RE: Objectifying women
July 18, 2010 at 6:29 pm
(This post was last modified: July 18, 2010 at 6:32 pm by In This Mind.)
Deuteronomy
22:23 If a damsel that is a virgin be betrothed unto an husband, and a man find her in the city, and lie with her;
22:24 Then ye shall bring them both out unto the gate of that city, and ye shall stone them with stones that they die; the damsel, because she cried not, being in the city; and the man, because he hath humbled his neighbour's wife: so thou shalt put away evil from among you.
If only we had outgrown such notions.
1 Timothy
2:9 In like manner also, that women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with shamefacedness and sobriety; not with braided hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly array;
It's sad this is so ingrained into society that people who otherwise consider themselves free-thinkers cannot move beyond such a mindset.
1 Peter
3:2 While they behold your chaste conversation coupled with fear.
3:3 Whose adorning let it not be that outward adorning of plaiting the hair, and of wearing of gold, or of putting on of apparel;
3:4 But let it be the hidden man of the heart, in that which is not corruptible, even the ornament of a meek and quiet spirit, which is in the sight of God of great price.
3:5 For after this manner in the old time the holy women also, who trusted in God, adorned themselves, being in subjection unto their own husbands:
3:6 Even as Sara obeyed Abraham, calling him lord: whose daughters ye are, as long as ye do well, and are not afraid with any amazement.
3:7 Likewise, ye husbands, dwell with them according to knowledge, giving honour unto the wife, as unto the weaker vessel, and as being heirs together of the grace of life; that your prayers be not hindered.
And when pressed, they can give no actual reason for their stance other than this early training, it's such a part of them they freak out and attack when asked to move beyond the indoctrination, and cling to such apologetics. They cling to the idea that it is 'riskier' behavior even when they cannot prove or even demonstrate with anything resembling evidence that it is riskier.
'But you took it out of context'
'That's not what it means'
'It's common sense, I don't need to prove it'
Pure apologetics. Nothing more than a refusal to deal with reality. No reason. No logic. No facts. Just long ingrained sexism that flies in the face of the truth.
Actually, what it means exactly is that now a kid is culpable for his own actions, which means now he'll be blamed when he fucks up rather than his parents.
So yes, they are in fact telling him that now he'll be to blame. That's why there is a difference between trying someone as an adult and trying them as a juvenile. The word responsibility is about blame.
22:23 If a damsel that is a virgin be betrothed unto an husband, and a man find her in the city, and lie with her;
22:24 Then ye shall bring them both out unto the gate of that city, and ye shall stone them with stones that they die; the damsel, because she cried not, being in the city; and the man, because he hath humbled his neighbour's wife: so thou shalt put away evil from among you.
If only we had outgrown such notions.
1 Timothy
2:9 In like manner also, that women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with shamefacedness and sobriety; not with braided hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly array;
It's sad this is so ingrained into society that people who otherwise consider themselves free-thinkers cannot move beyond such a mindset.
1 Peter
3:2 While they behold your chaste conversation coupled with fear.
3:3 Whose adorning let it not be that outward adorning of plaiting the hair, and of wearing of gold, or of putting on of apparel;
3:4 But let it be the hidden man of the heart, in that which is not corruptible, even the ornament of a meek and quiet spirit, which is in the sight of God of great price.
3:5 For after this manner in the old time the holy women also, who trusted in God, adorned themselves, being in subjection unto their own husbands:
3:6 Even as Sara obeyed Abraham, calling him lord: whose daughters ye are, as long as ye do well, and are not afraid with any amazement.
3:7 Likewise, ye husbands, dwell with them according to knowledge, giving honour unto the wife, as unto the weaker vessel, and as being heirs together of the grace of life; that your prayers be not hindered.
And when pressed, they can give no actual reason for their stance other than this early training, it's such a part of them they freak out and attack when asked to move beyond the indoctrination, and cling to such apologetics. They cling to the idea that it is 'riskier' behavior even when they cannot prove or even demonstrate with anything resembling evidence that it is riskier.
'But you took it out of context'
'That's not what it means'
'It's common sense, I don't need to prove it'
Pure apologetics. Nothing more than a refusal to deal with reality. No reason. No logic. No facts. Just long ingrained sexism that flies in the face of the truth.
(July 18, 2010 at 6:23 pm)Godhead Wrote: When a parent says to their kid when they reach the age of 18 "son, you're an adult now, you must start being more responsible", can you identify any perpetrator or any blame in that sentence, either explicitly stated or even hinted at? Of course not, becaue the parent is not referring to any perpetrator or any blame. They're referring to personal responsibility, which is something else. If you agree with that, then you agree that the word "responsibility" itself is not about blame or victims. The parent would hardly be able to freely interchange the word "responsibility" with "blame" in such a sentence as it wouldn't work. They would never say "son, you're an adult now, you must start being more blameful and at fault".
Actually, what it means exactly is that now a kid is culpable for his own actions, which means now he'll be blamed when he fucks up rather than his parents.
So yes, they are in fact telling him that now he'll be to blame. That's why there is a difference between trying someone as an adult and trying them as a juvenile. The word responsibility is about blame.