Islam Is Right About Women

@divegeester said
I’m sure why anyone is surprised at Philokalia’s attitudes in this thread, they guy is a blatant racist and it is of non surprise to me that he is also sexist.

So, just because it is no surprise, you would let him "get away" with what he's saying, even though you did take a moment, passively, in this instance, to call a spade a spade? Even you could have said nothing, yet you did not.

You're correct, that no one is "surprised", yet as they say, those who would promote evil are encouraged by silence.

@suzianne said
You're correct, that no one is "surprised", yet as they say, those who would promote evil are encouraged by silence.

Just to be clear, are you referring to [what you describe as] Philokalia's "overly patriarchal, parochial, narrow-minded, condescending outlook on women as anything more than concubines of men and breeders of children" as "evil"?

@suzianne said
I didn't "have to".

Perhaps you meant "choose to"?

Yes I did mean choose.

You dodging the question is noted though 🙂

@suzianne said
So, just because it is no surprise, you would let him "get away" with what he's saying, even though you did take a moment, passively, in this instance, to call a spade a spade? Even you could have said nothing, yet you did not.

Why are you having a go at me?

@divegeester said
Why are you having a go at me?

I only wish to crystallize your position regarding his comments.

@divegeester said
Yes I did mean choose.

You dodging the question is noted though 🙂

I chose to say sisters because yes, I feel women should stand together against those who would belittle them and their issues.

Why is the word "brotherhood" seen as unifying, supportive and good, while some see "sisterhood" as divisive, obstructive and bad?

By the way, I thought my reasons for the word choice were obvious. "Dodging" not withstanding.

@suzianne said
I only wish to crystallize your position regarding his comments.

Oh. Then what do you mean by saying this:

So, just because it is no surprise, you would let him "get away" with what he's saying, even though you did take a moment, passively, in this instance, to call a spade a spade?

What am I letting philokalia “get away with”?

@suzianne said
I chose to say sisters because yes, I feel women should stand together against those who would belittle them and their issues.

Why is the word "brotherhood" seen as unifying, supportive and good, while some see "sisterhood" as divisive, obstructive and bad?

By the way, I thought my reasons for the word choice were obvious. "Dodging" not withstanding.

I don’t like “brothers” either, especially when the dishonest christians in this forum are stroking each other.

I thought your post to philokalia was spot on but using the word “sisters” jarred; it revealed again your deep partisan mindset which colours every post you make on ever topic.

@divegeester said
it revealed again your deep partisan mindset which colours every post you make on ever topic.

@divegeester said
"...it revealed again your deep partisan mindset which colours every post you make on ever topic."

More gaslighting. You're wrong, but always want to be seen as right.

All it "revealed" was that I wanted to use the word "sisters" to show solidarity. But you have to try to make it into a totally hysterical, fevered expression to attempt to make me look bad. Again. Sorry, I reject your 'reality' as pure fantasy. I'm sorry you don't like "sisters", but it's just too bad.

The post that was quoted here has been removed

I was an only child, but I finally understood the value and the power of sisters when I pledged a sorority in college. I am still close with two of them, and their kids call me "Auntie Suzi". I wouldn't give it up for anything.

@suzianne said
I was an only child, but I finally understood the value and the power of sisters when I pledged a sorority in college. I am still close with two of them, and their kids call me "Auntie Suzi". I wouldn't give it up for anything.

Not even motherhood?

The post that was quoted here has been removed

I do not believe there are any frats in Korea. I am sure, of course, that there might be some rich boys at Yonsei that have branched over from some American frat and embrace this...

But, we generally just have "Dongari" and these are almost always made of both genders.

I feel that the classes and camaraderie is already quite strong, and no one is really looking for a surrogate family or strong social culture. But IDK.

@fmf said
My recognition that men and women are different will be waiting for you in two weeks, unchanged. And my question, still unanswered, will still be waiting for you in two weeks. This one: why should women be barred from leadership roles?

We have already gone over how the temperament of men and women are different, and how this bears out in actual social sciences. The source hasn't been called into question yet, and I believe it quite thoroughly stands.

To reiterate it:

A new study confirms that men's minds come from Mars and women's from Venus. In an article recently published in the online journal PLoS ONE, Italian cognitive psychologist Marco Del Giudice and his collaborators compared the personality traits of men and women in a sample of over 10,000 people and found huge differences. Women scored much higher than in men in Sensitivity, Warmth, and Apprehension, while men scored higher than women in Emotional Stability, Dominance, Rule-Consciousness, and Vigilance. When many personality traits were considered simultaneously, there was only a 10% overlap between the distributions of these traits in men and women. Essentially, the study suggests that when it comes to personality men and women belong to two different species.

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/games-primates-play/201201/gender-differences-in-personality-are-larger-previously-thought

These traits reflect the different natures of both genders. OF course, there are exceptions to the rule, but it is exceptions that actually help us prove the rule. The boy who is overly feminine is picked on and bullied, ultimately, and viewed as an outsider. Likewise, women who are overly masculine in school have their own struggles.

While exceptions exist, it is the exception themselves who are problematic. The whole of the Church and the world does not need to change to reflect the potential for exceptions, but rather, the exceptions have to adjust to the reality of the world.

The New Testament's position is rather obvious:

In order:

1 Timothy 2; 1 Corinthians 11; 1 Peter 3:7.

"7 A man ought not to cover his head,[b] since he is the image and glory of God; but woman is the glory of man. 8 For man did not come from woman, but woman from man; 9 neither was man created for woman, but woman for man. 10 It is for this reason that a woman ought to have authority over her own[c] head, because of the angels. 11 Nevertheless, in the Lord woman is not independent of man, nor is man independent of woman. 12 For as woman came from man, so also man is born of woman. But everything comes from God."


"7 A man ought not to cover his head,[b] since he is the image and glory of God; but woman is the glory of man. 8 For man did not come from woman, but woman from man; 9 neither was man created for woman, but woman for man. 10 It is for this reason that a woman ought to have authority over her own[c] head, because of the angels. 11 Nevertheless, in the Lord woman is not independent of man, nor is man independent of woman. 12 For as woman came from man, so also man is born of woman. But everything comes from God."

"7 Husbands, in the same way be considerate as you live with your wives, and treat them with respect as the weaker partner and as heirs with you of the gracious gift of life, so that nothing will hinder your prayers."

St. John Chrysostom reconfirms these things and elaborates a bit:

“But I suffer not a woman to teach.” “I do not suffer,” he says. What place has this command here? The fittest. He was speaking of quietness, of propriety, of modesty, so having said that he wished them not to speak in the church, to cut off all occasion of conversation, he says, let them not teach, but occupy the station of learners. For thus they will show submission by their silence. For the sex is naturally somewhat talkative: and for this reason he restrains them on all sides. “For Adam,” says he, “was first formed, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.”

If it be asked, what has this to do with women of the present day? it shows that the male sex enjoyed the higher honor. Man was first formed; and elsewhere he shows their superiority. “Neither was the man created for the woman, but the woman for the man.” (1 Cor. xi. 9.) Why then does he say this? He wishes the man to have the preeminence in every way; both for the reason given above, he means, let him have precedence, and on account of what occurred afterwards. For the woman taught the man once, and made him guilty of disobedience, and wrought our ruin. Therefore because she made a bad use of her power over the man, or rather her equality with him, God made her subject to her husband. “Thy desire shall be to thy husband?” (Gen. iii. 16.) This had not been said to her before.

https://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf113.v.iii.x.html

More on the rule of subjection:

For with us indeed the woman is reasonably subjected to the man: since equality of honor causeth contention. And not for this cause only, but by reason also of the deceit (1 Tim. ii. 14.) which happened in the beginning. Wherefore you see, she was not subjected as soon as she was made; nor, when He brought her to the man, did either she hear any such thing from
151
God, nor did the man say any such word to her: he said indeed that she was “bone of his bone, and flesh of his flesh:” (Gen. ii. 23.) but of rule or subjection he no where made mention unto her. But when she made an ill use of her privilege and she who had been made a helper was found to be an ensnarer and ruined all, then she is justly told for the future, “thy turning shall be to thy husband.” (Gen. iii. 16.)

On the proper order:

Symbols many and diverse have been given both to man and woman; to him of rule, to her of subjection: and among them this also, that she should be covered, while he hath his head bare. If now these be symbols you see that both err when they disturb the proper order, and transgress the disposition of God, and their own proper limits, both the man falling into the woman’s inferiority, and the woman rising up against the man by her outward habiliments.

https://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf112.iv.xxvii.html#iv.xxvii-Page_151


St. John Chrysostom also recognizes the different conditions that men and women end up in, with some men ending up living effeminately or pursuing things that are not good for his nature:

For among men, some are such as they are of themselves, others become so; for instance, one man is passionate by nature, and another from having fallen into a long illness gets this infirmity. Again, some men are flexible
239
and fickle by nature, while others become so by being slaves to luxury, and by living effeminately. “But John,” saith He, “neither was such a character by nature, for neither was it a reed that ye went out to see; nor by giving himself to luxury did he lose the advantage he possessed.”
....
And what again is the applause? what the
244
tumult, and the satanical cries, and the devilish gestures? For first one, being a young man, wears his hair long behind, and changing his nature into that of a woman, is striving both in aspect, and in gesture, and in garments, and generally in all ways, to pass into the likeness of a tender damsel.1603 Then another who is grown old, in the opposite way to this, having his hair shaven, and with his loins girt about, his shame cut off before his hair, stands ready to be smitten with the rod, prepared both to say and do anything. The women again, their heads uncovered, stand without a blush, discoursing with a whole people, so complete is their practice in shamelessness; and thus pour forth all effrontery and impurity into the souls of their hearers. And their one study is, to pluck up all chastity from the foundations, to disgrace our nature, to satiate the desire of the wicked demon. Yea, and there are both foul sayings, and gestures yet fouler; and the dressing of the hair tends that way, and the gait, and apparel, and voice, and flexure of the limbs; and there are turnings of the eyes, and flutes, and pipes, and dramas, and plots; and all things, in short, full of the most extreme impurity. When then wilt thou be sober again, I pray thee, now that the devil is pouring out for thee so much of the strong wine of whoredom, mingling so many cups of unchastity? For indeed both adulteries and stolen marriages are there, and there are women playing the harlot, men prostituting, youths corrupting themselves: all there is iniquity to the full, all sorcery, all shame. Wherefore they that sit by should not laugh at these things, but weep and groan bitterly.

https://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf110.iii.XXXVII.html


But what is also interesting is the concept of equal honor:

For had Paul meant to speak of rule and subjection, as thou sayest, he would not have brought forward the instance of a wife, but rather of a slave and a master. For what if the wife be under subjection to us? it is as a wife, as free, as equal in honor. And the Son also, though He did become obedient to the Father, it was as the Son of God, it was as God. For as the obedience of the Son to the Father is greater than we find in men towards the authors of their being, so also His liberty is greater.

https://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf112.iv.xxvii.html#iv.xxvii-Page_151

Let us also rememebr that St. John Chrysostom kept up incredible correspondnece with women -- including non-monastic women, women of high rank, women who wielded much power, and who played great roles in politics. It was also Olympia that he wrote the most letters to while in exile, and his letters were longer, less formalistic, and more intimate. He did not believe that they should not play roles in the world, and had great respect and intellectual exchanges with many.

Check out the article from Wendy Mayer for more information on all this:
https://www.academia.edu/10162871/John_Chrysostom_and_Women_Revisited

So, the will of God is reflected in creation and confirm...