Yes i bothers me with any religion, because women don't have a penis and don't stand up to pee we are a low life. Not just religions but any aspect of life, most women can do what men do but most men can't do what women do. There are plenty of very smart willing women who would love to give talks or give a bible study but they can't because their anatomy is different.
Did the second-class status of JW women ever bother you? Does it now?
by True North 35 Replies latest jw friends
-
-
Dan-O
most women can do what men do but most men can't do what women do
OK. I have to disagree with this. With the exception of breastfeeding & giving birth, I can do pretty much anything that Mrs. O can do, and vice versa. We each have our indivudual areas of superior talent or skill, but that's just the difference between two in-DUH-viduals ... not something that's based solely on our genitalia. She can build databases. I can bake one heck of a pecan pie. We can both rebuild carburators. We both understand how to work a washer & a dryer. And so on, and so on.
But back to the original question ... no the stuff at the KH never bothered me much while I was part of the org. But that was a long time ago, and it had been in front of me since infancy ... so it just seemed 'normal', if you will.
-
Gretchen956
Amazing, isn't it, how many of the men come on this topic and say how it didn't bother them??!!! Well I am a woman it did bother me, and I did try to suppress that when I was inside.... However, all my life I have been accused of being "uppidy," "independent," and stubborn. Usually when I use that word uppidy I get people asking what it means, it means acting in a manner "above your station." My mom and dad always told me I was "too big for my britches."
But no it isn't just a JW thing. And absolutely no that does not excuse it.
Gretchen
-
Dan-O
Gretchen, you uppidy, independent, stubbon woman, you.
-
FlyingHighNow
The headship arrangement was pushed as something to make happier, more successful marriages.
When it was put into action, headship made marriages misery for both husband and wife as well as any unfortunate children.
One thing I hated was that some elders resented it when sisters went to them pointing out legitimate problems and unfairnesses in the congregation.
I am very glad we could not become elders because we don't have to answer for the atrocities committed against JWs that the elders do. We are not guilty of sitting in on committe meetings. We are not guilty of sitting by and watching families neglected and destroyed from the lack of love, compassion and help.
Flyin'
-
Gretchen956
My biggest memory about this was being married to an unbeliever for 15 years of being inside the WTS. (I was a 3rd generation witness) The elders would always come around and chat him up and try to get him to come to meeting or let them study with him. From all of that there was only one thing he picked up on. The wife is supposed to be in subjection. I failed to mention he was abusive verbally, so that was not the one thing I was hoping he would "get". I won't bore you with details, but there are lots of them. Suffice it to say that there were many visits to the elders and they of course were no help. My own dad said it was probably something I did to cause him to treat me so badly.
I left him and the religion at the same time. And now I am strong, uppidy, independent, and stubborn to my heart's content.
Isn't life grand?
Gretchen
-
Sunnygal41
The headship arrangement was pushed as something to make happier, more successful marriages.
When it was put into action, headship made marriages misery for both husband and wife as well as any unfortunate children.
I was a member of one of those marriages..........husband didn't want to take the lead, and I was forced to......then I'd get grief from the elders for it. Many of the women in our congregation could run circles around the men when it came to logic and organization........but, we would have to shut up and act less than instead of being utilized for the good of all concerned. It sucked. I agree with Gretchen and Insomniac.
-
Carmel
It was and still is. That and they claim to be "unbiased" about race and "in accord with science". All bovine scat!
carmel
-
SixofNine
I can't say that it did really. I was probably to busy being bothered by my treatment as a third class citizen; a JW male with a beard, lol. My bad.
Today? It bothers me only in the sense that it bothers me in society at large, so in that sense, yeah. Within the organization; well, it just seems like (more of) the stupidity that comes along with following (actually worshiping) an ancient book. I'm happy to hear now that women chafe under it, but I'd hope that if it helps them break free, they use it as a springboard to examine the bible as well.
-
gaiagirl
The attitude of women as second class persons didn't begin with the Bible, although the Bible was written by men who held such views, and so it reinforces those views.
There is archaeological evidence that earlier societies treated women on a much more equal footing, because women were viewed as the source of life. The world was seen as a living being, a feminine one, who gave every good thing to the beings who lived upon her body. Because things such as vegetation and seasons were observed to come and go in cycles, it was believed that the Earth would also recycle human lives. In other words, life was not a straight-line, one-time-only trip, but more like a trip on a Ferris Wheel.
Most of these early cultures were agricultural, with little evidence of fortifications around their cities. This era gradually ended beginning about 4000 B.C.E, when nomadic pastoral invaders moved out of the steppes of central Asia and into the settled agricultural regions of Europe.
These people, called the Kurgans, had a different world view. Instead of viewing nature as a generous provider, nature was an enemy who must be defeated or placated. These people viewed their deity as a male warrior god, and tried to emulate the qualites which they projected onto their god.
The last known remnant of the older egalitarian society were the Minoans, who finally succumbed to attacks from outside, assisted by some natural disasters. Their culture pretty much ended around 1500 B.C.E. Since that time, all the cultures we learn about in World History class pretty much treat women as second class people. This is also reflected in their pantheons, which still contain goddesses, but who are all subordinate to the supreme male god of that culture. The Greeks in Athens used to restrict their women to a separate part of the house, forbidding them from education, etc. Among Sumerians, women could have their teeth broken with bricks for saying certain things. Marriage among most of these cultures was an exchange of property between men, with the woman having little if any say in the matter, and this survives today in the custom of the brides father "giving her away" to her husband. The Biblical laws against fornication were to protect the economic value of a man's daughters, as a non-virgin was economically worthless. Therefore, a man who "corrupted" a virgin was essentially a thief, having "stolen" the value of another man's property. Similarly, adultery was condemned because one man had stolen "property" which belonged to another man.
More details on this topic can be found in:
The Chalice and the Blade, by Rianne Eisler (highly recommended)
Sacred Pleasure, by Rianne Eisler
Dawn Behind the Dawn, by Geoffery Ashe
When God Was A Woman, by Merlin Stone