boys, and unfortunately our society gave up that hard, dull task long ago.
Sorry for the long comment, but I could write a book here if there was space, lol!
Robin, I profoundly love those insights! I wish you would write a book!!
ReplyDeleteWow, Officer DePrimo is a prince of a man… Love him! That is what a role model looks like. His parents should be very proud.
Morgan, how old are you? I have a son… ;)
I wrote you an email last night, attached pictures, and then didn't have the nerve to send it! Thought my son - a wonderful, fantastic, good-looking catch - would kill me.
ReplyDeleteWhere does Blondie live? We're in Texas and a chance meeting would be perfect.
Sue, email me!! And remember, this is not an "arranged marriage", just networking (an introduction to like minded folks!). I've seen it work very well. Drop me a note and we can discuss more -- littlecatholicbubble@gmail.com ;)
ReplyDeleteMy friends lent me the Catholicism DVD series, and I just finished it. I learned about Corpus Christi and that I have relatives related to a saint! When I get another chance, I would like to watch the series again because it's so very deep. I returned the DVD set to my friends, so that they can lend it to others. It makes you happy and proud to be Catholic.
ReplyDeleteHmmm. I wonder where Lena lives. I purchased the Catholicism series three times, and then lent them to friends when I didn't find time to watch them right away. And they all told me how good it was --- and so they lent the CDs to friends, and "we'll get it back to you soon."
ReplyDeleteI'm sure it is a GREAT series, but I guess I'll continue to buy books for Christmas gifts --- they're cheaper, and I don't expect to get them back.
Leila, when I heard that the winning power ball ticket was purchased in AZ, my first thought was "maybe Leila won it for her orphans!" That would be a happy day---how many fully funded kids would that be?
ReplyDeleteAbigail, there are about 800 orphans listed on RR! Can you imagine?
ReplyDeleteDNBA, that is frustrating! But kinda cool...
Okay, I know I'm a little late to the party! I've been really, really, really nauseous lately and have been avoiding the computer like the black plague, but I have to comment about The War on Men.
ReplyDeleteSo when I first came across the article it was because several of my liberal feminist friends had mentioned and were so utterly confused by it. They kept commenting about how ridiculous it was, how the article was inferring that women should drop out of the work force and get back to the home, and their own implications were that it was unjust and unfair for anybody but women to be made into victims, because women are still victims of the "patriarchy". And then some of my conservative friends discovered the article and they all thought it was right on target. Men have been made into victims - though instead of standing up to their own victimization they're rolling over and playing HALOIII for hours upon end.
I am simply so confused as to what my liberal feminist friends found so wrong with it.
And then I came across two things that simply made it all make sense (not that it's right). First a lobby group in the EU is trying to ban children's books that have depictions of Traditional Families because it encourages gender stereotyping. (Which begs the question? Wouldn't any picture of anything then encourage stereotyping? Or is only because that's how it's been done before?) The second was an article by Tim Crowe from this morning on Catholicvote.com rebutting the recent ridiculous editorial from the NCR regarding "Women's Ordination." He made the comment that our very souls are either masculine or feminine - the fact that being male or female is physically detectable via biological differences is an effect of the soul being either masculine or feminine, not a cause of having, to be perfectly blunt and graphic, a penis or a vagina.
After reading that and reflecting on it all, it occurred to me that most people, I think led by the liberal fems, REALLY do believe that the ONLY difference between male and female is "Boys have a penis, girls have a vagina."
Quite frankly this thinking irritates me to know end. Especially when we can obviously point out that no one REALLY thinks this way. If they did, we wouldn't have the ridiculous amount of T.V. shows showcasing the same exact flaws that we see in every man, in all of the leading men in these shows. We wouldn't have the comments that elude to a man's inability to find ANYTHING unless it jumps out and screams, "Here I AMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM!" or the comments that admit how they all turn into infants at the first sign of a cold. And while none of these comments are fruitful in muttering, and all they do is bring down the male in question - they are stereotypes for a reason! CAUSE THEY'RE TRUE! Even those of us who have grown out of the Tim Allen, Friends, Happy Endings, Modern Family bumbling idiot men, and we choose not to participate in perpetuating the flaws of men (we'd rather celebrate their awesome qualities) - Let's face it we all snicker on the inside when our husbands, significant others, sons, brothers, fathers and grandfathers, can't seem to find their pants - that are in the closet, hanging on a hanger, at eye level, right in front of them.
Sorry for the rant. I'm just so tired of people, women, telling me that women are the perpetual victims and we need to keep fighting to gain ground. Gain ground on what? Are we now supposed to be able to abandon are families and duties so that we can lounge around playing HALOIII all day long just because that's what the men have done. Or are we supposed to now rub men's noses in the, what has turned out to be a self-fulfilling, prophesy that "men are no-good, lazy, shiftless, layabouts who ride on the backs of women doing real work."
Gag me with a spoon!
(Sorry, Leila, to take over your Quicktakes comments 5 days after the fact. Guess I needed to vent more than I realized.)
*allude not elude
DeleteBethany, you can overtake my comments any day! (By the way, are you nauseous because you are with child?? If so, CONGRATULATIONS!!!
ReplyDeleteI totally agree… we all know that men and women are not interchangeable except for body parts. We all know why girls want to have a GNO and not bring the husbands along, and we all know then men relate differently to their guy friends than to women (praise God). Vive la difference! I don't know a SOUL who does not get this? But they pretend that we are just a serious of "roles". So, if I can change a tire, that means "women and men are the same" and if my husband cries reading Little Match Girl, that means "women and men are the same", and if I can fix dinner and so can my husband, and if I can earn a paycheck and so can my husband, the "women and men are the same". But that is so dumb!!!
Anyway, I appreciate your vent. It goes back to the truth that "oppression of women = suppression of what is uniquely woman". Women are not oppressed because they aren't "societally free" to scratch their crotch, spit on the ground and play HALO all day, they are oppressed when a society asks them to be neutered, sterilized, alter their natural biology, squelch their feminine genius, shred their offspring without shame or emotion in order to be more like men and gain power over others. That is what is oppressive to women, frankly.
As for gender stereotypes and the EU… good luck with that. We talk about wanting our men to (rightly) protect and provide, but then we don't teach them what a real man is, because we are androgynous, with interchangeable roles. Barf! No thank you. I will take a real man, and real men (fathers) teaching their sons how to be real men any day. I don't know a single woman who wants an emasculated man. I've never met one. I don't even believe that the liberal feminists want that… at least not most.
And don't get me started on the "we are the same but for biology" thing except for when someone "believes" they are the other sex! How can someone be the other sex "in their mind" when we are supposedly all the same in our minds, and it's only in our penises and vaginas that we are different? How can someone "feel like a woman" if there is no difference between women and men? How can one "believe one should have been born a man" if there is no essential distinction except in incidental body parts?
Gosh, more on that later, maybe.
I'm so grateful to God that God made us male and female. What beauty, what joy! Who in the world would want us to be interchangeable??
Sorry, ranting here now… Gotta go help one of my SIX little boys (and having six boys and two girls, I can promise you, the sexes are VERY, VERY, VERY different).
Aye, we're due June 5th and I'm still a little (okay, incredibly) overwhelmed at this turn of events. I hope when the nausea goes away I'll be able to focus on preparing a happy home for the new little one. Right now, I'm lucky if I can manage to make it downstairs in the morning with dry heaving - and it just goes down hill from there. Ugh! So I humbly beg for prayers! :)
ReplyDeleteBethany,
ReplyDelete"After reading that and reflecting on it all, it occurred to me that most people, I think led by the liberal fems, REALLY do believe that the ONLY difference between male and female is "Boys have a penis, girls have a vagina."
Do you really believe that most liberals really see absolutely positively no difference between the sexes, because I think they do, but instead see the rigid gender dichotomy as problematic.
In the end of men, rosin talks about how women have adapted throughout the past few decades. If someone needed to make money, they made it, if someone needed to take care of the children they tok care of them, if they needed to get a job as a secretary or a scientist, they did it, and in many situations men have refused to adapt.
The 'war on men' is predominately the result of men being so obsessed with being manly---that they have cripled themselves. Boys are failing in school because studying is 'girly', having good communication skills is 'girly' being club leaders is 'girly' acting in plays and playing musical instruments is 'girly' being usurped by a girl is girly' being polite is 'girly'
Girls on the other hand don't see success as gendered. They don't ask themselves am I less of a girl if I do well on this test, or if i am a wrestler, or a scientist, they get to know themselves and work towards that goal. And as a result women are leaves the boys behind...
~CS
THAT is why men are failing. Because men have made all these silly rules and are petrified of becoming women and as a result they lack the coping skills and initiative to do anything.
"Sorry for the rant. I'm just so tired of people, women, telling me that women are the perpetual victims and we need to keep fighting to gain ground. Gain ground on what? Are we now supposed to be able to abandon are families and duties so that we can lounge around playing HALOIII all day long just because that's what the men have done. Or are we supposed to now rub men's noses in the, what has turned out to be a self-fulfilling, prophesy that "men are no-good, lazy, shiftless, layabouts who ride on the backs of women doing real work."
ReplyDeleteBethany can you unpack this for me please?
I am a young woman so I didn't live through this, but it is very new and novel that women can exist and support herself without a mens help or approval.
When Hilary Clinton went to Wesley in 65' it was because she COULDNT GET IN TO YALE. Women were barred from the Ivy League, barred from education, from making enough wages to support themselves, from owning property without a man.
AND NOW MERELY 47 YEARS LATER WE OUT EARN THEM. you see no accomplishment in that? No oppression overcame? Nothing?
And as far as women crying victimization. How many women are raped each year? How many beaten? How many denied promotions because they were mothers (fatherhood does not have any bearing on men's career advancement statistically.) How many men wouldn't vote for a woman president?
Dont you think those would be great things to make ground on?
~CS
CS, I agree with much of what you said, so I will only go to the part that I really don't agree with at all:
ReplyDeleteBoys are failing in school because studying is 'girly', having good communication skills is 'girly' being club leaders is 'girly' acting in plays and playing musical instruments is 'girly' being usurped by a girl is girly' being polite is 'girly'
I have six boys, so let's talk about the older ones, who have been around longer. One of them is in college, one in high school, one in junior high. All of those "older" boys are manly men. Not one of them sees any of those things as "girly", and I've never known any of their (many) male peers to think of those things as "girly". Where are you getting this? Because it's not the experience of the men or boys that I know
Do you really believe that most liberals really see absolutely positively no difference between the sexes?
ReplyDeleteNo I don't, but I truly think that they WISH there wasn't a difference. What is this "rigid gender dichotomy"? Because what I see is, a natural instinctive difference between men and women.
If someone needed to make money, they made it, if someone needed to take care of the children they tok care of them, if they needed to get a job as a secretary or a scientist, they did it, and in many situations men have refused to adapt.
NO! The relative handful of examples of PEOPLE have refused to adapt, because they were incapable of looking into the future, one's sex had/has nothing to do with it. The feminist notion looks at the majority of this small sampling at being men and began to blame ALL men. THIS is the problem I have. Do people need to adapt with the times, YES? But do you blame everyone for the sins of the few?
The 'war on men' is predominately the result of men being so obsessed with being manly---that they have cripled themselves. Boys are failing in school because studying is 'girly', having good communication skills is 'girly' being club leaders is 'girly' acting in plays and playing musical instruments is 'girly' being usurped by a girl is girly' being polite is 'girly'
Girls on the other hand don't see success as gendered. They don't ask themselves am I less of a girl if I do well on this test, or if i am a wrestler, or a scientist, they get to know themselves and work towards that goal. And as a result women are leaves the boys behind...
Okay first of all, my husband - when in college- out-studied, out-performed, and achieved much higher than I ever did - he graduated Summa Cum Laude - and our former friend who also graduated summa cum laude, instead of happy for him, was pissed because he had a better GPA. She could only assume it was because they favored males. It never once has ever occurred to her that he just made better grades than she did. It's this attitude that I fun into with my liberal fem friends. All men are supposed to be stupid bumbling idiots so when one rises above them, it's the system that's flawed. So sorry, I don't buy into this one bit. Are there some who believe that studying and getting good grades is nerdy and therefore "girly for a man" ('Cause lets face it that's the real stereotype being a nerd or geek is considered "girly" for men.)? YES! I've known plenty of girls who think studying and achieving academic success is for the nerds and geeks and that would ruin their image as the popular cheerleader or soccer player if they did that. Again, this is NOT a gender problem. This is an apathy problem that is plaguing most of society, males and females alike.
When Hilary Clinton went to Wesley in 65' it was because she COULDNT GET IN TO YALE. Women were barred from the Ivy League, barred from education, from making enough wages to support themselves, from owning property without a man. OH. MY. GOSH. a woman couldn't get into an all male school. I'm sorry I don't see a problem with this. I wish there were more all-male and all female schools around.
ReplyDeleteAnd considering that my great-grandfather died in 1932 and my great-grandmother worked, raised 6 children, had a home, and took care of everything. I know that this rest isn't as true as feminist try to make it out to be. My husband grandmother was the mayor of the small city they lived in, sometime in the 1970's. Her husband died in 1965, I believe, she raised 5 daughters, worked for manufacturing company, owned their house. She's one tough lady. :)
And as far as women crying victimization. How many women are raped each year? How many beaten? How many denied promotions because they were mothers (fatherhood does not have any bearing on men's career advancement statistically.) How many men wouldn't vote for a woman president?
First all of women being raped causes the victim of the rape to be THE VICTIM, that's why they're called the victim. It does not in any way, shape, or form, make me or every other woman in America a victim. Rape turns an innocent human being into a victim, IMHO it has nothing to do with the "victimization of women" as a whole.
The same can be said for women who are beaten. Very few women are raped simply BECAUSE they're women. Very few women are beaten simply BECAUSE they're women. Are there some? I'm sure. But I'm not going to apply what happens to the minority to the majority just so I can blame another group of people (all men), falsely, for taking advantage of all women.
Now you're last two questions present an interesting foray. Because I DO see the problem of mothers being overlooked for promotions simply because their mothers, and men - fathers or non-fathers - not having this problem. However, the real issue is, is that feminist looked at this unfair dilemma and said, "I know, if mothers can't get promotions because we're mothers, then we have to stop being mothers!" And so they've spent the last 60 years pushing contraceptives, abortion and how "we don't need men." down our throats in an attempt to "even the playing field" with the men who don't have to worry about these things. And you know what? After 60 years we're not a whole lot better off in that area than we were 60 years ago. Because what we should have done is work to alter the mindset of the employers and the companies, not play into their ridiculous patriarchal mindset. Instead of not having children, we needed to demand that men, the fathers, stay home with sick kids every now and again. Make the men, the fathers, demand paternity leave when a child is born, and we should be making them take Family/Medical Leave if a child needs to have longer term care than just a couple of weeks.
As far as a woman running for president. Yeah, there are a some men out there who don't think a woman can be president - there are probably more than I'd care to admit to. However, I'm not entirely sure any woman could be president either. I turn 35 next year, and even if I had ambitions to be president, I KNOW that at this point in my life I could never do it. My children take precedence over the needs of the country. My husband (not that he has presidential ambitions) might be able to do it (I wouldn't let him anyway).
ReplyDeleteThis has nothing to do with gender roles, it has to do with instincts. My husband's instinct as man and father is to do what he must to provide for and protect me and the children even if that means that he has to travel around the country periodically, and work on the weekends (he does all of this). My instinct is take care of and nurture, educate our children, even if it means that, at this point in my life, I'm not a lawyer or a basketball player, or if I even manage to leave the house today. THIS is the difference we need to recognize and THIS is the difference I think most feminist try to ignore or deny.
Like I said, I think what you see as rigid gender roles, I see as instinct, which is why they are perceived as so rigid to some people. Because they're not going just "go away". They're ingrained in our biology, in our souls, they are what make us who we are.
And yes, there are some men who have a more nurturing instinct, and there are some women who have a more protective instinct. Only because it's on a scale. Of course there is going to be some overlap. Which is why it's important to play to people's strengths. But you don't play to people's strengths by trying to ignore, deny, or worse, reverse, the natural instincts we've been given.
Does that all make sense? I know I kind of rambled there. I'm not entirely sure what I wrote at the beginning.
Thanks, Bethany!
ReplyDeleteI want to make the case that as a conservative and a Catholic, I would HAPPILY vote for a woman for president. A conservative, pro-life woman. I would NEVER vote for a leftist radical pro-abortion feminist.
So, it's not the sex, it's the ideology. Some folks might see a woman on the ticket for President and say, "Oh, a woman! Yay, I am voting for a woman for president!" and not even care what her policies would be….they would just want to "make history" by voting for the first woman president. That to me is very problematic, and also sexist. I think the same thing happened with voting for the first black president. I would have been so happy to vote for a black president, if he shared my ideology (Thomas Sowell for president!!!). If Barack Obama had been a white man who was a junior senator with no executive experience, no resume except as a community organizer, and with his background of Marxist as mentors…. NEVER would a white man have made it to the White House with those "qualifications". So, there is a big problem there.
Sorry, I am so tired of everything being framed in terms of "groups" and in terms of those groups being "oppressed" vs. "oppressor".
This is that leftist lens of seeing everything in terms of race, class and gender (which is so divisive) instead of truth, goodness and beauty (which unites every human being).
Oh, and I totally agree that there should be more single-sex educational opportunities for both male and female.
One more thought: There may not be a lot of liberals who actually believe that men and women are exactly the same, but that is how the ideology plays out. And I have been utterly SHOCKED (and totally sick) by how many commenters on the left, here in the Bubble, have argued that there is no difference between men and women, and that there is no difference between mothers (and motherhood) and fathers (and fatherhood).
When I read stuff like that, I think that we are just manufacturing some kind of weird leftist Brave New World and that we have severed the common bonds of humanity, the things we ALL used to understand and agree on. (Rich, poor, black, white, young, old, religious, non-believers -- we were ALL united in an understanding of the importance of mothers and fathers. How sad that we are losing even the basic, primal, ties that bind us as humans.)
Here's what I think, all of it, from contraception and abortion to the "victimization of women", the "war on men", and the desire to break down the "stereotypical gender roles", it's all about human beings trying to control nature. Fertility, the inherent differences between males and females, the instinctive attributes of mothers and fathers and males and females in general, all of these things are natural, they're biology. We can no more control them than we can control whether or not it's going to rain tomorrow. We can gain knowledge and use to predict scenarios, we could build a bunch of windmills and try to disrupt weather patterns, but the control is an illusion. Those things don't give us control, they just make us think we do, until something shakes us out of our delusion, like a massive, destructive hurricane or a baby conceived on the pill.
ReplyDeleteAnd as my husband says, us not being able to control nature is just the secular way of saying we can't control God.
I think I'm getting grumpy in my old age.
ReplyDeleteI KNOW I'm getting grumpy in my old age!! But I feel better reading about the old grump himself, St. Padre Pio. Makes me seem patient and gentle in comparison!! :)
DeleteHe was basically all, "I have no time for this nonsense, I have souls to save!!!"
Bethany, well said!
ReplyDeleteLeila,
ReplyDeleteI don’t think boys or men in general think studying and doing well is girly. But in my very limited experience with at risk boys, younger boys are more likely than their female counterparts to think books and doing well in school or delaying gratification in general in girly. Young boys have a perception of what a manly career is, like playing sports, or being a music artist or even designing video games and are less likely to think studying is relevant to their success.
~CS
CS, that makes more sense to me. Yes, then you are talking about a particular demographic of boys. Ironically, I am going to guess that at-risk boys generally do not have fathers in the home and are not the product of a stable, happy marriage with good male role modeling. So, there again, the answer is to strengthen fatherhood and marriages for those demographics, and that will help those boys. It really doesn't have to do with "gender roles" over all, or a need to make men and women the same. In fact, quite the opposite. I am guessing you would agree with that?
ReplyDeleteBethany,
ReplyDeleteI found myself very…. annoyed at your comments frankly.
I get that we are going to disagree on abortion and contraception and the like, but I don’t know how conservative women can call themselves feminist by undervaluing the progress that women have made and the sexism they overcame.
I really don’t see what it hurts to acknowledge that women throughout history couldn’t educate or provide for themselves and that women needed to ask mens’ permission to do just about anything. Or that women’s sexual autonomy is brand new. The notion of rape, especially date rape and spousal rape is only decades old.
And frankly the antidote about your great grandmother is offensive. Wow your one white great grandmother owned her home and was the mayor of a city which proves what? that men thought of women as equals? Those women had equal opportunities as men? or that SOME WOMEN happened to be fortunate. The measure of how a society treats people is never how it treats a few people, but rather how it treats everyone. If you don’t think every woman had a shot at being the major or owning her own home because she was a woman, the society was a sexist one, and its nothing to brag about.
~CS
CS, I would change one of your sentences to this:
ReplyDeleteThe measure of a society is how it treats its weakest members.
I wonder if you see the irony that the modern feminist movement predicates the advancement of women on the backs of the unborn? In other words, the oppressed have become the oppressors.
If women can only advance by killing their own children by the tens of millions, then do we really have a civilized, advanced society? And has oppression been lessened, or has it in fact increased?
Bethany,
ReplyDelete“OH. MY. GOSH. a woman couldn't get into an all male school. I'm sorry I don't see a problem with this. I wish there were more all-male and all female schools around.”
I realize you are a grown woman, but shame on you for saying this.
Now that coed schools are the norm, I see nothing wrong with having some single sex schools university. However that is not the same as thinking it would be okay if none of the schools went coed in the first place. ALL of the best schools were reserved for men, all the ivies, all the best liberal arts, all the state schools ALL OF them. How could women achieve what we have if we were limited to 7 schools while all the boys had everything else
~CS
Bethany,
ReplyDeleteAre you a sexist? I mean that seriously.
You agreed with the article ‘The War on Men’ which paints men as victims of women and feminism. But you had this to say about men as rape.
“But I'm not going to apply what happens to the minority to the majority just so I can blame another group of people (all men), falsely, for taking advantage of all women.”
Then why are you blaming all women or even feminists ( those who want equal rights for women) for men behaving badly. Seems inconsistent.
“Very few women are raped simply BECAUSE they're women. Very few women are beaten simply BECAUSE they're women.”
Can you unpack this. You think rapists are gender neutral and do not have a preference, that women and not men are raped by happenstance?
Also, you wouldn’t vote for a woman for president because she couldn’t possibly put her country before her children just because you can’t? How is that not sexist?
~CS
“So, there again, the answer is to strengthen fatherhood and marriages for those demographics, and that will help those boys. It really doesn't have to do with "gender roles" over all, or a need to make men and women the same. In fact, quite the opposite. I am guessing you would agree with that?”
ReplyDeleteMeh, Leila, you keep mistakenly conflating getting rid of the ‘ridged gender dichotomy’ with getting rid of male female differences.
I think a lot of socially constructed gender is harmful. I’m pretty girly, but I really don’t feel the world is putting any huge feminine boundaries on me, when I’m in a situation I don’t have to think that’s the appropriate course of action for a woman, and I think its infinitely freeing. I don’t see men having the same freedom and I see a lot of them trying to live up to BS masculinities as opposed to just trying to be good people.
Many men my age are obsessed with ‘not looking like a bitch’ (i.e. a woman) which means not looking weak and having a bunch of stupid caveats. For instance having a girlfriend is something you would keep to yourself because ‘that’s a bitch move.’
Frankly one of the reason you see so many single mothers is because men think marriage and babies are girly.
When many men spend time trying to be good men, they end up as bad people, I think their time would be better spend trying to be good people and not good men.
~CS
Oh College Student, you misunderstood me, which I understand was easy, given that I was mostly rambling a stream of consciousness. First of all, I am very proud of what the early feminists were able to accomplish in regards to the rights of women. Susan B. Anthony, Elizabeth Cady Stanton and company fought for the rights of women and they should be lauded and commended and honored for their actions.
ReplyDeleteWhat I have a problem with is certain people, certainly not ALL feminists, but the large majority of the ones who, to be quite frank, used to be my friends in college because I was right along side them in their thinking; they think that women are still being victimized because ALL women don't have ALL of the exact same opportunities AND outcomes as ALL men. I'm sorry but, if men and women are truly different beyond simply the "Boys have a penis, girls have a vagina," Kindergarten Cop quotable, then no, ALL women do NOT have to have ALL of the exact same opportunities or outcomes as ALL men. I can't understand why this is so hard to understand.
If this makes me sexist, then so be it. But I think men and women have instinctive, inherent differences that give them natural abilities that lend themselves to specific tasks and I don't think this is a bad thing. So no, unlike Justice Ginsburg apparently uttered, I don't want to see an all female Supreme Court, and I think if we ever DO see an all female Supreme Court it's going to be A LOT less representative the American Population than all male Supreme Court ever was.
Then why are you blaming all women or even feminists ( those who want equal rights for women) for men behaving badly. Seems inconsistent.
I'm not blaming all women or even feminists for men behaving badly. Men make their own choices, but I believe that the certain Second Wave feminists created an atmosphere where men can behave badly and no one really seems to care because they're now behaving exactly how most were unfairly accused of behaving in the first place.
But the bolded part is where the real difference is: Because, NO, I don't want "equal rights for women". I want JUST rights for women. And fair doesn't mean equal, it means what is in the best interest of the person and/or group of people. And that's a HUGE difference and probably where are disagreements stem from.
Can you unpack this. You think rapists are gender neutral and do not have a preference, that women and not men are raped by happenstance?
First of all, men are raped, by both women and other men, but I'm assuming you already new that. What I said is that women are not raped simply because they are women. They are a whole HOST of other reasons, most of which have nothing to do with the victim at all, other than she may have smiled too prettily, or lingered a little too long in a conversation, or offered to help a little too gently, or whatever other crap a rapist will spew in order to justify to himself (or herself, though rare) committing the violence.
As far as not voting for a woman for President. First of all, I vote on a whole host of issues, none of which includes gender, race, or religion, among other things. But what I want to know is WHY do you think it's sexist to point out that the maternal instinct is JUST THAT, a maternal instinct? You say, "just because you can't" as if for some reason I would be choosing not to be able to do that. It's called an instinct for a reason. We can control our behaviors but our instincts influence what and how we control those behaviors.
ReplyDeleteHowever, I will say this, I have worked for both male and female bosses. I'll take a male boss over a female boss any day of the week. While I acknowledge that there are @$$es in both sexes higher up in companies, being a woman myself I'm WELL AWARE of the cattiness, the gossiping, the back-stabbing, the rhymes with witchiness, that exists between women just in every day life. Why on earth would expect anything more from women holding big time positions or even a position such as President. Do these things exist between men? Probably. But not even close to the same degree in realm of female relationships.
The bottom line in all of this, my rants earlier and this, hopefully, clarifying rant, is this: I'm sick and tired of being told that the sole reason why I, as a woman, haven't achieved "success" is because of men. When you (royal) rely on blaming ALL men (the ever popular "patriarchy") as the cause of all of your (still royal) lack of accomplishments in the world, while simultaneously showcasing all that you have accomplished then you (royal) are really just being dishonest with your accomplishments in general and to me that is anti-feminist and sexists. And that is what I see many, many, many, many friends, former friends, liberal feminists, and others doing.
Oh and BTW: my mention of my great-grandmother and my husband's grandmother was not to point out that all women had it made back then, but simply to refute your notion that women (which I interpreted to mean as all women) were barred from all sorts of things, which simply isn't true.
Hope that helps clarify some things.
ReplyDeleteNow I'm off to fold some laundry before I curl up into a little ball of nausea and, hopefully, drift off, peacefully, to sleep.
CS, I will say this flat out: You really need to find different kinds of men. Sheesh, every time you mention men you know, they sound horrid. What the heck??? Get a new social circle! :)
ReplyDeleteAnd, what of the demographics? Are a lot of the kids you mention who only want to play ball or become rock stars or want to play HALO all day… without strong and hard-working fathers in their lives?
How could women achieve what we have if we were limited to 7 schools while all the boys had everything else
ReplyDeleteBut I will address this. On the contrary, if women were able to achieve all that we have achieved without the help of those bumbling idiot men who were just bringing us down by not allowing us to do everything they were allowed to do, then why did we even need the 7? Why not concentrate the best of the best of women's education into 1 school and send all women there. Think of the efficiency. And since obviously, women have always been so much smarter and so much better than the men anyway, we've just been pushed down by the "patriarchy", then concentrating our efforts would have led to a type of super-school, which would have surpassed the men in everything. Think about it, we could've been the X-Men before they were even created!
Can anyone else hear my sarcasm?
Geez, I really need to go to bed. I get grumpier the later in the day.
Haha Leila,
ReplyDeleteand yes the boys I were talking about were from lower socioeconomic groups and were often not raised with fathers in the home.
~CS