I don't understand why weman want to be equal to men

seems like a step down

Actually, though it gets difficult to explain to non believers. The bible is a collection of historical truths and Gods words directly. There is nowhere that God says that women have a lesser value,, that is all up to interpretation. There were LAWS however, that MAN had made during that time which are mentioned in the bible which did put women as secondary, but when Jesus came he actually brought with him laws that contradicted the laws at that time. Women were also not to talk to men in public but Jesus himself kept the company of and made conversation with plenty of women. To say that because the bible recorded history it should be burned,,is a bit like throwing out the baby with the bath water.

As far as the bible putting the man in charge, this is also false and taken from context. There are SEVERAL places in the bible that the man is meant to submit to others, including Christ, ,and in the context of a man who is submitting to christ,, so is his wife to submit to him. It is a mutual relationship not one of one way servitude and not one extended to all women and all men,,just husbands and wives.

That's like saying the guy in Saw doesn't kill people.

The Bible and really all ancient story repeatedly paints women as the sources of evil. Greek myth had about a million female monsters terrorizing people and if they weren't distinctly female they were some kind of animal. Even regular women were the source of wars and the unleashers of unfathomable suffering.
The Bible paints Eve as a Pandora opening the box with that apple and offers frequent reminders of how women not kept on leashes turn horrible, like how Lot's daughters raped their father after having left that city.


SO really what there is to say is that it's possible to promote feminism in spite of the message the Bible, or whichever bronze age history book you prefer, sends. You can choose not to pick up those messages and perhaps just say that women were horrible in history while trying not to let that impact your view of modern women.

You have to override the message it's sending because you know better and if you want to say that you're just reading it "the right way" to yourself that's fine but you are undeniably drawing your morals from elsewhere and telling others that the Bible is infallible will result in people without those morals who will conduct themselves rottenly. No decent person can use that book like that and you need to recognize the weight of telling them that it's not just ok to do so but that it's the only "right" way.

After all, people can do what you're doing with the Koran and change it into a decent book but that doesn't change the intense oppressive force it has become in those places where they don't have these other morals to interpret it through.

The message was that men and women are flawed and not perfect. It gave historical examples of such flaws which included many of the awful laws that were in place in the old testament. After Jesus arrived, the new testament, we were given guidance based upon Gods laws and not mans. Jesus did not place women as secondary humans and hopefully, those reading the bible as christians, place the messages that Jesus delivered above all else.

As a woman one of my peeves is people that bend the bible to some chauvanistic truth. for every passage in the bible that gives guidance on how a female should carry herself there is an equal passage on how a man should,, but chauvanists overlook that. When these two roles, so to speak, are followed together, they are beautiful and not chauvanistic or demeaning at all.

Everyone who lives in a free society is responsible for creating their own life.

To blame anything on social standards, stereotypes, or social expectations, or even on the expectations of a spouse or family, is to do nothing more than play the role of a victim.

In a free society no one is forced to do much of anything. What typically 'forces' them into the situations that they complain about almost always stems from their own lust live a particular lifestyle.

First off, today many people are single. For a single woman femininism is basically a non-issue. She'd be expected to provide her own income in any case. If anything it might have helped single women to gain a more balance pay scale with men.

Whether a married woman would be expected to go to work, or stay home and raise a family ultimately depends on her choice of a husband.

Truly!

It might also depend on her expectations to live at a particular class-level, or whatever. I think that's truly the bottom line. People who complain about social conditions and wages are typically the ones who want to be 'better off' than they currently are.

It's a "keep-up-with-the-Jones" mentality.

Give that up and just accept the simple things in life, and feminism shouldn't be a problem. Also, if a woman wants to stay home and raise kids just choose a like-mindeded husband, and be prepared to live a frugal simple lifestyle.

It's that simple. I wouldn't ask my wife to work unless she was bitching about money all the time. Then hell ya.

If a woman wants the Rolls Royce let her get her butt to work and be glad that feminism movements paved the way.

Owl gladly take a homebody woman.

But she better be prepared to ride around in a 20-year-old car.

Don't be expecting expensive stuff.

You must not be reading it. Let's just troll through Mathew to see what Jesus said.
5:32 divorce is alright if the wife adulters but if a man cheats that's no justification for divorce.
24:19 pregnancy and nursing are terrible dirty things.
25:1 sounds a bit like Islam where heaven is like having numerous virgin women.
Ok, maybe Mathew was a dick. Mark is fairly decent about women with just some matter of fact end of days stuff but I can let that slide.
Luke... well,
2:22 Even giving birth to Jesus was still so dirty a thing that his mother had to be cleansed. Well, that's just one of those stupid laws from the past right?
2:23 no, next verse clearly states that the man's part in reproduction makes him holy.
Then the next couple of books only really say that a wife must submit to her husband but that's not so much the direct word of Jesus as far as my skimming shows. Get Timothy 1 5 gets kind of nasty again but I'm not going to go through the entire thing here.

So again. You can reject the message we're clearly being sent here if you know well enough to but the way you talk about the Bible is going to make people think they don't need to know better.

I Corinthians 11:11-12 Nevertheless, neither is man independent of woman, nor woman independent of man, in the Lord. For as the woman was from the man, even so the man also is through the woman; but all things are from God.


Ephesians 5:23 For the husband is head of the wife, as also Christ is head of the church; and He is the Savior of the body.


Ephesians 5:25 Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ also loved the church and gave Himself for it.


Ephesians 5:28-29 So husbands ought to love their own wives as their own bodies; he who loves his wife loves himself. For no one ever hated his own flesh, but nourishes and cherishes it, just as the Lord does the church.

The bible taught husbands and wives should be partners. One is meant to take the lead but only in so much as Jesus lead the church, and I dont know of any passage that supports the idea of a Jesus leading with ego or harshness. When the wife loves the husband as the church loved christ and vice versa,, it is as beautiful as a truly christ filled life is to God. There is no room for subjagation or abuse,as Christ did neither.

LOL, But is god not still superior to his church, are the church goers still not subservient to their god, are the church goers not being punished by the god.

There is nothing here that implies equality and mutual love. It all implies superior and subordinate.

Not how I want to live...lol

IM not clear how my post would make anyone think they didnt need to read for themselves. There are accounts of various views of women in the bible. The ones that were backed up by Jesus however, through his own behavior, were not those which placed women secondary. Being that Jesus brought Gods message, his would be the one I would expect to follow, his example stands before any others.

Well, It is up to all of us how we want to live. I accept and enjoy an orderly life where people are mutually respectful of each other yet recognize differences. As a child is to honor their mother and father, is not a bad thing with parents who love the child. It is neither a bad thing for a wife to honor her husband if her husband loves her. I have no problem with it and dont feel differences automatically equate to being superior or inferior.

I think it's more like this....


Don't walk in front of me,
I may not follow.

Don't walk behind me,
I may not lead.

Just walk beside me and be my friend.

IM not clear how my post would make anyone think they didnt need to read for themselves. There are accounts of various views of women in the bible. The ones that were backed up by Jesus however, through his own behavior, were not those which placed women secondary. Being that Jesus brought Gods message, his would be the one I would expect to follow, his example stands before any others.

Whether a married woman would be expected to go to work, or stay home and raise a family ultimately depends on her choice of a husband.

Not her husbands choice at all.

Mutual choice it is.

Matthew 5:32 (King James Version)

32But I say unto you, That whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery: and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery


--Perhaps because women were not permitted under law to divorce?--


Matthew 24:19 (King James Version)

19And woe unto them that are with child, and to them that give suck in those days!


- if you had born a child you would know its usually not exactly a party,, --


Matthew 25:1 (King James Version)
1Then shall the kingdom of heaven be likened unto ten virgins, which took their lamps, and went forth to meet the bridegroom

--a comparison of a feeling or a metaphor,,,---



To say that the bible is not simple to understand completely is not something I can disagree with,,b ut I think some deliberately misquote and paraphrase their way to points that arent truthful or valid.

Why's Jesus saying the laws that let men divorce but not women are right?

Child birth is difficult but we consider it a miracle, why did Jesus say it was to be pitied?

Yes, it's a metaphor that objectifies women. With the things that we don't take literally the message is even clearer.


But hey, it's clear that you want to stick your hands over your ears, close your eyes, and say lalala.