What's the highest ranking woman in the Organization.
The secret of how Christianity spread across the world
by Terry 108 Replies latest watchtower bible
-
-
Satanus
Wobble
Women doing w persuasion, the same thing that men did w force. Better? Looking at where capitalism is, at the moment, how it got there over the last 50 yrs, it is largely by gentle persuasion. Of course, the cia has worked behind the scenes in keeping third world countries' populations subservient and productive of fruits, vegies and other raw materials. However, on the consumption end of capitalism, the gentle persuasion methods assails us, each and every day through commercialism through the medias. This has been very effective at persuading the consumer masses. However, whether it makes the capitalist ideology good in it's present form is currently the subject of debate.
S
-
Morbidzbaby
@ designs: Highest titled woman? I'd have to say a Missionary or Special Pioneer or something like that. But either way, they are usually accompanied by a man. But the highest POSITION, where there is no title, but they are acknowledged as higher than most women, would probably be the wives of the GB members. On a congregational level, you have elder's wives and CO's wives where the same principle applies.
I tried discussing this with my mom the other day. I am adamant that my daughter will NOT grow up to be a "nothing". And to me, that's what an elder's wife, a pioneer, etc. are. What are they??? What do they have outside of their title that no one else in the world but JW's cares about? NOTHING. Toilet scrubbers, book salespeople (who don't get paid), and a trophy on the arm of the man they marry if he's of high rank. She tried to say this wasn't true...that sisters can go and get a trade if they want to... They can go and take a CNA course! Or Home Health Aide! Um...be that as it may, are those courses from colleges? I mean, are they encouraged to learn MORE than just the focus of what they are being certified for? No, they are not. Anything over a few weeks or months of worldly education is frowned on. I know a young sister who wanted to go to community college for a 2 year Associates Degree...her elder father "encouraged" her to pioneer instead and dangled the "you can live at home rent-free" carrot. That was 2 years ago. She would have been almost done with her degree. And instead, she pioneers and works 2 part time jobs. That will not be my daughter. When I was married, I had to depend solely on my husband because he didn't allow me to do anything but "my job" (raising the kids and cleaning the house). I was educated and had a good job before we met. Now, I'm furthering my education, I have a good job, and I know I can make it on my own. I want that for my little girl. She needs to know she is MORE than just the value a man gives her.
Amazingly, I never made the "your first mentor is a woman, yet women are to be silent in the congregation" connection! That kinda blew my mind a bit.
I think, Terry, your observations are insightful. I've never really looked at things from that angle, but it makes a lot of sense. Myself, I like reading about how women influenced the world. The ancient religions/belief systems revered women as the bringers of life. There was polarity and balance, gods and goddesses, the two aspects of the divine. Even in the romance languages you have masculine and feminine words. It's quite intriguing to me. I guess I have never been "submissive" (and I was accused of that many times over my marriage lol). I am more strong-willed than most JW women and I never bought into the whole "You have a penis so you're over me" stuff. In my mind, I have a uterus and someone like me brought your penis into this world, so I'd say we're pretty even lol.
-
Nickolas
Interesting hypothesis, Terry. I wonder what Freud would have thought of it, given that he admitted not to have had a clue about female psychology. It's the psychology of what you're saying that's intriguing. The Abrahamic religions are unquestionably male dominated and even misogynous, yet women themselves caused them to be successful because they were the least of several evils? You may be right, but I might be more inclined to think that the Abrahamic religions demanded complete and utter submissiveness and compliance of their women and to have done anything less than what you describe above would have been considered defiance against the will of God and would have been severely punished. Is it not more logical to think that women were the willing tools of belief systems invented by men because they didn't have a choice?
-
Curtains
nickolas I'd go even further and say that if they didn't have a choice they can't be said to be willing. I'd prefer to say dissenters (which included men and women) were silenced. People then made the best of the situation that they found themselves in. This to me is not willing submission.
Terry if you are saying that religiouness incorporates traditionally feminine elements/factors (like softness, love, peace, bonding, compliance, meekness, mystery etc) more than traditionally masculine elements/factors like (solidness, pride, strength, rigidity, duty, transparency, reason, logic etc) then I would agree with you.
-
AGuest
Ah, yes... "it was the wimmen you gave us!" LOLOLOLOLOL! A very convenient loophole, dear Terry (as always, peace to you!), but I am more inclined to agree with dear Nick. Also, as a woman, while I must agree that we (women) do make it harder for ourselves and other women... we do it by buying into what men say to and about us... and put upon us.
Many (both men and women) justify it by giving in to that whole "Your craving will be for your husband and he will dominate you" melarkey. He will only do it if (1) he is unkind, unloving, and selfish, and (2) you allow it. The statement was not a curse but a prophecy of the reality: of what men would do and women would let them do.
Also, along with be more religious (and more faithful, yes, but I am not willing to say more spiritual), we are also a LOT less loyal, sorry to say. While there are some among us who a more level-headed and independent, the majority of us have bought into the [now] myth that we aren't anything on our own but only in conjunction with the men (fathers and husbands) in our lives. But that is really only due to tradition... which tradition was established by men, not women. While women did once address their husbands in respectful terms (i.e., "Lord"), they didn't just rollover and take it. And men also addressed the head of households as "Lord."
But if the truth be told, much of women's oppression... and how they raise their sons/daughters... started with... and starts with still... fathers. Who are men. If a father teaches his daughter worth, then she finds a man who respecta that worth. Same with sons. This often starts with how fathers treat... mothers. True, the opposite applies as well, but it really is most often the first case.
I would love to be the excuse for religion, dear one, but even if women are the worker bees... the men hold the leadership, and thus the helm... in undeniably greater porportion. From day one. True, the women may be blind followers... but they are merely followers.
Again, peace to you!
A slave of Christ,
SA
-
pirata
From day one. True, the women may be blind followers... but they are merely followers.
Without followers, there is no need for leaders.
In a lot of Asian countries, I have observed and have been told that it is mainly housewives who come into the truth, later bringing their husbands (sometimes) and children with them.
PS. Welcome back 'aguest'!
-
wobble
"In to the truth " wassat ?
-
pirata
"In to the truth " wassat ?
Ack! dubspeak still affects my mind...
-
Nickolas
I am more inclined to agree with dear Nick
!
Saturday, March 19, 2011. Marking my calendar.