There is a guy called Walid Shoebat who use to be a former Muslim. He is now a Christian and travels round warning churches about the threat of Islam. I have one of his books and he seems very genuine. However, on quite a few occasions when he's giving a sermon he says, "Women are smarter than men." And then people laugh and start clapping.
Now, as a man I do not know who is smarter. But the reason I find his statement a little ludicrous is because of technology. Men are the ones who have created space ships, satellite, computers, TV, airplanes, factories, machines, medication, etc. If it wasn't for men inventing computers and factories with machinery, millions of women wouldn't have a job. It's because of men creating all this technology that more women are able to work. How in the name of common sense can somebody make such a bold claim and say, "Women are smarter than men?"
I'm not saying men are smarter than women. Not at all. But to say that women are smarter than men (when men are the ones who have created all this technology) is a little naive and arrogant.
What do you think?
There are many comparisons between men and women on different aspects. Which gender is stronger physically? Which is tidier? Personally, I've seen some women make great contributions to the world and the church. One of the pastors at my church was a female before she felt called to another church. She's still a female btw xP
You also have to take into consideration how long it took for women to have as many rights as men, which probably limited their abilities to make great contributions to society.
Males and females each have their own strengths as well as individual males and females themselves. Making a generalization isn't the most accurate way to measure anything.
: wolflet7 Tue May 22, 2012 - 17:36:44
There are many comparisons between men and women on different aspects. Which gender is stronger physically? Which is tidier? Personally, I've seen some women make great contributions to the world and the church. One of the pastors at my church was a female before she felt called to another church. She's still a female btw xP
You also have to take into consideration how long it took for women to have as many rights as men, which probably limited their abilities to make great contributions to society.
Males and females each have their own strengths as well as individual males and females themselves. Making a generalization isn't the most accurate way to measure anything.
I know what you're saying, but it's men who have created all the technology. My point was that to say women are smarter than men seems a little arrogant when the technology that men have created are giving millions of women a job.
Men have had much more opportunity to work and create/invent things. Until quite recently women stayed at home looking after children, and had no opportunity to do anything else. I believe that both men and women are smart. In the UK, for example, there are now as many women as men traning to be doctors, because they now have the opportunity to do so. 30 or so years ago that was not the case. Girls generally do better at school and get better grades. That's a fact.
My husband has a phd, and is intelligent in his field, but when it comes to life and the day to day things, I beat him hands down, and he will agree on that. There are different types of intelligence.
I may not know much, but I do know that this isn't an argument anyone can win. I'd say we are all equally ignorant.
Fran
: francesepp Tue May 22, 2012 - 18:28:26
I may not know much, but I do know that this isn't an argument anyone can win. I'd say we are all equally ignorant.
Fran
::nodding::
: ObeyTheGospel Tue May 22, 2012 - 16:34:21
I'm not saying men are smarter than women. Not at all. But to say that women are smarter than men (when men are the ones who have created all this technology) is a little naive and arrogant.
What do you think?
I think that your statement is just as naive, arrogant and ignorant as the one you are complaining about.
Invented by women:
- Circular saw - 1810 Tabitha Babbitt
- Liquid Paper - 1958 Bette Nesmith Graham
- Computer Compiler - 1950's Admiral Grace Murray Hopper (Also developed COBOL computer programming language. In 1986 was awarded the prestigious National Medal of Technology.)
- Maritime Signal Flares - 1857 Martha Coston
- Square-bottomed paper bags - 1870 Margaret Knight (She patented 19 other inventions, the first one when she was just 12 years old)
- Dishwasher - 1886 Josephine Cochrane
- Windshield wipers - 1903 Mary Anderson
- Nystatin (antifungal) - 1950 Rachel Fuller Brown and Elizabeth Lee Hazen
- Kevlar - 1964 Stephanie Kwolek
- Geobond (fireproof building material) - Patricia Billings
- Non-reflective glass - Katherine Blodgett
- CPR mannequin - Dianne Croteau
- Petroleum refining method - Edith Flanigen
- Home diabetes test - Helen Free
- Visual Voice telephone software - Krisztina Holly
- Computerized telephone switching system - Erna Schneider Hoover
- Dorothy Crowfoot Hodgkin used x-rays to find the structural layouts of atoms and to discover the overall molecular shape of over 100 molecules including: penicillin, vitamin B-12, vitamin D and insulin.
- Vacuum-packed canning - Amanda Theodosia Jones
- Ada Lovelace wrote a scientific paper in 1843 that anticipated the development of computer software artificial intelligence and computer music.
- Disposable cell phone - 1996 Randice-Lisa Altschul
- Protograph (worked with a manual typewriter to make four copies of a document) - 1932 Beulah Henry (Over 100 inventions and 49 patents, inducted into National Inventors Hall of Fame in 2006)
- Lillian Moller Gilbreth - inventor and pioneer in ergonomics
All I can say is WOWWWWW! Very impressive! ::clappingoverhead:: ::cheerleader::
Penicillin was discovered by a husband and wife team. ::smile::
: chosenone Tue May 22, 2012 - 18:06:51
Men have had much more opportunity to work and create/invent things. Until quite recently women stayed at home looking after children, and had no opportunity to do anything else. I believe that both men and women are smart. In the UK, for example, there are now as many women as men traning to be doctors, because they now have the opportunity to do so. 30 or so years ago that was not the case. Girls generally do better at school and get better grades. That's a fact.
My husband has a phd, and is intelligent in his field, but when it comes to life and the day to day things, I beat him hands down, and he will agree on that. There are different types of intelligence.
Well, I guess we'll never know if women would have created space ships, computers, and satellites if they were given the same opportunity as men. Maybe they would, maybe they wouldn't. I guess we'll never know. Also, many universities are being hijacked by feminists. Women are getting higher grades, not because they're smarter, but because they get their head down more and spend more time studying, whereas men have other things on their mind. Even a woman on TV admitted that women getting higher grades isn't because their smarter, it's because men have more distractions. There have also been times where men scored high marks in an exam than the women. In my opinion, it proves nothing.
Men have created most of the technology. Even to this day, it's mostly men who invent the most technology. But don't get me wrong, I'm not saying this makes men smarter than women. But if someone is going to tell me that women are smarter than men, they need to provide some strong evidence, considering men have created most of the awesome technology.
The reason I have brought this up is because I hear this quite often, and now I'm hearing it in the church: "Women are smarter than men." And then people start laughing and cheering. But unfortunately these people cannot provide a single iota of evidence. They ignore that men creating computers has given millions of women a job, and they ignore that more and more feminists are poisoning the universities and giving women more encouragement.
: ObeyTheGospel Tue May 22, 2012 - 16:34:21
There is a guy called Walid Shoebat who use to be a former Muslim. He is now a Christian and travels round warning churches about the threat of Islam. I have one of his books and he seems very genuine. However, on quite a few occasions when he's giving a sermon he says, "Women are smarter than men." And then people laugh and start clapping.
Now, as a man I do not know who is smarter. But the reason I find his statement a little ludicrous is because of technology. Men are the ones who have created space ships, satellite, computers, TV, airplanes, factories, machines, medication, etc. If it wasn't for men inventing computers and factories with machinery, millions of women wouldn't have a job. It's because of men creating all this technology that more women are able to work. How in the name of common sense can somebody make such a bold claim and say, "Women are smarter than men?"
I'm not saying men are smarter than women. Not at all. But to say that women are smarter than men (when men are the ones who have created all this technology) is a little naive and arrogant.
What do you think?
I have listened to many of Walid Shoebat's sermons and I have heard him use the phrase "women are smarter than men". Each time it was for the sake of humor. The content of his sermons are way too important to be side tracked by something like that. I have heard several other preachers use such lines. Usually a sign that it is humor is there is laughing and/or clapping afterward. Mysteriously, that sometimes is the result of humor. Who'd a thunk it? When my wife calls at work, I look at my cell phone and say to the other guys, "War Department on line 1" ------(que laughter). It gets a chuckle. No big deal.
Seriously though, listen to the core of his message. His inventory of humor is average at best.
Would we have nuclear power if not for Madame Curie?
In 1845, Sarah Mather received a patent for the invention of a submarine telescope and lamp.
Martha Coston perfected then in 1859 patented her deceased husband's idea for a pyrotechnic flare. Mr. Coston, a former naval scientist, died leaving behind only a rough sketch in a diary of plans for the flares. Martha developed the idea into an elaborate system of flares called Night Signals that allowed ships to communicate messages nocturnally.
In 1916 Mary Anderson invented winshield wipers, manually operated by a lever. Charlotte Bridgwood invented an automatic version the next year.
More women inventors:
http://www.women-inventors.com/
http://inventors.about.com/od/womeninventors/a/Women-In-History.htm
: Jaime Wed May 23, 2012 - 07:12:04
: ObeyTheGospel Tue May 22, 2012 - 16:34:21
There is a guy called Walid Shoebat who use to be a former Muslim. He is now a Christian and travels round warning churches about the threat of Islam. I have one of his books and he seems very genuine. However, on quite a few occasions when he's giving a sermon he says, "Women are smarter than men." And then people laugh and start clapping.
Now, as a man I do not know who is smarter. But the reason I find his statement a little ludicrous is because of technology. Men are the ones who have created space ships, satellite, computers, TV, airplanes, factories, machines, medication, etc. If it wasn't for men inventing computers and factories with machinery, millions of women wouldn't have a job. It's because of men creating all this technology that more women are able to work. How in the name of common sense can somebody make such a bold claim and say, "Women are smarter than men?"
I'm not saying men are smarter than women. Not at all. But to say that women are smarter than men (when men are the ones who have created all this technology) is a little naive and arrogant.
What do you think?
I have listened to many of Walid Shoebat's sermons and I have heard him use the phrase "women are smarter than men". Each time it was for the sake of humor. The content of his sermons are way too important to be side tracked by something like that. I have heard several other preachers use such lines. Usually a sign that it is humor is there is laughing and/or clapping afterward. Mysteriously, that sometimes is the result of humor. Who'd a thunk it? When my wife calls at work, I look at my cell phone and say to the other guys, "War Department on line 1" ------(que laughter). It gets a chuckle. No big deal.
Seriously though, listen to the core of his message. His inventory of humor is average at best.
But there's an old saying: "A lie told often enough becomes true." It's commonplace today for people to spout a load of nonsense and people will believe it as a fact. If Walid Shoebat were to say, "Men are smarter than women," do you think everybody would start clapping and cheering, or do you think people would be offended?
: ObeyTheGospel Wed May 23, 2012 - 07:29:09
: Jaime Wed May 23, 2012 - 07:12:04
: ObeyTheGospel Tue May 22, 2012 - 16:34:21
There is a guy called Walid Shoebat who use to be a former Muslim. He is now a Christian and travels round warning churches about the threat of Islam. I have one of his books and he seems very genuine. However, on quite a few occasions when he's giving a sermon he says, "Women are smarter than men." And then people laugh and start clapping.
Now, as a man I do not know who is smarter. But the reason I find his statement a little ludicrous is because of technology. Men are the ones who have created space ships, satellite, computers, TV, airplanes, factories, machines, medication, etc. If it wasn't for men inventing computers and factories with machinery, millions of women wouldn't have a job. It's because of men creating all this technology that more women are able to work. How in the name of common sense can somebody make such a bold claim and say, "Women are smarter than men?"
I'm not saying men are smarter than women. Not at all. But to say that women are smarter than men (when men are the ones who have created all this technology) is a little naive and arrogant.
What do you think?
I have listened to many of Walid Shoebat's sermons and I have heard him use the phrase "women are smarter than men". Each time it was for the sake of humor. The content of his sermons are way too important to be side tracked by something like that. I have heard several other preachers use such lines. Usually a sign that it is humor is there is laughing and/or clapping afterward. Mysteriously, that sometimes is the result of humor. Who'd a thunk it? When my wife calls at work, I look at my cell phone and say to the other guys, "War Department on line 1" ------(que laughter). It gets a chuckle. No big deal.
Seriously though, listen to the core of his message. His inventory of humor is average at best.
But there's an old saying: "A lie told often enough becomes true." It's commonplace today for people to spout a load of nonsense and people will believe it as a fact. If Walid Shoebat were to say, "Men are smarter than women," do you think everybody would start clapping and cheering, or do you think people would be offended?
It all depends on context and delivery of course. If it is meant as humor, or if it was just stupidity. In my neck of the woods, people tell Aggie jokes, (about Texas A&M graduates). Everyone knows that A & M is an excellent school and it's graduates are exemplary. One of my ex-bosses, who was an A & M graduate, had a joke he would repeatedly tell. "What do you call an A & M graduate? - the answer was "Boss". The response was always the same especially from his loyal and dependent employees.
Shoebat has much to offer beyond his attempt at humor.
Plus, he is not an Obama fan, so you can imagine what his standing in the main stream media is. Unfortunately people even listen to NBC.
Jaime, I understand what you are saying about the content of his message being more important than his choice of humor, but in my opinion, a preacher who chooses to pit men and women against each other even in jest is making a mistake.
If I were in the audience I would neither laugh nor clap in response to the statement that women are smarter than men. It's just a stupid thing to say. Since I didn't hear the actual sermon I can't say for sure, but most of the time such statements are made it's somewhat of an inside joke. The speaker is really implying, "We all know that men are smarter, so if I say that women are smarter you will laugh."
But even if we take his statement at face value it is offensive. It only serves to fuel the conflict between men and women, which only came about because of sin. God designed us to work together, to complement each other, but since sin entered the world we have struggled to dominate each other. I don't think a preacher should encourage that tendency.
I have heard our preacher use such as an ice breaker of sorts. It has nothing to do with pitting men against women. It's context. If Shoebat meant it as anything but humor, then yes. Most times when our preacher does it, it is self deprecating humor. The men never rise up and dispute a clear joke. THAT would be shallow and nonsensical. Has a preacher said things serious about the subject? Look at the movie review section on the movie Courageous. The preacher DingDong is dead serious in his pitting men against women. That is clearly wrong. No humor intended with his remarks. I reject his entire thesis on the thread about a religious movie with a strong Christian message is somehow emasculating to men.
: Nevertheless Wed May 23, 2012 - 09:07:42
Jaime, I understand what you are saying about the content of his message being more important than his choice of humor, but in my opinion, a preacher who chooses to pit men and women against each other even in jest is making a mistake.
If I were in the audience I would neither laugh nor clap in response to the statement that women are smarter than men. It's just a stupid thing to say. Since I didn't hear the actual sermon I can't say for sure, but most of the time such statements are made it's somewhat of an inside joke. The speaker is really implying, "We all know that men are smarter, so if I say that women are smarter you will laugh."
But even if we take his statement at face value it is offensive. It only serves to fuel the conflict between men and women, which only came about because of sin. God designed us to work together, to complement each other, but since sin entered the world we have struggled to dominate each other. I don't think a preacher should encourage that tendency.
Thankyou. It's women like you that are a great gift to men, a woman who can see that belittling men is only going to fuel the tension between men and women. I do not say that men are smarter than women. It would be arrogant for me to say such a thing, but yet to say that women are smarter than men seems to tickle the ears of our Western culture.
People may think that it's only a joke, but Walid Shoebat always says it like he means it. On one of his sermons he said, "Women are smarter than men on everything." Again, it's this kind of belittling that fuels the tension between men and women. There is enough feminism outside the church to deal with. The last thing a man wants to is endure feminism inside the church.
God bless you. You are a true woman of God.
NO, Walid Shoebat absolutely says it in jest. I am very familiar with his material.
The thing on the movie review I mentioned IS a problem.
: Jaime Wed May 23, 2012 - 11:36:34
NO, Walid Shoebat absolutely says it in jest. I am very familiar with his material.
The thing on the movie review I mentioned IS a problem.
It sounds like Walid means it to me, and I find it quite offensive.
: ObeyTheGospel Wed May 23, 2012 - 11:39:36
: Jaime Wed May 23, 2012 - 11:36:34
NO, Walid Shoebat absolutely says it in jest. I am very familiar with his material.
The thing on the movie review I mentioned IS a problem.
It sounds like Walid means it to me, and I find it quite offensive.
I can assure you the very last thing Walid wants to promote is feminism.
: Jaime Wed May 23, 2012 - 11:43:35
: ObeyTheGospel Wed May 23, 2012 - 11:39:36
: Jaime Wed May 23, 2012 - 11:36:34
NO, Walid Shoebat absolutely says it in jest. I am very familiar with his material.
The thing on the movie review I mentioned IS a problem.
It sounds like Walid means it to me, and I find it quite offensive.
I can assure you the very last thing Walid wants to promote is feminism.
But making remarks like "women are smarter than men" is giving the impression that he does support feminism.
He's a dry humor guy, what can I say. Some people say funny things with a straight face and the hearers GET IT. Like when they laughed as you said. He definitely can be a funny man, but you sometimes can't read his face. Sarcasm, irony etc are all comedic tools, even for people not naturally funny. Feminism is not in his nature as a former Muslim, even though he has converted to Christianity. Heck, humor is not in his nature as a former Muslim, but he understands how to communicate and Americans gravitate to humor as an ice breaker. It happens all the time in the pulpit and not just on the topic of women. Our preacher made a derisive remark about my alma mater being clobbered by his alma mater in football. Weird me, I took it as humor and not a slanderous remark. He never smiled by the way, but the humorous message was received by all. I did not brand him as a chronic malicious anti-Red Raider. It was an ice breaker even though he is a lousy Longhorn.
I remember seeing, as a child, books of jokes aimed at all kinds of people. PC says we don't make those jokes anymore.. unless it's the people in these groups making the jokes themselves. Comics seem now to be softening this unspoken rule by getting a shot in at more than one group at a time.. it's the anti-prejudice influence. Is there too much man bashing in jokes today? Too much white people bashing? IDK..but probably. IMO, these jokes are getting old and tired; just as did the"dumb blond" jokes.
I've never heard Shoebat speak. Good jokes have some truth in them. It's why we laugh.. (Though the laughter of derision comes from hatred.) What was the context of Shoebat's message?
On the lines of the OP. I believe that men and women tend toward two different types of intelligence. Individuals vary. One type has been overlooked to a great degree. I'm guessing that this is the point Shoebat was making.
Absolutely Kindle. Women have smarts in areas that men don't have and vice versa. That's why we make pretty good teams as married couples. My wife has intellilect and abilities that I don't have, and I have areas of mental abilities that she runs from, like balancing a checkbook. Am I smarter than her? NO. Is she smarter than me? NO. Is it a rich topic of humor to drill into? Absolutely. Shoebat has pointed out these differences on occasion with maybe less than funny to some humor. But as I said, even an EX-Muslim would never embrace feminism.
Yes humor has a degree of truth. Just like my preacher putting down my football team. They were without a doubt horrible.
There is of course bad distasteful humor that sometimes we succumb to such as off color jokes, or the like. I don't care who ya' are, now somethings are funny. (Larry the Cable Guy of Redneck Humor fame). Some of the truest statements I have heard are jokes about preachers on the golf course.
rofl
In another sermon Walid Shoebat also said, "Men are ugly."
: ObeyTheGospel Wed May 23, 2012 - 13:15:21
In another sermon Walid Shoebat also said, "Men are ugly."
Horrors ::scared::
He might think I'm fat, but I would want a 2nd opinion. ::lookaround::
I would have to say compared to my wife, from my perspective, I AM ugly.
Jamie.."mental abilities that she runs from, like balancing a checkbook." rofl My husband tries to explain all the financial details to me via spread sheets... ::headspin::
: Kindle Wed May 23, 2012 - 15:43:27
Jamie.."mental abilities that she runs from, like balancing a checkbook." rofl My husband tries to explain all the financial details to me via spread sheets... ::headspin::
I just tell my wife, if it appears we have some money in the bank, I have obviously made a mistake and failed to pay something.
: Jaime Wed May 23, 2012 - 15:56:27
: Kindle Wed May 23, 2012 - 15:43:27
Jamie.."mental abilities that she runs from, like balancing a checkbook." rofl My husband tries to explain all the financial details to me via spread sheets... ::headspin::
I just tell my wife, if it appears we have some money in the bank, I have obviously made a mistake and failed to pay something.
Argh.. These days especially, pennies should come with a built in squeak. ::nodding::
: ObeyTheGospel Wed May 23, 2012 - 07:29:09
: Jaime Wed May 23, 2012 - 07:12:04
: ObeyTheGospel Tue May 22, 2012 - 16:34:21
There is a guy called Walid Shoebat who use to be a former Muslim. He is now a Christian and travels round warning churches about the threat of Islam. I have one of his books and he seems very genuine. However, on quite a few occasions when he's giving a sermon he says, "Women are smarter than men." And then people laugh and start clapping.
Now, as a man I do not know who is smarter. But the reason I find his statement a little ludicrous is because of technology. Men are the ones who have created space ships, satellite, computers, TV, airplanes, factories, machines, medication, etc. If it wasn't for men inventing computers and factories with machinery, millions of women wouldn't have a job. It's because of men creating all this technology that more women are able to work. How in the name of common sense can somebody make such a bold claim and say, "Women are smarter than men?"
I'm not saying men are smarter than women. Not at all. But to say that women are smarter than men (when men are the ones who have created all this technology) is a little naive and arrogant.
What do you think?
I have listened to many of Walid Shoebat's sermons and I have heard him use the phrase "women are smarter than men". Each time it was for the sake of humor. The content of his sermons are way too important to be side tracked by something like that. I have heard several other preachers use such lines. Usually a sign that it is humor is there is laughing and/or clapping afterward. Mysteriously, that sometimes is the result of humor. Who'd a thunk it? When my wife calls at work, I look at my cell phone and say to the other guys, "War Department on line 1" ------(que laughter). It gets a chuckle. No big deal.
Seriously though, listen to the core of his message. His inventory of humor is average at best.
But there's an old saying: "A lie told often enough becomes true." It's commonplace today for people to spout a load of nonsense and people will believe it as a fact. If Walid Shoebat were to say, "Men are smarter than women," do you think everybody would start clapping and cheering, or do you think people would be offended?
Exactly.
"Women are smarter than men" is a "funny" comment.
"Men are smarter than women" (typically) isn't.
The word "smarter" is far too vague a term. I can't take any statement like Suzy is smarter than Betty seriously anyway.
: Jaime Wed May 23, 2012 - 10:24:30
I have heard our preacher use such as an ice breaker of sorts. It has nothing to do with pitting men against women. It's context. If Shoebat meant it as anything but humor, then yes. Most times when our preacher does it, it is self deprecating humor. The men never rise up and dispute a clear joke. THAT would be shallow and nonsensical. Has a preacher said things serious about the subject? Look at the movie review section on the movie Courageous. The preacher DingDong is dead serious in his pitting men against women. That is clearly wrong. No humor intended with his remarks. I reject his entire thesis on the thread about a religious movie with a strong Christian message is somehow emasculating to men.
He wants to pit men against women? Or perhaps, warn men that the movie is an attempt to put on shackles of manipulation on men and reduce their value to nothing?
Yes, I still have to see that movie . . . something I won't pay a cent to do, but I'm really inclined to believe Dingdong after watching Fireproof.
: Nevertheless Wed May 23, 2012 - 09:07:42
If I were in the audience I would neither laugh nor clap in response to the statement that women are smarter than men. It's just a stupid thing to say. Since I didn't hear the actual sermon I can't say for sure, but most of the time such statements are made it's somewhat of an inside joke. The speaker is really implying, "We all know that men are smarter, so if I say that women are smarter you will laugh."
I think this is half-right. I think of a lot of men of my parent generation who will joke about women being smarter than men for what looks like a few reasons. One is partly what you say, in that I think they just don't take women seriously for better OR for worse, they patronize and flatter--a twisted sort of gentlemenly thing to do. It doesn't actually mean they particularly have a high opinion of women, it's just something to say to tickle them and since they're so harmless (insignificant) it doesn't really matter anyway.
It's a two-sided coin. ::preachit:: A lot of men of the past generation simply don't take women seriously, causing an insulting view of them (harmful to women), which also opened the door for their tolerance feminism (again, since they're so harmless regardless, what does it matter? Let them do what they want). That's my take.
This is from my past experience and what I've noticed. It's funny to "bring women up" and "put men down" in the same joke. However, if I or any other male were to make a kitchen joke in front of hundreds of people, I and the other males would most likely get boo-ed and/or thrown off stage, and for good reason. The reasoning behind this? Earlier in out nation's history and in other nations' histories, men were seen as superior to women and women often had hardly if any rights. Therefore, women deserve our respect and gentlemen-like conduct and should be treated right.
The same could be said for African Americans. They have had a rough history in the U.S. and in other nations. It's not funny to make fried chicken jokes or field jokes, but people often joke around how much greater African Americans are than white people on vertical height, speed, and all around athleticism.
Btw, I am neither sexist nor racist. I'm simply stating what I've noticed when it comes to jokes when it comes to different genders and/or races.
P.S. Real men treat women with their most upright respect.
: wolflet7 Fri May 25, 2012 - 00:45:32
This is from my past experience and what I've noticed. It's funny to "bring women up" and "put men down" in the same joke. However, if I or any other male were to make a kitchen joke in front of hundreds of people, I and the other males would most likely get boo-ed and/or thrown off stage, and for good reason. The reasoning behind this? Earlier in out nation's history and in other nations' histories, men were seen as superior to women and women often had hardly if any rights. Therefore, women deserve our respect and gentlemen-like conduct and should be treated right.
The same could be said for African Americans. They have had a rough history in the U.S. and in other nations. It's not funny to make fried chicken jokes or field jokes, but people often joke around how much greater African Americans are than white people on vertical height, speed, and all around athleticism.
Btw, I am neither sexist nor racist. I'm simply stating what I've noticed when it comes to jokes when it comes to different genders and/or races.
P.S. Real men treat women with their most upright respect.
Wolflet, that was the pitch that our generation was raised on, but I'm inclined not to believe it anymore. Life has never been a cakewalk for men. Gentlemanly mannerisms ARE a statement of men being stronger and perhaps smarter than women, and that's exactly why debates rage on about whether a man should hold open a door for women, pull her chair out, and so on. He's accommodating her frailty (to put it in rather severe terms, to be sure).
Jokes on men for puffing up a female ego is, oddly enough, a warped gentlemenly gesture. After all, we're men, we can take the bashing right? I mean, for her sake, right?
The modern world has attempted to condemn the entirety of human history for being "sexist," and as a believer in the Bible, there's no way I can believe that (there's plenty other common sense to go with that too). God cracked down on humanity constantly and if some horrible sort of discrimination really pervaded human history, God would have spoken about it and then truly the "righteous" among us would be the select few. Point 1: it's not in the Bible. And point 2: modern society is an absolute mess.
: wolflet7 Fri May 25, 2012 - 00:45:32
This is from my past experience and what I've noticed. It's funny to "bring women up" and "put men down" in the same joke. However, if I or any other male were to make a kitchen joke in front of hundreds of people, I and the other males would most likely get boo-ed and/or thrown off stage, and for good reason. The reasoning behind this? Earlier in out nation's history and in other nations' histories, men were seen as superior to women and women often had hardly if any rights. Therefore, women deserve our respect and gentlemen-like conduct and should be treated right.
The same could be said for African Americans. They have had a rough history in the U.S. and in other nations. It's not funny to make fried chicken jokes or field jokes, but people often joke around how much greater African Americans are than white people on vertical height, speed, and all around athleticism.
Btw, I am neither sexist nor racist. I'm simply stating what I've noticed when it comes to jokes when it comes to different genders and/or races.
P.S. Real men treat women with their most upright respect.
I think you're missing the point. We are no longer living in the past, we are living in the present. Why should men suffer for what other men did in the past? Shouldn't people just forgive and move on? If people use the past as an excuse for using double standards in the present, then this is a sign of unforgiveness, that these people still haven't let go of the past and are using the past to punish men in the present.
You also said that in the past women often had hardly if any rights. Well, this goes back to Genesis. After sin, God said to Eve, "Your desire shall be for your husband, and he shall rule over you." (Genesis 3:16). It was foretold from the beginning that men would rule. Look at the grim result of allowing women to vote: Since women were allowed to vote, there has been abortion on demand. The family has also started to collapse, because feminists vote for evil. Fathers hardly have any rights over the children anymore because feminists have dug their evil claws into the legal system. If you give women more power and authority, they will start to destroy things. This is why God ordained men to rule, not women.
My point is that it is ridiculous for people to use the past in order to use double standards against men in the present. Both men and women have done evil in the past. But why should men today have to put up with double standards and mistreatment for what happened in the past? When God forgives us He remembers our sins no more. We need to do the same. We need to forget about the past and start treating men and women equally.
There is always that fear that history repeats itself, and more often than not it does. Also, we have to take in notice the generalization of the specific genders and the individuals of that gender. Perhaps some females have forgiven men for our past mistakes. Perhaps some have not. However, we cannot generalize that all women have not forgiven men of their mistakes.
Take this for example. I lie to you. You forgive me. Then, you witness me lying to another person. And then another. And maybe one more. Then I say something to you that you aren't sure if I'm lying or not. Would you believe me? Or think I'm lying again? Most likely you would believe I'm lying again. And you would have good reason to believe so. But what if I wasn't? What if I was telling the truth? We often make generalizations with people and groups, which is judgmental, which God warns us not to do.
You're absolutely right about the forgiveness and forgetting the past part. I COMPLETELY agree with you about that! It IS ridiculous for people to hold grudges. I'm actually in a situation with one of my friends who, in my opinion, is acting completely ridiculous. Along with that, I have a lot of people holding grudges against me from some stupid argument(s) we had in high school. I wish some people would grow up. But do you know why they hold a grudge against me? Cause they fear that I haven't changed and history will repeat itself. They have pre-determined judgments towards me. I sit in the same congregation every Sunday morning with these people.
We'e forgetting one little detail though. The highest commandment, according to Jesus, is to "love the Lord Your God with all your heart, soul, and mind." But the second is to "love your neighbor as yourself." You see, even if these people still have judgments against us and fear the past will repeat itself, we have to LOVE them. No excuses. I do this every time I see one of the people who judge me and hold pointless grudges against me. We have to love them like Jesus.
P.S. My friend is African American and most of the people who hold grudges and have judgments against me are females.
: Cally Thu May 24, 2012 - 22:24:52
: Jaime Wed May 23, 2012 - 10:24:30
I have heard our preacher use such as an ice breaker of sorts. It has nothing to do with pitting men against women. It's context. If Shoebat meant it as anything but humor, then yes. Most times when our preacher does it, it is self deprecating humor. The men never rise up and dispute a clear joke. THAT would be shallow and nonsensical. Has a preacher said things serious about the subject? Look at the movie review section on the movie Courageous. The preacher DingDong is dead serious in his pitting men against women. That is clearly wrong. No humor intended with his remarks. I reject his entire thesis on the thread about a religious movie with a strong Christian message is somehow emasculating to men.
He wants to pit men against women? Or perhaps, warn men that the movie is an attempt to put on shackles of manipulation on men and reduce their value to nothing?
Yes, I still have to see that movie . . . something I won't pay a cent to do, but I'm really inclined to believe Dingdong after watching Fireproof.
That's unfortunate for you, in my opinion, especially as a young person. These movies are made by a church group to portray a sermon in story form. The power of unconditional love is the theme of Fireproof. It could have easily been portrayed with the wife's and husband's parts reversed and been just as powerful. I assume since Cameron was the professional actor capable of more accurately portraying the gamut of emotions his part was chosen as it was. Nothing at all speaking to how men should become emasculated in order to have a successful relationship with a woman. If Kirk Cameron's character had told his wife to jump in the lake and rush to the divorce proceedings, it would have ended like 50% or more of the marriages in the country. No life lesson in that. Hollywood could have certainly taken it and focused on the pain and misery of all that, but the LESSON was what was important for the church group who produced the film.
Again, I pray that you see this for YOUR sake, not mine. I've been very happily married 39 years. And it IS very much a give and take proposition requiring extraordinary mustering of Christ-like behavior including as much as humanly possible, unconditional love. We as men are to love our wives as Christ loved the church. (Eph 5:25) That sometimes takes "tricking ourselves" as in the lovedare to push beyond how we want to react in the flesh. It's akinned to Jesus' admonition to turn the other cheek type thing. It doesn't come naturally. The lovedare as portrayed in the movie is not a husband emasculating himself before his wife, but portraying Christ-like love, even when the flesh doesn't want to. An abhorrent thing for you I guess, but absolutely essential for both husbands and wives.
: wolflet7 Fri May 25, 2012 - 10:21:01
There is always that fear that history repeats itself, and more often than not it does. Also, we have to take in notice the generalization of the specific genders and the individuals of that gender. Perhaps some females have forgiven men for our past mistakes. Perhaps some have not. However, we cannot generalize that all women have not forgiven men of their mistakes.
Take this for example. I lie to you. You forgive me. Then, you witness me lying to another person. And then another. And maybe one more. Then I say something to you that you aren't sure if I'm lying or not. Would you believe me? Or think I'm lying again? Most likely you would believe I'm lying again. And you would have good reason to believe so. But what if I wasn't? What if I was telling the truth? We often make generalizations with people and groups, which is judgmental, which God warns us not to do.
You're absolutely right about the forgiveness and forgetting the past part. I COMPLETELY agree with you about that! It IS ridiculous for people to hold grudges. I'm actually in a situation with one of my friends who, in my opinion, is acting completely ridiculous. Along with that, I have a lot of people holding grudges against me from some stupid argument(s) we had in high school. I wish some people would grow up. But do you know why they hold a grudge against me? Cause they fear that I haven't changed and history will repeat itself. They have pre-determined judgments towards me. I sit in the same congregation every Sunday morning with these people.
We'e forgetting one little detail though. The highest commandment, according to Jesus, is to "love the Lord Your God with all your heart, soul, and mind." But the second is to "love your neighbor as yourself." You see, even if these people still have judgments against us and fear the past will repeat itself, we have to LOVE them. No excuses. I do this every time I see one of the people who judge me and hold pointless grudges against me. We have to love them like Jesus.
P.S. My friend is African American and most of the people who hold grudges and have judgments against me are females.
What is there to fear? Just go back a few decades and men were more of a gentlemen to women in the olden days. Giving women the right to vote has led to abortion on demand. Abortion is the biggest genocide in history, all because we gave into the whims of the female feminists. I don't see how the olden days were such a bad thing. And like I said, we need to focus on the present. It is unreasonable for women to use the past as an excuse to use double standards against men in the present, even though the past was often better than the present.
: Jaime Fri May 25, 2012 - 11:44:01
: Cally Thu May 24, 2012 - 22:24:52
: Jaime Wed May 23, 2012 - 10:24:30
I have heard our preacher use such as an ice breaker of sorts. It has nothing to do with pitting men against women. It's context. If Shoebat meant it as anything but humor, then yes. Most times when our preacher does it, it is self deprecating humor. The men never rise up and dispute a clear joke. THAT would be shallow and nonsensical. Has a preacher said things serious about the subject? Look at the movie review section on the movie Courageous. The preacher DingDong is dead serious in his pitting men against women. That is clearly wrong. No humor intended with his remarks. I reject his entire thesis on the thread about a religious movie with a strong Christian message is somehow emasculating to men.
He wants to pit men against women? Or perhaps, warn men that the movie is an attempt to put on shackles of manipulation on men and reduce their value to nothing?
Yes, I still have to see that movie . . . something I won't pay a cent to do, but I'm really inclined to believe Dingdong after watching Fireproof.
That's unfortunate for you, in my opinion, especially as a young person. These movies are made by a church group to portray a sermon in story form. The power of unconditional love is the theme of Fireproof. It could have easily been portrayed with the wife's and husband's parts reversed and been just as powerful. I assume since Cameron was the professional actor capable of more accurately portraying the gamut of emotions his part was chosen as it was. Nothing at all speaking to how men should become emasculated in order to have a successful relationship with a woman. If Kirk Cameron's character had told his wife to jump in the lake and rush to the divorce proceedings, it would have ended like 50% or more of the marriages in the country. No life lesson in that. Hollywood could have certainly taken it and focused on the pain and misery of all that, but the LESSON was what was important for the church group who produced the film.
Again, I pray that you see this for YOUR sake, not mine. I've been very happily married 39 years. And it IS very much a give and take proposition requiring extraordinary mustering of Christ-like behavior including as much as humanly possible, unconditional love. We as men are to love our wives as Christ loved the church. (Eph 5:25) That sometimes takes "tricking ourselves" as in the lovedare to push beyond how we want to react in the flesh. It's akinned to Jesus' admonition to turn the other cheek type thing. It doesn't come naturally. The lovedare as portrayed in the movie is not a husband emasculating himself before his wife, but portraying Christ-like love, even when the flesh doesn't want to. An abhorrent thing for you I guess, but absolutely essential for both husbands and wives.
Jaime I've known lots of men older than I who are "happily married" with women I can't imagine putting up with, and let me just say this, as brutal as it sounds: I would never want to end up like them. As "happy" as these guys claim to be, I see their very being compromised, they've been domesticated, they're under control. Their bold ambition, audacity, and their energy (I could go on) just isn't like a single man's. What they've lost is a terrible loss for themselves and for the rest of the world.
That's "unconditional love" for their wives, or is it worship, to the point that they're party to destroying themselves in the name of loving their wives "sacrificially"? Ahab and Jezebel had a "successful marriage." Crazy as it sounds, I think there are objectives more primary than avoiding divorce, as painful as that experience is.
All these lamentations about Fathers who just aren't putting out enough is just a feedback loop: they're HURTING Fathers continually which is exactly what's making it difficult for them to "step up." I haven't seen "Courageous," but I am rather convinced that's the gist of the ugly feedback loop of all the griping that goes on at men. Men DO need to step up, but in ways that won't make the general world very happy in the short run--and I mean boldly stepping up against injustices, including ones that cause themselves damage. Men are for saving the world by making changes in it and impacting it boldly, not for changing to accommodate a dying world.
I can't imagine that film studio saying a word about the accountability of women. If you can, then you have a more active imagination than I (whether it's "better" or not is a different story).
Cally, I truly feel sorry for you bro. Like I said, i ain't trying to convince you for my benefit or to win an argument but for your benefit. I've got better things to do than to explain the obvious.
Okay, this is to all three of you! The Bible specifically tells wives to submit to their husbands. It also specifically tells us to love one another. As long as we men as loving women as we should, then we are playing our part. It doesn't matter if women are "domesticating" the husband or what have you. A good marriage/relationship works hand in hand and there is NO domestication or dominance or what have you. Does it say in the Bible "Love one another, unless they try to domesticate or dominate you"? No! Do not worry about tomorrow, for tomorrow will worry about itself. To live you must give your life away. What is 60-70 or so years on this earth compared to an ETERNITY in Heaven?!
The fact of the matter is we all have our faults and sins. If we all judged one another, we would hate everyone but ourselves. Leave the judgments up to God and worry about your own faith instead of spotting out someone else's fault(s). Our duty on this earth is to glorify Jesus and live and love Him and to love one another. It's no different for us trying to domesticate or dominant someone of a different or same gender than we feel like they are doing to us. An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind. Turn the other cheek.
I'm sorry, but we all need to man up and respect women no matter what, myself included.
: wolflet7 Fri May 25, 2012 - 22:18:20
Okay, this is to all three of you! The Bible specifically tells wives to submit to their husbands. It also specifically tells us to love one another. As long as we men as loving women as we should, then we are playing our part. It doesn't matter if women are "domesticating" the husband or what have you. A good marriage/relationship works hand in hand and there is NO domestication or dominance or what have you. Does it say in the Bible "Love one another, unless they try to domesticate or dominate you"? No! Do not worry about tomorrow, for tomorrow will worry about itself. To live you must give your life away. What is 60-70 or so years on this earth compared to an ETERNITY in Heaven?!
The fact of the matter is we all have our faults and sins. If we all judged one another, we would hate everyone but ourselves. Leave the judgments up to God and worry about your own faith instead of spotting out someone else's fault(s). Our duty on this earth is to glorify Jesus and live and love Him and to love one another. It's no different for us trying to domesticate or dominant someone of a different or same gender than we feel like they are doing to us. An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind. Turn the other cheek.
I'm sorry, but we all need to man up and respect women no matter what, myself included.
Wolflet, men getting domesticated and otherwise neutered after they get married is exactly what in turn causes wives to be unsatisfied with their husbands, and the general world dissatisfied with men. They/we can't put out like the world needs them to after that damage is done.
Men need to "man up" and refuse to let that happen to themselves for everybody's sake. What's the conflict with "respecting women"? Modern studies (for whatever you might think that's worth) are saying that women are less happy ever since they've been "liberated." (and the social scientist geniuses are still trying to figure out the mystery of why that is)
When you say "love" or "respect" women you can't take that under the conventional definitions. When you think about loving people in general, that doesn't especially mean giving them what they say they want.
After saying all that, what, specifically, do you have in mind?
Cally, you bring up an interesting point about the whole love not meaning giving them what they want. I do agree with that. However, we still need to love them like Jesus. I was thinking by "manning up" that us men show some specific females a good role model by forgiving and forgetting, just as Jesus has done for us. As for the marriage aspect, it goes both ways. If a man marries a..."moody"...female, to put it in lighter terms, he should have seen it coming. Maybe men should make wiser choices when it comes to finding a marriage partner, and vice versa.
Going back to the original problem though, I've known girls who have had interest in me and that I've dated who haven't tried to domesticate/dominant me in the relationship. On the other hand, I've had a girl who I felt has tried to do such, although she said she had no such intentions. Making a generalization and saying that the entire female gender, or at least most of them, always try to domesticate/dominant a male is judgmental.
: wolflet7 Fri May 25, 2012 - 23:45:51
Cally, you bring up an interesting point about the whole love not meaning giving them what they want. I do agree with that. However, we still need to love them like Jesus. I was thinking by "manning up" that us men show some specific females a good role model by forgiving and forgetting, just as Jesus has done for us. As for the marriage aspect, it goes both ways. If a man marries a..."moody"...female, to put it in lighter terms, he should have seen it coming. Maybe men should make wiser choices when it comes to finding a marriage partner, and vice versa.
Going back to the original problem though, I've known girls who have had interest in me and that I've dated who haven't tried to domesticate/dominant me in the relationship. On the other hand, I've had a girl who I felt has tried to do such, although she said she had no such intentions. Making a generalization and saying that the entire female gender, or at least most of them, always try to domesticate/dominant a male is judgmental.
It's more of a judgment on accepted practices than anything.
The fact that certain behaviors are "acceptable" by a general culture means you can't see them coming. You don't know when/where you're safe from destructive behaviors and when you're the recipient, you're hard-pressed to get others on your side.
My back-and-forth with Jaime is that men getting MAJOR hits to their testosterone (if you'll take that as a metaphor) after getting married or even just into those communities
is an accepted practice in Christian culture and then people have the nerve to turn around and complain at men when it's hard for them to "be a man" and put out. Do all women do that to men? Of course not. Not by a long shot. But men aren't protected from it and the outcome is not good for men or their wives or anyone else.
"I'm sorry, but we all need to man up and respect women no matter what, myself included."
Women also need to woman up and give men the respect to be the leaders. Women need to stand up and support a father's rights instead of allowing the feminists to cause discrimination against men. Women also need to woman up and realize that it's wrong to belittle men and make crude jokes about them. Women are not holier than men. God will judge us all fairly. God is no feminist.
Cally what do you mean by domesticated? Are you saying that men shouldn't help to clean or cook etc?
: Cally Fri May 25, 2012 - 23:57:52
: wolflet7 Fri May 25, 2012 - 23:45:51
Cally, you bring up an interesting point about the whole love not meaning giving them what they want. I do agree with that. However, we still need to love them like Jesus. I was thinking by "manning up" that us men show some specific females a good role model by forgiving and forgetting, just as Jesus has done for us. As for the marriage aspect, it goes both ways. If a man marries a..."moody"...female, to put it in lighter terms, he should have seen it coming. Maybe men should make wiser choices when it comes to finding a marriage partner, and vice versa.
Going back to the original problem though, I've known girls who have had interest in me and that I've dated who haven't tried to domesticate/dominant me in the relationship. On the other hand, I've had a girl who I felt has tried to do such, although she said she had no such intentions. Making a generalization and saying that the entire female gender, or at least most of them, always try to domesticate/dominant a male is judgmental.
It's more of a judgment on accepted practices than anything.
The fact that certain behaviors are "acceptable" by a general culture means you can't see them coming. You don't know when/where you're safe from destructive behaviors and when you're the recipient, you're hard-pressed to get others on your side.
My back-and-forth with Jaime is that men getting MAJOR hits to their testosterone (if you'll take that as a metaphor) after getting married or even just into those communities is an accepted practice in Christian culture and then people have the nerve to turn around and complain at men when it's hard for them to "be a man" and put out. Do all women do that to men? Of course not. Not by a long shot. But men aren't protected from it and the outcome is not good for men or their wives or anyone else.
Cally, I still don't think you have shown where Cameron's actions with the lovedare was in anyway a hit to his testosterone? What he exhibited was Jesusterone - unconditional love. If you think that is unmanly................then I don't see how Christianity is for you at all. Do we all know women that belittle their husbands into quivering masses? Of course, that isn't what the movie or the sermon of the movie was about. Christianity isn't living a real life chick flick, and getting your testerone removed a molecule at a time. That is such a shallow viewpoint. I assure you it is still possible to golf, hunt, fish, chew tobacco, and such even after doing things like the love dare and saving a marriage. One doesn't have to deposit his testicles in a lockbox to have a successful marriage, but it DOES without a doubt require unconditional love EXACTLY like was displayed and responded to in the move.
By the way, what would have been YOUR story line of Fireproof? Knowing the initial circumstances, how would you have written the screen play?
: chosenone Sat May 26, 2012 - 06:49:10
Cally what do you mean by domesticated? Are you saying that men shouldn't help to clean or cook etc?
No. I'm a single man so I cook and clean. ::shrug::
It's a figure of speech, like the way one domesticates a pet, for example. (I'm pretty sure I'm not the on who started that) He's brought totally under control and tamed.
Is that a little too abstract?
: Jaime Sat May 26, 2012 - 08:23:54
: Cally Fri May 25, 2012 - 23:57:52
: wolflet7 Fri May 25, 2012 - 23:45:51
Cally, you bring up an interesting point about the whole love not meaning giving them what they want. I do agree with that. However, we still need to love them like Jesus. I was thinking by "manning up" that us men show some specific females a good role model by forgiving and forgetting, just as Jesus has done for us. As for the marriage aspect, it goes both ways. If a man marries a..."moody"...female, to put it in lighter terms, he should have seen it coming. Maybe men should make wiser choices when it comes to finding a marriage partner, and vice versa.
Going back to the original problem though, I've known girls who have had interest in me and that I've dated who haven't tried to domesticate/dominant me in the relationship. On the other hand, I've had a girl who I felt has tried to do such, although she said she had no such intentions. Making a generalization and saying that the entire female gender, or at least most of them, always try to domesticate/dominant a male is judgmental.
It's more of a judgment on accepted practices than anything.
The fact that certain behaviors are "acceptable" by a general culture means you can't see them coming. You don't know when/where you're safe from destructive behaviors and when you're the recipient, you're hard-pressed to get others on your side.
My back-and-forth with Jaime is that men getting MAJOR hits to their testosterone (if you'll take that as a metaphor) after getting married or even just into those communities is an accepted practice in Christian culture and then people have the nerve to turn around and complain at men when it's hard for them to "be a man" and put out. Do all women do that to men? Of course not. Not by a long shot. But men aren't protected from it and the outcome is not good for men or their wives or anyone else.
Cally, I still don't think you have shown where Cameron's actions with the lovedare was in anyway a hit to his testosterone? What he exhibited was Jesusterone - unconditional love. If you think that is unmanly................then I don't see how Christianity is for you at all. Do we all know women that belittle their husbands into quivering masses? Of course, that isn't what the movie or the sermon of the movie was about. Christianity isn't living a real life chick flick, and getting your testerone removed a molecule at a time. That is such a shallow viewpoint. I assure you it is still possible to golf, hunt, fish, chew tobacco, and such even after doing things like the love dare and saving a marriage. One doesn't have to deposit his testicles in a lockbox to have a successful marriage, but it DOES without a doubt require unconditional love EXACTLY like was displayed and responded to in the move.
By the way, what would have been YOUR story line of Fireproof? Knowing the initial circumstances, how would you have written the screen play?
As much as I'd like to answer question about Fireproof, the "initial circumstances" in this case are more a question of the characters . . . which are not well-defined or well-written. Everybody in the movie shapeshifts to suit the pastor/congregation roles at the writers' whim so much that it's jarring when they try to come out of preaching into making the audience believe that they're actual characters.
So let's just propose a scenario: man is less than perfect, woman has all the answers. As a writer, I'm not going to wave a magic wand and say the man totally becomes perfect. To skip lots of plot, though, I'd say eventually he learns not to take her at face value so much but starts to provide some real direction for the house. She might leave out of a total refusal to show respect, as he also doesn't ingest the sort of venom that Solomon says can rot a man's bones, or she might find the man interesting again and be encouraged to be a part of what he's up to.
That's what God gives a man: a higher purpose. A godly woman will love to be a part of it.
Either way, he won't "take responsibility" for her actions--hey, have you seen a movie called "The Insider"? THAT'S a good flick!!! A man sacrificed everything he had to do the right thing, and his wife wouldn't endure with him when the going got tough. He goes from rich to poor because of a purpose, makes lots of sacrifices for the sake of doing what's right.
Then the objects that he thinks he needs (like the boat) might shrink in significance, not especially because that's a bad thing, but because having meaning in what he does makes him not feel so taxed and desperate for relief.
I'd have a character arc that kind of looks like that. For something like the "love dare" thing . . . um, not that a man shouldn't work to please his wife, but that's not the central issue--putting purpose into the house and leading into it are what's important.
You've made it clear that you consider Fireproof to be an authority of morality like the scriptures themselves, even to the point of using the film as a judgment as whether "Christianity is for me."
My central issue with THAT film is this, and I've said it many times: the general vibe I get through that film is that men are supposed to feel 200% responsible for a marriage. To quote one of the many lazily-thought out ideas in the film: "A woman is like a rose, if you take care of her, she'll bloom." And the context of that statement is totally to say that if the husband does the right thing, the woman will start acting perfect, and that's just a lie that heaps ungodly guilt on a man who can in fact do the right thing and still find that he's stuck with a contentious woman.
Good luck with your future wife. Though luck has nothing to do with, but I'm guessing you are gonna need some.
Remember the reason for the movie was that the church that produced it wanted to portray scriptural principals and they did. Nothing more, nothing less than unconditional love, IF you want to fireproof our marriages. A very true and scriptural concept. And you get to keep your testosterone. A testosteronectomy was NOT portrayed, and no testicles were harmed in the making of the movie. Even for cave men, movie good, men good, saveum marriage.
Forget the movie, if you and your future wife have any chance, BOTH will have to be willing to exhibit unconditional love at one time or the other and maybe not even at the same time. If you want a lasting marriage fireproofing will be necessary. Because fires will definitely come.
: Jaime Sat May 26, 2012 - 18:40:26
Good luck with your future wife. Though luck has nothing to do with, but I'm guessing you are gonna need some.
Remember the reason for the movie was that the church that produced it wanted to portray scriptural principals and they did. Nothing more, nothing less than unconditional love, IF you want to fireproof our marriages. A very true and scriptural concept. And you get to keep your testosterone. A testosteronectomy was NOT portrayed, and no testicles were harmed in the making of the movie. Even for cave men, movie good, men good, saveum marriage.
Forget the movie, if you and your future wife have any chance, BOTH will have to be willing to exhibit unconditional love at one time or the other and maybe not even at the same time. If you want a lasting marriage fireproofing will be necessary. Because fires will definitely come.
Thank you for your gracious advice. I agree with the "unconditional love" part except it looks like we might disagree on exactly how that is put into practice.
It's put into affect pretty much just like the movie portrayed, whether husband or wife is the one that employs it. Loving someone even when they are unloveable. Kinda like Jesus does with us. Kinda like turning the other cheek when someone hits you on the other. It's counter to our flesh. Nothing about our flesh would have pursued the lovedare like in the movie. People married many years will all tell you that unconditional love is just that. Loving him/her when they aren't loveable. It DOES work without a doubt. When that level of love is ceased, a marriage is not then fireproof. If divorce is an option, chances are a divorce will happen. For my wife and I, divorce was never an option. We took vows, and meant them. Both of us are unloveable at times. If the other one responded in kind, our relationship wouldn't be long for this world. The other one has to love the unloveable one back to reality. EXACTLY what happened in the movie. Though the lovedare was a structured ever increasing intensity program. Like Cameron found out, it usually takes several steps, it would never work on the first one. The unloveable one HAS to see the other sacrificing something of value to them, like Cameron's bonus money that he would have usually spent on something just for him. When his wife saw that he spent it on her invalid mother seeking no credit, THAT was when unconditional love became real to her. The parties could have easily been switched and she could have been the one giving the unconditional love gift that slapped him up beside the head. It's an awesome concept, or could we say SERMON.
I've shared that this is exactly how it works in real life for my marriage and I'm sure others. How would you see unconditional love being put into practice in your future marriage? If your future wife was mad about something you did or she thought you did, how would you see unconditional love playing out for you in that situation, much like Cameron found himself in? Could you see yourself doing a lovedare to bring your wife back to her senses? Would it be worth it? I've seen it happen EXACTLY like the movie portrayed where the other party broke down and was amazed at the unconditional love shown them when they were unloveable and the relationship was restored. Much like we as Christians feel when we think we have done something too heinous for Jesus to forgive and when we realize that he loves us anyway. Would you be willing to fireproof your future marriage as Jesus has fireproofed his relationship with us, or do you project a relationship of no fires?
Who cares?
I don't know how many here have seen Jackass, The Dudesons, or the like, as it is not exactly recommended Christian theater. But it should not go unnoticed that the female persuasion does not partake in such nonsense.....yeah I have to agree, women are smarter than men. ::pondering::
Cheers, ::smile::
Carey
: Carey Sat Jun 16, 2012 - 17:27:30
I don't know how many here have seen Jackass, The Dudesons, or the like, as it is not exactly recommended Christian theater. But it should not go unnoticed that the female persuasion does not partake in such nonsense.....yeah I have to agree, women are smarter than men. ::pondering::
Cheers, ::smile::
Carey
All you're arguing there is that women don't do as much self-depreciating humor, I think.
: Satan_Is_A_Loser Sat Jun 16, 2012 - 14:28:10
Who cares?
Couldn't have said it better myself! What's this really going to matter when it comes to the Kingdom of God?
: Cally Sat Jun 16, 2012 - 17:30:23
All you're arguing there is that women don't do as much self-depreciating humor, I think.
Nope not really. Although It manifests itself in different ways, women too can hold their own in that department. My comment was kind of in jest, I apologize for it was somewhat trollish in nature, and did not add much substance to the thread.
As for the topic, IMO any comparison of intelligence between the sexes is so fraught with categories, variables, and sampling error, I don't see how any useful information can be gleaned. If I look back on anecdotal evidence in my own experience, I see no correlation whatsoever.
What is important is that the two can often come together and create something more intellectually complex and superior to what they were apart. God did not mean for us to compete with one another, but rather compliment.
Cheers,
Carey.
: Carey Sat Jun 16, 2012 - 20:04:00
: Cally Sat Jun 16, 2012 - 17:30:23
All you're arguing there is that women don't do as much self-depreciating humor, I think.
Nope not really. Although It manifests itself in different ways, women too can hold their own in that department. My comment was kind of in jest, I apologize for it was somewhat trollish in nature, and did not add much substance to the thread.
As for the topic, IMO any comparison of intelligence between the sexes is so fraught with categories, variables, and sampling error, I don't see how any useful information can be gleaned. If I look back on anecdotal evidence in my own experience, I see no correlation whatsoever.
What is important is that the two can often come together and create something more intellectually complex and superior to what they were apart. God did not mean for us to compete with one another, but rather compliment.
Cheers,
Carey.
Indeed, the functionality of truly healthy male-female relationships makes us into an effective unit.
: Cally Sun Jun 17, 2012 - 16:50:47
Indeed, the functionality of truly healthy male-female relationships makes us into an effective unit.
Hey Cally,
I am pretty sure my wife would say I was "smarter" than her; academically, mathematically, mechanically, and with regards to spatial awareness(ie. navigation).
However, I can not compete with her in other areas; patience, forethought, common sense, empathy, sympathy, creativity, morality, compassion, and just sheer goodness of heart. I may be smarter, but she is wiser.
When I act by myself, I do many stupid things. When I seek her input that seldom happens.
My wife is amazing, she humbles me, she makes me a better man.
Cheers,
Carey.
: ObeyTheGospel Tue May 22, 2012 - 16:34:21
There is a guy called Walid Shoebat who use to be a former Muslim. He is now a Christian and travels round warning churches about the threat of Islam. I have one of his books and he seems very genuine. However, on quite a few occasions when he's giving a sermon he says, "Women are smarter than men." And then people laugh and start clapping.
Now, as a man I do not know who is smarter. But the reason I find his statement a little ludicrous is because of technology. Men are the ones who have created space ships, satellite, computers, TV, airplanes, factories, machines, medication, etc. If it wasn't for men inventing computers and factories with machinery, millions of women wouldn't have a job. It's because of men creating all this technology that more women are able to work. How in the name of common sense can somebody make such a bold claim and say, "Women are smarter than men?"
I'm not saying men are smarter than women. Not at all. But to say that women are smarter than men (when men are the ones who have created all this technology) is a little naive and arrogant.
What do you think?
Women use to not be ALLOWED to invent and create, so this is not really a fair statement. Women have had to catch up, and prove themselves. It's terrible how men use to (and sometimes still) treat them. They were bossed around with no freedom, only being married off to people so that a male could have his "pleasures" with the beautiful girl (often young). Girls have had it tough.
I am a boy, but yet I do not understand about men believing they are the ultimate gender. Women are just as smart, tough, and equal as men. No gender is smarter than the other.
: FlawedWings Mon Aug 06, 2012 - 20:40:56
: ObeyTheGospel Tue May 22, 2012 - 16:34:21
There is a guy called Walid Shoebat who use to be a former Muslim. He is now a Christian and travels round warning churches about the threat of Islam. I have one of his books and he seems very genuine. However, on quite a few occasions when he's giving a sermon he says, "Women are smarter than men." And then people laugh and start clapping.
Now, as a man I do not know who is smarter. But the reason I find his statement a little ludicrous is because of technology. Men are the ones who have created space ships, satellite, computers, TV, airplanes, factories, machines, medication, etc. If it wasn't for men inventing computers and factories with machinery, millions of women wouldn't have a job. It's because of men creating all this technology that more women are able to work. How in the name of common sense can somebody make such a bold claim and say, "Women are smarter than men?"
I'm not saying men are smarter than women. Not at all. But to say that women are smarter than men (when men are the ones who have created all this technology) is a little naive and arrogant.
What do you think?
Women use to not be ALLOWED to invent and create, so this is not really a fair statement. Women have had to catch up, and prove themselves. It's terrible how men use to (and sometimes still) treat them. They were bossed around with no freedom, only being married off to people so that a male could have his "pleasures" with the beautiful girl (often young). Girls have had it tough.
I am a boy, but yet I do not understand about men believing they are the ultimate gender. Women are just as smart, tough, and equal as men. No gender is smarter than the other.
Men, historically, have literally worked themselves as far as to death to provide for and protect their wives and women in general. But some people like to assume that women always had the worse end of the deal.
When I was younger I would have regurgitated some of the tenets of feminism myself. When their hypocrisy bites you again and again and again as a male (and you find out that a minority--albeit growing--of people even care about the fact) you'll likely snap out of it. That's what usually happens with men of my generation and younger. I just hope it doesn't hurt too much before then for you.
BTW I do believe men are the more risk-taking gender which is the reason for inventions--i.e. true exploration of uncharted territory as it were. That doesn't mean "smarter" per se, but more likely to defy "safe" convention for the sake of an end objective: inventing.
: Cally Mon Aug 06, 2012 - 21:47:17
: FlawedWings Mon Aug 06, 2012 - 20:40:56
: ObeyTheGospel Tue May 22, 2012 - 16:34:21
There is a guy called Walid Shoebat who use to be a former Muslim. He is now a Christian and travels round warning churches about the threat of Islam. I have one of his books and he seems very genuine. However, on quite a few occasions when he's giving a sermon he says, "Women are smarter than men." And then people laugh and start clapping.
Now, as a man I do not know who is smarter. But the reason I find his statement a little ludicrous is because of technology. Men are the ones who have created space ships, satellite, computers, TV, airplanes, factories, machines, medication, etc. If it wasn't for men inventing computers and factories with machinery, millions of women wouldn't have a job. It's because of men creating all this technology that more women are able to work. How in the name of common sense can somebody make such a bold claim and say, "Women are smarter than men?"
I'm not saying men are smarter than women. Not at all. But to say that women are smarter than men (when men are the ones who have created all this technology) is a little naive and arrogant.
What do you think?
Women use to not be ALLOWED to invent and create, so this is not really a fair statement. Women have had to catch up, and prove themselves. It's terrible how men use to (and sometimes still) treat them. They were bossed around with no freedom, only being married off to people so that a male could have his "pleasures" with the beautiful girl (often young). Girls have had it tough.
I am a boy, but yet I do not understand about men believing they are the ultimate gender. Women are just as smart, tough, and equal as men. No gender is smarter than the other.
Men, historically, have literally worked themselves as far as to death to provide for and protect their wives and women in general. But some people like to assume that women always had the worse end of the deal.
When I was younger I would have regurgitated some of the tenets of feminism myself. When their hypocrisy bites you again and again and again as a male (and you find out that a minority--albeit growing--of people even care about the fact) you'll likely snap out of it. That's what usually happens with men of my generation and younger. I just hope it doesn't hurt too much before then for you.
BTW I do believe men are the more risk-taking gender which is the reason for inventions--i.e. true exploration of uncharted territory as it were. That doesn't mean "smarter" per se, but more likely to defy "safe" convention for the sake of an end objective: inventing.
I simply beilieve neither gender is more superior than the other. God is faster, stronger, smarter, and better than human guys and girls. So I don't really see the point of people who think one gender is better. God outshines every single one of us, male and female, so neither gender is the "best" at something. God will always be better.
..Was that understandable or was that a load of waffle, make no sense, and was a confusing thing to say that got this conversation nowhere? I'm a teenager, so what I say probably doesn't make any sense ha ha.
: FlawedWings Mon Aug 06, 2012 - 21:55:40
: Cally Mon Aug 06, 2012 - 21:47:17
: FlawedWings Mon Aug 06, 2012 - 20:40:56
: ObeyTheGospel Tue May 22, 2012 - 16:34:21
There is a guy called Walid Shoebat who use to be a former Muslim. He is now a Christian and travels round warning churches about the threat of Islam. I have one of his books and he seems very genuine. However, on quite a few occasions when he's giving a sermon he says, "Women are smarter than men." And then people laugh and start clapping.
Now, as a man I do not know who is smarter. But the reason I find his statement a little ludicrous is because of technology. Men are the ones who have created space ships, satellite, computers, TV, airplanes, factories, machines, medication, etc. If it wasn't for men inventing computers and factories with machinery, millions of women wouldn't have a job. It's because of men creating all this technology that more women are able to work. How in the name of common sense can somebody make such a bold claim and say, "Women are smarter than men?"
I'm not saying men are smarter than women. Not at all. But to say that women are smarter than men (when men are the ones who have created all this technology) is a little naive and arrogant.
What do you think?
Women use to not be ALLOWED to invent and create, so this is not really a fair statement. Women have had to catch up, and prove themselves. It's terrible how men use to (and sometimes still) treat them. They were bossed around with no freedom, only being married off to people so that a male could have his "pleasures" with the beautiful girl (often young). Girls have had it tough.
I am a boy, but yet I do not understand about men believing they are the ultimate gender. Women are just as smart, tough, and equal as men. No gender is smarter than the other.
Men, historically, have literally worked themselves as far as to death to provide for and protect their wives and women in general. But some people like to assume that women always had the worse end of the deal.
When I was younger I would have regurgitated some of the tenets of feminism myself. When their hypocrisy bites you again and again and again as a male (and you find out that a minority--albeit growing--of people even care about the fact) you'll likely snap out of it. That's what usually happens with men of my generation and younger. I just hope it doesn't hurt too much before then for you.
BTW I do believe men are the more risk-taking gender which is the reason for inventions--i.e. true exploration of uncharted territory as it were. That doesn't mean "smarter" per se, but more likely to defy "safe" convention for the sake of an end objective: inventing.
I simply beilieve neither gender is more superior than the other. God is faster, stronger, smarter, and better than human guys and girls. So I don't really see the point of people who think one gender is better. God outshines every single one of us, male and female, so neither gender is the "best" at something. God will always be better.
..Was that understandable or was that a load of waffle, make no sense, and was a confusing thing to say that got this conversation nowhere? I'm a teenager, so what I say probably doesn't make any sense ha ha.
Nah I agree with you. It's just that my days of white-knighting women
JUST because they're women are totally over. In my mind only an anti-feminist woman deserves chivalrous treatment.
: Cally Mon Aug 06, 2012 - 21:57:04
: FlawedWings Mon Aug 06, 2012 - 21:55:40
: Cally Mon Aug 06, 2012 - 21:47:17
: FlawedWings Mon Aug 06, 2012 - 20:40:56
: ObeyTheGospel Tue May 22, 2012 - 16:34:21
There is a guy called Walid Shoebat who use to be a former Muslim. He is now a Christian and travels round warning churches about the threat of Islam. I have one of his books and he seems very genuine. However, on quite a few occasions when he's giving a sermon he says, "Women are smarter than men." And then people laugh and start clapping.
Now, as a man I do not know who is smarter. But the reason I find his statement a little ludicrous is because of technology. Men are the ones who have created space ships, satellite, computers, TV, airplanes, factories, machines, medication, etc. If it wasn't for men inventing computers and factories with machinery, millions of women wouldn't have a job. It's because of men creating all this technology that more women are able to work. How in the name of common sense can somebody make such a bold claim and say, "Women are smarter than men?"
I'm not saying men are smarter than women. Not at all. But to say that women are smarter than men (when men are the ones who have created all this technology) is a little naive and arrogant.
What do you think?
Women use to not be ALLOWED to invent and create, so this is not really a fair statement. Women have had to catch up, and prove themselves. It's terrible how men use to (and sometimes still) treat them. They were bossed around with no freedom, only being married off to people so that a male could have his "pleasures" with the beautiful girl (often young). Girls have had it tough.
I am a boy, but yet I do not understand about men believing they are the ultimate gender. Women are just as smart, tough, and equal as men. No gender is smarter than the other.
Men, historically, have literally worked themselves as far as to death to provide for and protect their wives and women in general. But some people like to assume that women always had the worse end of the deal.
When I was younger I would have regurgitated some of the tenets of feminism myself. When their hypocrisy bites you again and again and again as a male (and you find out that a minority--albeit growing--of people even care about the fact) you'll likely snap out of it. That's what usually happens with men of my generation and younger. I just hope it doesn't hurt too much before then for you.
BTW I do believe men are the more risk-taking gender which is the reason for inventions--i.e. true exploration of uncharted territory as it were. That doesn't mean "smarter" per se, but more likely to defy "safe" convention for the sake of an end objective: inventing.
I simply beilieve neither gender is more superior than the other. God is faster, stronger, smarter, and better than human guys and girls. So I don't really see the point of people who think one gender is better. God outshines every single one of us, male and female, so neither gender is the "best" at something. God will always be better.
..Was that understandable or was that a load of waffle, make no sense, and was a confusing thing to say that got this conversation nowhere? I'm a teenager, so what I say probably doesn't make any sense ha ha.
Nah I agree with you. It's just that my days of white-knighting women JUST because they're women are totally over. In my mind only an anti-feminist woman deserves chivalrous treatment.
I get where you are coming from. And glad I made sense for once. My mind is a big bowl of nonsense that also can't spell
Ya godda lern ta spel gud, kid. Utterwise pipple will thik your dum.
: Willie T Mon Aug 06, 2012 - 22:20:07
Ya godda lern ta spel gud, kid. Utterwise pipple will thik your dum.
Atleast I spell how it sounds. Pipple doesn't sound like people
: FlawedWings Mon Aug 06, 2012 - 22:23:00
: Willie T Mon Aug 06, 2012 - 22:20:07
Ya godda lern ta spel gud, kid. Utterwise pipple will thik your dum.
Atleast I spell how it sounds. Pipple doesn't sound like people
::applause::
HAHAHA. PWNED. Beautifully done, FlawedWings. ::tippinghat::
: Cally Mon Aug 06, 2012 - 22:24:19
: FlawedWings Mon Aug 06, 2012 - 22:23:00
: Willie T Mon Aug 06, 2012 - 22:20:07
Ya godda lern ta spel gud, kid. Utterwise pipple will thik your dum.
Atleast I spell how it sounds. Pipple doesn't sound like people
::applause::
HAHAHA. PWNED. Beautifully done, FlawedWings. ::tippinghat::
Thank you, but please excuse me if I burst into a random laughing fit, I am having an interesting conversation with Willie T in "Christian Goth being shunned by other Christians" (my topic post thingy)
: Cally Mon Aug 06, 2012 - 21:47:17
When I was younger I would have regurgitated some of the tenets of feminism myself.
Really? Let's review the "basic tenets" of feminism:
"A woman needs a man like a fish needs a bicycle" nah
"In the beginning God made a man. Then God said 'I can do better than that.' " really?
"the only good man is a dead man." uh-huh.
"All men are liars, cheaters and rapists. All women are victims."
And don't forget the research (way behind Jill Ireland's timeline) to be able to perfect reproduction without any male input so they can eliminate all males from the planet.
: FlawedWings Mon Aug 06, 2012 - 22:23:00
Pipple doesn't sound like people
No, but they both pop nicely.
: ObeyTheGospel Tue May 22, 2012 - 16:34:21
There is a guy called Walid Shoebat who use to be a former Muslim. He is now a Christian and travels round warning churches about the threat of Islam. I have one of his books and he seems very genuine. However, on quite a few occasions when he's giving a sermon he says, "Women are smarter than men." And then people laugh and start clapping.
Now, as a man I do not know who is smarter. But the reason I find his statement a little ludicrous is because of technology. Men are the ones who have created space ships, satellite, computers, TV, airplanes, factories, machines, medication, etc. If it wasn't for men inventing computers and factories with machinery, millions of women wouldn't have a job. It's because of men creating all this technology that more women are able to work. How in the name of common sense can somebody make such a bold claim and say, "Women are smarter than men?"
I'm not saying men are smarter than women. Not at all. But to say that women are smarter than men (when men are the ones who have created all this technology) is a little naive and arrogant.
What do you think?
Smartness has nothing to do with gender. It has to do with education and opportunity. Men have always been given the opportunities but in the current generation things are much more equitable. I have met smart and dumb from both genders, and believe me it has NOTHING to do with their gender.
Walid Shoebat is smarter than anyone I know, man or woman. His comment in the quote is an ice breaker type statement. I use the very same tool when I am to speak before people.
Stan I agree with your assessment.
: Stan53 Tue Aug 07, 2012 - 20:16:36
: ObeyTheGospel Tue May 22, 2012 - 16:34:21
There is a guy called Walid Shoebat who use to be a former Muslim. He is now a Christian and travels round warning churches about the threat of Islam. I have one of his books and he seems very genuine. However, on quite a few occasions when he's giving a sermon he says, "Women are smarter than men." And then people laugh and start clapping.
Now, as a man I do not know who is smarter. But the reason I find his statement a little ludicrous is because of technology. Men are the ones who have created space ships, satellite, computers, TV, airplanes, factories, machines, medication, etc. If it wasn't for men inventing computers and factories with machinery, millions of women wouldn't have a job. It's because of men creating all this technology that more women are able to work. How in the name of common sense can somebody make such a bold claim and say, "Women are smarter than men?"
I'm not saying men are smarter than women. Not at all. But to say that women are smarter than men (when men are the ones who have created all this technology) is a little naive and arrogant.
What do you think?
Smartness has nothing to do with gender. It has to do with education and opportunity. Men have always been given the opportunities but in the current generation things are much more equitable. I have met smart and dumb from both genders, and believe me it has NOTHING to do with their gender.
I don't think smartness has to do with education and opportunity at all. I think Peter was a smart man but was "uneducated" according to the Bible.
I disagree with your assessments about past and present generational opportunities.
: Cally Tue Aug 07, 2012 - 23:46:34
I don't think smartness has to do with education and opportunity at all. I think Peter was a smart man but was "uneducated" according to the Bible.
I disagree with your assessments about past and present generational opportunities.
Really? Where does the Bible say Peter was 'uneducated'?
Well of course you have the right to disagree, but at 28 you really don't have the span of experience I do, being 30 years older then you.
: Stan53 Wed Aug 08, 2012 - 01:35:04
: Cally Tue Aug 07, 2012 - 23:46:34
I don't think smartness has to do with education and opportunity at all. I think Peter was a smart man but was "uneducated" according to the Bible.
I disagree with your assessments about past and present generational opportunities.
Really? Where does the Bible say Peter was 'uneducated'?
Well of course you have the right to disagree, but at 28 you really don't have the span of experience I do, being 30 years older then you.
Acts 4:13 refers to Peter and John as uneducated and ordinary men.
Being 30 years older than me, you probably don't realize what your generation handed mine on this issue. You see, right now, women make a very significant majority of college attendance in general. And yet they still throw out scholarships for women only, and there are measures being taken to force colleges to find SOME way of getting more women into fields that men still dominate (since, as it happens, those fields like those in engineering tend to pay more and actually lead to employment).
The message to men of my generation is loud and clear: if you fail, you are hated as a loser and poor provider. If you succeed, you're hated because your success makes women's success look bad by comparison.
You can simplify that expression easily: men are hated.
: DaveW Tue Aug 07, 2012 - 06:49:54
: Cally Mon Aug 06, 2012 - 21:47:17
When I was younger I would have regurgitated some of the tenets of feminism myself.
Really? Let's review the "basic tenets" of feminism:
"A woman needs a man like a fish needs a bicycle" nah
"In the beginning God made a man. Then God said 'I can do better than that.' " really?
"the only good man is a dead man." uh-huh.
"All men are liars, cheaters and rapists. All women are victims."
And don't forget the research (way behind Jill Ireland's timeline) to be able to perfect reproduction without any male input so they can eliminate all males from the planet.
Statements like that are really blatant and won't quite stand in the mainstream, but, just as many who support feminism won't exactly wage war against the people who make those statements, many have ways of veiling those sentiments.
: Cally Wed Aug 08, 2012 - 01:46:42
: Stan53 Wed Aug 08, 2012 - 01:35:04
: Cally Tue Aug 07, 2012 - 23:46:34
I don't think smartness has to do with education and opportunity at all. I think Peter was a smart man but was "uneducated" according to the Bible.
I disagree with your assessments about past and present generational opportunities.
Really? Where does the Bible say Peter was 'uneducated'?
Well of course you have the right to disagree, but at 28 you really don't have the span of experience I do, being 30 years older then you.
Acts 4:13 refers to Peter and John as uneducated and ordinary men.
Being 30 years older than me, you probably don't realize what your generation handed mine on this issue. You see, right now, women make a very significant majority of college attendance in general. And yet they still throw out scholarships for women only, and there are measures being taken to force colleges to find SOME way of getting more women into fields that men still dominate (since, as it happens, those fields like those in engineering tend to pay more and actually lead to employment).
The message to men of my generation is loud and clear: if you fail, you are hated as a loser and poor provider. If you succeed, you're hated because your success makes women's success look bad by comparison.
You can simplify that expression easily: men are hated.
Ah yes well unschooled and uneducated are two different things. Both of them were orthodox Jews and were definitely educated in the laws of the OT. I was actually talking about modern day 21st century people.
I can't really speak to your assertions except to say that yes females do make up a higher % of postsecondary enrolment. So as a result women could be as a % of the overall population, "smarter" than men. That is a statistic, not a gender or human condition. People also say whites are smarter than blacks, which is also false and based on postsecondary statistics. You seem to have a personal bias in this issue, which does not make for very effective rational thinking. My original statement stands, regardless of any apparent inequity in our postsecondary systems. I do agree though that most guys look for work rather then get a better education so they can have better professions, but the world is still full of unemployed PHD's or PHD's that aren't working in their chosen secter. In NA this may be the case, but in most other countries in the world, the men get the opportunities and the women don't. Again, not germane to the OP.
: Stan53 Wed Aug 08, 2012 - 02:15:21
: Cally Wed Aug 08, 2012 - 01:46:42
: Stan53 Wed Aug 08, 2012 - 01:35:04
: Cally Tue Aug 07, 2012 - 23:46:34
I don't think smartness has to do with education and opportunity at all. I think Peter was a smart man but was "uneducated" according to the Bible.
I disagree with your assessments about past and present generational opportunities.
Really? Where does the Bible say Peter was 'uneducated'?
Well of course you have the right to disagree, but at 28 you really don't have the span of experience I do, being 30 years older then you.
Acts 4:13 refers to Peter and John as uneducated and ordinary men.
Being 30 years older than me, you probably don't realize what your generation handed mine on this issue. You see, right now, women make a very significant majority of college attendance in general. And yet they still throw out scholarships for women only, and there are measures being taken to force colleges to find SOME way of getting more women into fields that men still dominate (since, as it happens, those fields like those in engineering tend to pay more and actually lead to employment).
The message to men of my generation is loud and clear: if you fail, you are hated as a loser and poor provider. If you succeed, you're hated because your success makes women's success look bad by comparison.
You can simplify that expression easily: men are hated.
Ah yes well unschooled and uneducated are two different things. Both of them were orthodox Jews and were definitely educated in the laws of the OT. I was actually talking about modern day 21st century people.
I can't really speak to your assertions except to say that yes females do make up a higher % of postsecondary enrolment. So as a result women could be as a % of the overall population, "smarter" than men. That is a statistic, not a gender or human condition. People also say whites are smarter than blacks, which is also false and based on postsecondary statistics. You seem to have a personal bias in this issue, which does not make for very effective rational thinking. My original statement stands, regardless of any apparent inequity in our postsecondary systems. I do agree though that most guys look for work rather then get a better education so they can have better professions, but the world is still full of unemployed PHD's or PHD's that aren't working in their chosen secter. In NA this may be the case, but in most other countries in the world, the men get the opportunities and the women don't. Again, not germane to the OP.
Stan,
Some translations of Acts 4:13 say "unschooled." It doesn't matter at any rate, as "uneducated" I think is obviously in the sense that one would be uneducated today. The point is, unless you think that means John and Peter were not smart because they were uneducated, I believe strongly that "smart" has no connection to whether or not you have a college degree. My college degree did not make me smarter (I'd say it was an uphill battle not to let it make me become dumber), although my post-bacc and graduate studies in Computer Science have been rather stimulating to learn new skills . . . but again, no way would I say it makes me "smarter," nor does my success with it indicate intelligence meaningfully; at least, not as meaningfully as the astuteness and wisdom of figures like John and Peter.
Also, Stan, let's take a step back and take a gander at reality for a moment: college, today, is a sham for the most part, says a trillion dollars in student debt. Like school in general it's an artificial environment that is obviously not indicative of actual competence.
As it happens--and this may be worth pondering--most of the fields women appear to dominate in college are the ones that prove the least effective degrees. ::pondering:: Hence the fact that now measures are being taken to shoehorn women into male-dominated fields that actually DO have some credibility.
Try wrapping your head around that fact and see what happens.
: Cally Wed Aug 08, 2012 - 02:23:40
Stan,
Some translations of Acts 4:13 say "unschooled." It doesn't matter at any rate, as "uneducated" I think is obviously in the sense that one would be uneducated today. The point is, unless you think that means John and Peter were not smart because they were uneducated, I believe strongly that "smart" has no connection to whether or not you have a college degree. My college degree did not make me smarter (I'd say it was an uphill battle not to let it make me become dumber), although my post-bacc and graduate studies in Computer Science have been rather stimulating to learn new skills . . . but again, no way would I say it makes me "smarter," nor does my success with it indicate intelligence meaningfully; at least, not as meaningfully as the astuteness and wisdom of figures like John and Peter.
The OP was about today, NOT 2000 years ago. You brought up Peter and I asked. You answered. I'm fine with it. There is NO correlation.
Smart as the OP dealt with does. It doesn't as far as gender is concerned. Wise and smart, astute and smart, are NOT the same. In the context of the OP was how I answered. Please don't try to make this about bad school system or other inequities in North America. Your education makes you 'smarter' than me, but NOT wiser, or better equipped to handle life, or anything else for that matter, except to get a job. Although I'm retired so need for me to work. ::whistle:: The furthest I got in school was grade 10 and then went and got a job. Did it for almost 40 years. Was not very smart in business and did some pretty dumb things in business and life. My educated sons are much better off on the smart scale, except for the one whole didn't finish high school. He's not dumb, but he's not smart. I pray you are seeing the difference.
: Cally Wed Aug 08, 2012 - 02:29:31
Also, Stan, let's take a step back and take a gander at reality for a moment: college, today, is a sham for the most part, says a trillion dollars in student debt. Like school in general it's an artificial environment that is obviously not indicative of actual competence.
As it happens--and this may be worth pondering--most of the fields women appear to dominate in college are the ones that prove the least effective degrees. ::pondering:: Hence the fact that now measures are being taken to shoehorn women into male-dominated fields that actually DO have some credibility.
Try wrapping your head around that fact and see what happens.
Let's take a step back all right, OFF your soapbox and back onto topic if you don't mind. You my friend, are developing a couple of noids. I suggest you pray about it.
: Stan53 Wed Aug 08, 2012 - 02:45:01
: Cally Wed Aug 08, 2012 - 02:23:40
Stan,
Some translations of Acts 4:13 say "unschooled." It doesn't matter at any rate, as "uneducated" I think is obviously in the sense that one would be uneducated today. The point is, unless you think that means John and Peter were not smart because they were uneducated, I believe strongly that "smart" has no connection to whether or not you have a college degree. My college degree did not make me smarter (I'd say it was an uphill battle not to let it make me become dumber), although my post-bacc and graduate studies in Computer Science have been rather stimulating to learn new skills . . . but again, no way would I say it makes me "smarter," nor does my success with it indicate intelligence meaningfully; at least, not as meaningfully as the astuteness and wisdom of figures like John and Peter.
The OP was about today, NOT 2000 years ago. You brought up Peter and I asked. You answered. I'm fine with it. There is NO correlation.
Smart as the OP dealt with does. It doesn't as far as gender is concerned. Wise and smart, astute and smart, are NOT the same. In the context of the OP was how I answered. Please don't try to make this about bad school system or other inequities in North America. Your education makes you 'smarter' than me, but NOT wiser, or better equipped to handle life, or anything else for that matter, except to get a job. Although I'm retired so need for me to work. ::whistle:: The furthest I got in school was grade 10 and then went and got a job. Did it for almost 40 years. Was not very smart in business and did some pretty dumb things in business and life. My educated sons are much better off on the smart scale, except for the one whole didn't finish high school. He's not dumb, but he's not smart. I pray you are seeing the difference.
Foregoing prolonging in arguing semantics, I think I agree. Some people teach themselves skills and run circles around those who are "educated" for that matter (the ultimate examples can be found with those educated in scriptures in Jesus' day, of course).
: Stan53 Wed Aug 08, 2012 - 02:47:15
: Cally Wed Aug 08, 2012 - 02:29:31
Also, Stan, let's take a step back and take a gander at reality for a moment: college, today, is a sham for the most part, says a trillion dollars in student debt. Like school in general it's an artificial environment that is obviously not indicative of actual competence.
As it happens--and this may be worth pondering--most of the fields women appear to dominate in college are the ones that prove the least effective degrees. ::pondering:: Hence the fact that now measures are being taken to shoehorn women into male-dominated fields that actually DO have some credibility.
Try wrapping your head around that fact and see what happens.
Let's take a step back all right, OFF your soapbox and back onto topic if you don't mind. You my friend, are developing a couple of noids. I suggest you pray about it.
What's a "noid"? ::headscratch::
: Cally Wed Aug 08, 2012 - 02:50:32
: Stan53 Wed Aug 08, 2012 - 02:47:15
: Cally Wed Aug 08, 2012 - 02:29:31
Also, Stan, let's take a step back and take a gander at reality for a moment: college, today, is a sham for the most part, says a trillion dollars in student debt. Like school in general it's an artificial environment that is obviously not indicative of actual competence.
As it happens--and this may be worth pondering--most of the fields women appear to dominate in college are the ones that prove the least effective degrees. ::pondering:: Hence the fact that now measures are being taken to shoehorn women into male-dominated fields that actually DO have some credibility.
Try wrapping your head around that fact and see what happens.
Let's take a step back all right, OFF your soapbox and back onto topic if you don't mind. You my friend, are developing a couple of noids. I suggest you pray about it.
What's a "noid"? ::headscratch::
The Noid
The Noid (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qJ7RnXakSXU#)
Yikes! I think Stan is right about needing to pray about developing noids in that case! ::eek::
I took Stan's comment is that you are developing noids, as in para. could be way off. But based on previous threads, that might be it.
: Jaime Wed Aug 08, 2012 - 12:34:35
I took Stan's comment is that you are developing noids, as in para. could be way off. But based on previous threads, that might be it.
That was my best guess too, actually.
: Cally Wed Aug 08, 2012 - 01:57:25
Statements like that are really blatant and won't quite stand in the mainstream, but, just as many who support feminism won't exactly wage war against the people who make those statements, many have ways of veiling those sentiments.
Not mainstream?
A woman needs a man like a fish needs a bicycle - Gloria Steinem [quoting Irene Dunn]
In the beginning God made a man. Then God said 'I can do better than that.' - Adela Rogers St. Johns [a reporter who covered the women's movement in the 60s and 70s]
the only good man is a dead man. - Margaret Holmes Bates
I would say that Steinem and Rogers St Johns are pretty mainstream in the feminist movement. Perhaps Bates not so much.
"well-behaved women seldom make history" Marilyn Monroe
: Bitter Sweet Thu Aug 16, 2012 - 13:10:35
"well-behaved women seldom make history" Marilyn Monroe
A solid quote, but it also applies equally to men. Ironic, iddn't it?
Jarrod
: DaveW Thu Aug 16, 2012 - 12:51:35
: Cally Wed Aug 08, 2012 - 01:57:25
Statements like that are really blatant and won't quite stand in the mainstream, but, just as many who support feminism won't exactly wage war against the people who make those statements, many have ways of veiling those sentiments.
Not mainstream?
A woman needs a man like a fish needs a bicycle - Gloria Steinem [quoting Irene Dunn]
In the beginning God made a man. Then God said 'I can do better than that.' - Adela Rogers St. Johns [a reporter who covered the women's movement in the 60s and 70s]
the only good man is a dead man. - Margaret Holmes Bates
I would say that Steinem and Rogers St Johns are pretty mainstream in the feminist movement. Perhaps Bates not so much.
Yep.
: Wycliffes_Shillelagh Thu Aug 16, 2012 - 13:56:51
: Bitter Sweet Thu Aug 16, 2012 - 13:10:35
"well-behaved women seldom make history" Marilyn Monroe
A solid quote, but it also applies equally to men. Ironic, iddn't it?
Jarrod
Sure is but Eve did it first. ::giggle::
What obey the gospel may have been trying to raise of awareness of was not the question of who is actually smarter, but instead, why does the topic come up every so often and get the same type of laughter-based response?
The answer is that there pervades among the populace a particular sickness. It is so common that it has become normalized. Sexual envy and strife are not part of the true believer though. God declares that the role of the child bearer is just as important as the man who teaches the gospel. Being a stay-at-home mom is just as important as the man who works in the field, sweating, to produce food for his wives and children.
I'm typing differently today. Notice the capitalization of every sentence? What's that? You don't like it? ~~~~~~~~~~~ deal with it ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
: Bitter Sweet Thu Aug 16, 2012 - 15:21:52
: Wycliffes_Shillelagh Thu Aug 16, 2012 - 13:56:51
: Bitter Sweet Thu Aug 16, 2012 - 13:10:35
"well-behaved women seldom make history" Marilyn Monroe
A solid quote, but it also applies equally to men. Ironic, iddn't it?
Jarrod
Sure is but Eve did it first. ::giggle::
Thank you for that excellent example of "female logic."
Bazinga!
Thank you for that excellent example of "female logic."
Bazinga!
Have you been drinking that b-12 stuff today?
No, officer, I'm clean. I swear!
Ok, considering your location I suppose it isn't too late to be catching a second wind.