• Biblical Families is not a dating website. It is a forum to discuss issues relating to marriage and the Bible, and to offer guidance and support, not to find a wife. Click here for more information.

The land that feminism forgot

Doc

Member
Real Person
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/artic ... iness.html

Have you wondered what life would be like if feminism had never happened? If we were all housewives? If we were not required to live on our wits and our adrenaline, and were able to take up a hobby? If men were happy to step up to the mark and look after us?

Am I talking about travelling back in time to see what life was like in the Fifties? No, it is much simpler than that. I am catching a flight to Amsterdam.

A recent report reveals that fewer than ten per cent of Dutch women work full-time, and they face one of the highest wage gaps in Europe. But the surprise is it’s not just mums with young families who work only two or three days a week, or older women who care for elderly relatives: it is child-free women in their 20s and 30s, too.

And, it seems, it makes them incredibly happy. A new book, Dutch Women Don’t Get Depressed, explains that the reason they don’t is because the majority work part-time. They earn less and have less. Many live off their partner. But they don’t care. They want to relax, read a book, see their friends.

Studies show that Dutch women don’t want to spend more time at work: they refuse extended hours at their jobs, even if they don’t have children. And they are horrified by British women’s lack of free time.

I have travelled to Holland to find out why women here don’t want equality, professional fulfilment, independence and autonomy and power and . . . lovely things!

Are they not bored, and worried about having no identity? Where is their ambition?

I meet Maaike Voorhoeve, 30, and we compare notes. I tell her I work 75 hours a week, haven’t had a day off since Christmas, and that to me my job is my identity. When I was features editor on a daily paper, I had lunch away from my desk once in five years.

Consequently, I have very few friends, and I’m exhausted. I’ve only seen my mum once this year, and my new boyfriend complains that even out for a romantic dinner, I’m always sending emails. I might have nice things, but I don’t have time to enjoy them.

Maaike tells me about her life. I am soon jealous. She is studying for her Phd in law, has a boyfriend, but no children. I ask how many hours a week she works. ‘Well,’ she says. ‘I am very sensitive to stress, and as soon as I start feeling tense I come to this cafe.’

How many hours a day does she spend here, drinking coffee and talking? ‘Oh, three hours a day. I like to do some form of sport, too. I run three times a week.’

Another woman in the cafe interrupts. She tells me she is 32, childless, and works four hours a week. ‘Dutch women meet friends for lunch, we visit family, we exercise, we work on who we are.

‘We sometimes feel sorry for the men who are stuck in the office all day, but not that often.’ What does she do all day? ‘I garden!’

'We sometimes feel sorry for the men who are stuck in the office all day, but not that often'

I’m aghast. These women are obviously intelligent. But, they see enjoying life as more important than having a career. Can we learn something from them?

The Dutch divorce rate is, after all, one of the lowest in Europe, but are couples forced to put up with each other, given the woman’s greater financial dependence?

Yes, of course in Holland there are many women who work full-time, at low-paid, unfulfilling jobs: immigrant workers in the catering trade, for example. It is the middle-class Dutch woman who has chosen to turn her back on the corporate world.

Even Dutch high-fliers don’t see a career as the most important thing in their life. A female newspaper editor was quoted in the Press recently as saying: ‘We look at the world of management — and it is a man’s world — and we think: “Oh, I could do that if I wanted. But I’d rather enjoy my life.” ’

I speak to yet another graduate: Margje van Haeften, 35, teaches children with behavioural problems three days a week. She lives with her boyfriend, who works full-time.

‘I was struggling, working five days. I would do the same thing every day, I was tired, and I had no energy for my social life. I knew I didn’t want to feel like that for my whole life.

‘But then I studied life coaching, and became more self-confident, and decided to cut down my hours. I was nervous telling my boss at first, but he told me not to worry.’

I ask how this affects the dynamic between her and her boyfriend. ‘I do more housework than he does, but I don’t feel I have to always make dinner for him. I have more time for him.’

But does he respect you? Isn’t this set-up a little old-fashioned? ‘No, it’s more modern. Our relationship is better. I take photos, I go to the gym. We can manage financially. I’m much happier.’
Tranquility: In Amsterdam, many women are free to enjoy walks and cycles around the city instead of working full-time

Tranquility: In Amsterdam, many women are free to enjoy walks and cycles around the city instead of working full-time

The main difference I can find between Dutch women and their British counterparts is that they are much less concerned with material things.

Debby Nobel, the 34-year-old deputy editor of Dutch Grazia, does work five days a week, but tells me that: ‘Dutch women would rather live in a small house, and only eat out occasionally, than work all the time.

‘All my friends say they want to work to live, not live to work. There is no credit card culture here. But men do tend to pay for stuff, and they don’t seem to mind. That is they way they were brought up.’

I ask if she resents the part-timers. ‘On a Friday afternoon, this building is deserted,’ she says. ‘If you are a mum, fine, but if you are a normal girl, why? Not a lot of Dutch women like to be called feminists. They won’t work longer hours. They leave university, and go into a part-time job. They say it’s about self-development, they want to write a book…’

'Being a mum is more important to me than a job. There is not a culture of nannies here'

I sympathise. I wouldn’t dream of employing someone whose sole ambition was to sit in a cafe for three hours a day. But Yvonne van Nielen, a 34-year-old with a young son, who works four days a week as a designer on Grazia, disagrees. She believes part-timers work more intensively than full-timers.

‘We pack the work of five days into four. But, yes, being a mum is more important to me than a job. There is not a culture of nannies here.’

I get a cab to the suburbs to meet Lisa Zwaaneveldt, a young mum. Her apartment is immaculate: all polished floors, mid-20th-century furniture, toys stored neatly. It’s all so different from the homes of my super busy friends who are mums.

I once went back for dinner with a female TV newsreader, and when we got to her £3 million home I looked at her hallway, strewn with detritus, and said: ‘Oh my god, you’ve been burgled!’ ‘Nah,’ she said, throwing her coat on a pile. ‘This is normal.’

Lisa is 33, and has an 18-month-old son, Dave. Her husband works full-time as a chef. When I ask what she does for a living, she replies: ‘Full-time housewife,’ without a hint of an apology. ‘I used to work as a PA, and the men expected their wives to stay home,’ she says. ‘There is pressure to be a good wife, to be a good cook, to keep the home nice.’

Would she call herself a feminist? ‘No.’ Do she feel vulnerable? ‘I used to earn a lot of money, so I know I could again. I am training to be a beauty therapist, so I will work one day, just not full-time.’

I’m starting to wonder how men in the Netherlands feel. It turns out they don’t go Dutch at all: they tend to pay for everything.

But then I meet a young man heading home at Schipol train station, arms full of tulips. ‘Do you have a girlfriend?’ ‘Yes.’ ‘Does she work full-time?’ ‘Are you kidding? No, it is my job to worship her, to make her happy and fulfilled.’

Maybe the Dutch women have got the right idea, after all.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/artic ... iness.html
 
Interesting, the DM is a tabloid, it isn't usually considered a beacon of serious journalism, it has featured quite a few Anti Polygamy articles and is rampant in its distaste towards Polygynous relationships and especially the men in them.

It is a pretty narrow article though, I don't see much difference between the Dutch and the Germans, in regards to how many women work part time or study later in life, however, I think it is interesting that she chose the more socially progressive Dutch (very liberal ideas about sex) than the conservative Germans for her article, could it just be that the Germans do not have the same level of psychological health that supports the premise of the article?

B
 
A secular approach to polygamy.

In any first world society there will be a minority of women who will oppose feminism, and this will be the case in the Netherlands.

One way for an anti feminist to oppose feminism is to support polygamy. I see a future in the Netherlands, and any first world society, where upmarket suburbs have large houses, each house accommodating a harem of wives. These anti feminist wives may work part time or not at all, and take pride in being polygamous, and their husbands take pride in supporting their wives and giving them contented, carefree lives.

Such harems will be in a minority, but there seems no reason, in the long term, why a polygamous minority will not be accepted, particularly if polygamous marriage is presented in a favourable light.
 
I am not a feminist per say, but I think that it is very important to accept that we needed a feminist movement. There was a time when women were not educated, not allowed to enter the workforce if they chose, and were not given fair treatment in the court of law. Yes, we all understand that in many families women were treated well. They were able to stay home and tend to their families and homes, but what about the young women who ended up working in sweat shops, brothels, and incarcerated in institutions with men, or the women who were simply stuck in abusive marriages because they had no recourse?

I have wondered what a life without feminism would be like and I have concluded that if we didn't have strong women leading the feminist movement throughout history in the western world, then I and many women across this country would be in a sorry state. A world untouched by feminism would be a horrid place. Even Margaret Sanger, as evil and as repulsive as she was, improved the quality of health care for women. Sometimes we have to take the bad with the good and recognize that we don't want to go back to what once was. Those who truly feel that feminism wasn't necessary need to take a quick Google tour of the atrocities that happen in the east where feminism is only beginning to touch the lives of women.

Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.
 
My old very conservative pastor, when asked why he supported a Mormon based legislation in our state responded, "Politics indeed makes strange bedfellows." Me thinks he was pragmatic politically yet quite a purist in the pulpit. Does the common goal of women's rights make the political alignment with others that normally would wish us ill will a good strategy? I remember in the OT when even ungodly kings were used by God for His glory and the protection of His children.
Were the crimes against women so heinous that it was ok to subjugate patriarchy to feminism or is that a proper way to view it? Another question is, "Can biblical patriarchy exist in a world of feminism?" The societal track of the world is leaning heavily toward feminism in first world countries and the push is on for third-world countries(and religions). Can we promote the destruction of worldly patriarchy/oppression and yet maintain our own? It seems it is almost self-destructive if not just incongruent. Parallel thought: can we cheer on the world for doing something we were/are not able to do? (Protect the vulnerable) Are we helping to sharpen the sword that may ultimately be used on us? Political savy and wisdom need to meet somewhere.
Maddog
 
"Does the common goal of women's rights make the political alignment with others that normally would wish us ill will a good strategy?"

I am not quite sure what you are asking here?

"Were the crimes against women so heinous that it was ok to subjugate patriarchy to feminism or is that a proper way to view it?"

Yes, absolutely. The crimes against women were heinous and still ARE heinous.

No, that is not the proper way to view it. Patriarchs are strong leaders who are not afraid of a woman who is self sufficient, intelligent and thriving because he sees her as an asset rather than a beast of burden to whip into compliance. Feminism did not subjugate patriarchy. Feminism slowly crept in because women were being subjugated by men who were not leaders, not strong, not respectable, NOT Patriarchs. Feminism came about in defense of stonings, lashings, abandonment, abuse, neglect, lack of honor for women... need I go on?

"Can biblical patriarchy exist in a world of feminism?"

Yes. A woman who is intelligent, independent, and capable, who is willing to bow her knee to a husband's authority should be valued above all else by any man who claims to be a patriarch. Authority taken in any manner, other than freely given, is not authority. It is oppression. A women should respect and love her husband because he deserves loves and respect. Not because she will be beaten mentally or physically or has no other choice.
 
Lysistrata said:
Authority taken in any manner, other than freely given, is not authority. It is oppression. A women should respect and love her husband because he deserves loves and respect. Not because she will be beaten mentally or physically or has no other choice.

Excellent, excellent point!!!!!


*relief....*

Bels
 
Lysistrata said:
"Does the common goal of women's rights make the political alignment with others that normally would wish us ill will a good strategy?"

I am not quite sure what you are asking here?

"Were the crimes against women so heinous that it was ok to subjugate patriarchy to feminism or is that a proper way to view it?"

Yes, absolutely. The crimes against women were heinous and still ARE heinous.

No, that is not the proper way to view it. Patriarchs are strong leaders who are not afraid of a woman who is self sufficient, intelligent and thriving because he sees her as an asset rather than a beast of burden to whip into compliance. Feminism did not subjugate patriarchy. Feminism slowly crept in because women were being subjugated by men who were not leaders, not strong, not respectable, NOT Patriarchs. Feminism came about in defense of stonings, lashings, abandonment, abuse, neglect, lack of honor for women... need I go on?

"Can biblical patriarchy exist in a world of feminism?"

Yes. A woman who is intelligent, independent, and capable, who is willing to bow her knee to a husband's authority should be valued above all else by any man who claims to be a patriarch. Authority taken in any manner, other than freely given, is not authority. It is oppression. A women should respect and love her husband because he deserves loves and respect. Not because she will be beaten mentally or physically or has no other choice.

Oh Lord, can we have lunch??!!

What particular rights of women are tearing down the house????

The right to vote? The right to equal pay for equal work? The right to choose if they want to work or not? The right to an education??? The 'right' not to be raped by their abusive husbands? I'm sorta confused about how allowing women basic rights erodes society.

When I was young my dad was so abusive to my mom and us that she would drive us around in the car until it was out of gas, then we had to go back home. WHY??? Because she couldn't escape an abusive home. WHY??? Because in the early sixties women couldn't rent apartments without a husbands or dads signature on the lease; because there were no shelters for battered women; there was no social network to help distressed families with food, shelter, etc. You know what else??? No church or caring neighbors came to her defense.

My mom drilled into my sisters and I to 'get your education and have your own money so this never happens to you.' Everyone, including men' EARN respect by being respectable. Period.

Respect is earned; Friendship is earned. The feminist movement may not be all good to all people, but it certainly isn't all bad either. Maybe if men stepped up and became the men worthy of respect and leadership they wouldn't be so threatened by the perceived 'liberated women'.

Most women I know want to be in a worthy relationship. We just don't feel the need to 'lower our standards' of requiring those who we date/marry to have job skills that will enable them to earn a decent living so they can provide a stable home; act like adults instead of perpetual teenagers; show respect to the people they interact with every day; you know, like their families and co-workers, and silly stuff like that.

I think men and should take a long look at themselves and ask "Exactly what am I bringing to this relationship?"...Am I worth it?"
 
Thanks DonnaG for the invite (tongue in cheek of course). It is interesting the potluck table of backgrounds and ideas that come to this forum. My background is not quite opposite from yours but close. Whereas the "abuse" was never rape, there was much unkindness from a controlling and dominant mother particularly toward my father. Did he "deserve" respect from mom even though he was a gentle and soft-spoken man? He was not a typical "leader" in that he was never in positions of authority nor did he strive to be. So by all outward appearance, he did not "deserve" respect. But he loved his children and did love his wife, loved his God and served in church. Feminism in my mind would welcome the roughshod treatment of the mild-mannered men. In an unregenerate world, might makes right. I have no problem with strong women at all but along with the strength there needs to be a meekness- an ability to be led. Worldly feminism occludes that. How else could a saved woman who lived with an unsaved man win that man to Christ without a word but through profound strength of character? In this forum which is typically christian, perhaps a qualification of feminism in general as regarding believers and our ideals in CONTRAST to what the "world" has to peddle. Do we really wish to elevate feminism to the ninth(I think that's the correct number) fruit of the Spirit- along with Love, Joy, Peace, Longsuffering,...etc?
 
Maddog said:
I have no problem with strong women at all but along with the strength there needs to be a meekness- an ability to be led. Worldly feminism occludes that. How else could a saved woman who lived with an unsaved man win that man to Christ without a word but through profound strength of character?

This is a problem I find with 'Christians' in general The 'we love strong women as long as they aren't really strong' mentality. It really turns me off. By the same hand let me ask you this, How can a godly man win the heart of his wife to his particular view on a lifestyle when he is telling her 'he can love more than one, and at the same time telling her his patience is running out and if she doesnt accept his lifestyle he may have to go on without her?

You seem to indicate that a wife must endure all in everthing out of a love for God, who will give her 'profound strengeth of character', but a husband doesn't. Is that correct?

I've never really seen a man who earns respect, be disrespected. I've seen plenty who think they deserve all manor of things just by virtue of being alive. You cannot mandate or demand love and respect.

Maddog said:
I have no problem with strong women at all but along with the strength there needs to be a meekness- an ability to be led.

Same goes for men.
 
1Co 11:3 But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God.

We are strongest when we are doing God's will. When I am doing God's will I am capable of being led. When hubby is doing God's will he is capable of being led. The question is who are we capable of being led by.

I believe that if we are truly feminine (not feminist) we will be answering God's call on our lives regardless of what those around us do. And if our husbands are true men of God they will answer that call on their life regardless of what anyone around them does. So if a woman keeps her husband from following God's will in his (and as a result her) life, then she is not being submissive. Therefore she is not answering the call on her life and therefore she is not strong.

The biggest theme in my life so far is that God wants us to do the opposite of what the world wants us to do, no matter how little sense it makes.


SweetLissa
 
Well I'm in no hurry to turn back time to when a woman couldn't have her own checking account, mortgage or decent job prospect.

I still say that I've never seen a man worth following that wasn't being followed. I've never seen a leader worth following that wasn't being followed. I've never seen a respectful person that wasn't respected in return.

As for the idea that women are to blame for men not being allowed to be the good leaders of society....please give me a break.
 
I have a checking account and a career. Submission has nothing to do with any of that. Submission means following after the head of my household who is following after God. The point is not that I am in charge of my life but that God is in charge of my life. I don't want to get to the end of my life thinking I was so great because of this, that and the next thing only to find out that I entirely missed what God had for my life.

What you are talking about is not submission but inequality. We are different but equal. And not in the sense that the African-Americans were different but equal. That was manufactured by man. This is created by God

SweetLissa
 
DocInMO said:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-1364690/Have-Dutch-women-secret-happiness.html

Have you wondered what life would be like if feminism had never happened? If we were all housewives? If we were not required to live on our wits and our adrenaline, and were able to take up a hobby? If men were happy to step up to the mark and look after us?

Am I talking about travelling back in time to see what life was like in the Fifties? No, it is much simpler than that. I am catching a flight to Amsterdam.

A recent report reveals that fewer than ten per cent of Dutch women work full-time, and they face one of the highest wage gaps in Europe. But the surprise is it’s not just mums with young families who work only two or three days a week, or older women who care for elderly relatives: it is child-free women in their 20s and 30s, too.

And, it seems, it makes them incredibly happy. A new book, Dutch Women Don’t Get Depressed, explains that the reason they don’t is because the majority work part-time. They earn less and have less. Many live off their partner. But they don’t care. They want to relax, read a book, see their friends.

This article is about lifestyles not religious belief systems. It is making the point that in Holland women are happy to live off their boyfriends and why they're happy to earn less and have less so they can have more leisure time. Seems like they NEVER get depressed and all is well in Holland where they are free to pursue hobbies all day long. I wonder how they pay their rent?

My point is that if you choose to be a stay at home person, all fine and well, but if you choose a career instead of a large family that should be ok too. I just get tired of women who want careers and to be independent being trivialized. NOTE: One of my friends is from Holland and she is very educated and has a great career, no kids and is actually happy, If you dare to believe that. Believe it or not, not all of us 'women' want to be housewives.
 
On second thought.....being 'economically inactive' in Holland looks pretty good.

Just look up any link on the Social Security System in Holland and you can find this info, I lost the link I copied this from.

The Social Security System
The public health and social security system in the Netherlands is comprehensive but expensive. The country has a high percentage of "economically inactive" citizens claiming one or more benefits. To further complicate matters, with effect from 1 January 2006 the Healthcare Insurance Act (Zorgverzekeringswet) came into force and the former two-tier public/private healthcare system has been replaced by a single system for everyone.

Social security in the Netherlands falls into two categories: social welfare benefits (sociale voorzieningen) and social insurance benefits (sociale verzekeringen). There are also other benefits such as housing subsidies (not normally available to temporary residents) and educational funding which are not dealt with here.

Social welfare benefits are financed from government funds and are intended to provide a basic level of assistance which is means-tested
Social insurance benefits are mostly funded from employee contributions to the system and it is compulsory for employees and the self-employed to contribute. These contributions cover illness, disability and unemployment
In addition, national insurance schemes (volksverzekeringen) cover old-age benefits, death benefits, long-term invalidity, some medical expenses and child allowances. They apply to anyone with a Dutch residence permit

Guess they can afford to be housewives.
 
DonnaG wrote,
I've never really seen a man who earns respect, be disrespected. I've seen plenty who think they deserve all manor of things just by virtue of being alive. You cannot mandate or demand love and respect.
Perhaps we have traveled in uniquely different circles of life, but I see it all the time. I saw it in my parents and in members of churches from several different states. I see it in society around me, everywhere I go. You are incorrect in saying, "You cannot mandate or demand love and respect." It happens all the time, though it shouldn't. In our modern feminist state in America our people are bombarded with media onslaughts and broadsides from education and science telling us that women, minorities, alternative lifestyles and diverse religious views are to be tolerated, respected and even embraced if we are going to be part of this society. I have no problem with accepting anyone or anything on it's own merit and genuine value, so, really, I am not prejudiced against anyone. I do however, have a problem being told that someone must be given place and privilege because of their minority status or because of the suffering of others like them. I have encountered many, many women who have suffered mistreatment because of brutal men. but I have seen many more suffer the consequences of broken homes and families because of their rebellious spirit and the lack of good sense of when to keep their mouth closed and their thoughts to themselves. When police respond to domestic violence calls, they have to be very alert, because in most cases the "abused" woman turns on the police in defense of the man that she complained about. She didn't want deliverance, just a hand getting the uppermost of the man she was fighting with.
The issue of respect being earned, that is correct, but it is a two edged blade, it cuts both men and women and it affects both those who must be worthy of giving respect as well as those worthy of receiving it.
It is no mistake that we find in the three times in the NT where the roles of men and women are repeated, (Ephesians 5, Colossians and Peter) that God speaks to the women first, before addressing the men. The soil of our hearts need be broken up and fertile before seed will grow, meaning a woman must first be able or capable of respecting her man before she will ever see his worthiness or unworthiness. I grant you, ashamedly, that way far too many men have not stepped up to the plate of life and attempted a home run for their family. I wish it were not so, but it is. Commonly, they were never taught to be men, first by their mothers and then by their fathers. A good wife can help her husband be a better man, but NEVER by lording it over him or exercising authority in his life. And nagging just doesn't get it done.
Women ar among the most powerful people in the world IF AND WHEN they are content to be godly women. It is an extremely rare and brutish man that will not bend over backward to please a godly woman. She doesn't even have to be related to him, no obligation. When God created woman, He did His best work. If Christian women would be happy to be what God designed them to be, they would enjoy the benefit of His design.
Proverbs 31:28-31
Her children arise up, and call her blessed; her husband also, and he praiseth her. Many daughters have done virtuously, but thou excellest them all. Favour is deceitful, and beauty is vain: but a woman that feareth the LORD, she shall be praised. Give her of the fruit of her hands; and let her own works praise her in the gates.
 
John Whitten said:
In our modern feminist state in America our people are bombarded with media onslaughts and broadsides from education and science telling us that women, minorities, alternative lifestyles and diverse religious views are to be tolerated, respected and even embraced if we are going to be part of this society. I have no problem with accepting anyone or anything on it's own merit and genuine value, so, really, I am not prejudiced against anyone. I do however, have a problem being told that someone must be given place and privilege because of their minority status or because of the suffering of others like them.

I'm glad you found a way to tolerate and respect women. That will make me sleep better.

Again this article was not about a religious system, it is about how wonderful it is to live off the system and boyfriends and socialize with one's friends and never grow up and take responsibility for supporting ones self because it's much more 'fun' to do other things with your day.
 
Ah, where to begin.....
If I was a woman, that would be quite a temptation- have society take care of me and I get my boyfriend too! Sign me up- no wait, is this really a good idea? Is it a good idea for an individual to not contribute to society but rather consume all the good things and get all upset when life doesn't go their way?
There is tremendous value to being productive at something, anything, rather than just be a chatty chum. It is destructive to the human experience and existance. I dare say that having no requirements in life will be followed closely by having no God in life because they have no longer any need. The soul that cries out to God for redress of grievances done by others at least cries out to God. They that have a full tummy that never worked for it, or a bed they never made will rarely say thanks to the Almighty for His benevolence.
But wait, do men have that kind of choice? Not really. A man that doesn't work is still counted as being lazy. Being unemployed to a man is not just poverty in his pocketbook, it becomes poverty in his soul.
I already have a problem with government mandating anything let alone more tax money going to folks that refuse to participate in society.
It is unfortunate DonnaG that you missed the point of John's post by replying that he has found a way to tolerate women. I doubt seriously that is truly what he was saying but he can speak for himself.
What if feminism never happened? Which brand, I must ask? The brand that moved forward the equality of gender and (a) demanded a newly hired woman to make the same as a man that has been at the job for 20 to 30 years or, (b) that earns pay commensurate with experience? Or is it the brand that becomes a powerful voting block for, (a) righteous causes or, (b) the most sensitive and good looking candidate? Feminism has led the charge to brand men as hateful rapists. I know- I was there.
We cannot afford to see only the beneficial aspects of such an ideal and blindly look the other way when injustice is committed. There indeed was extreme injustice when it(feminism) did not exist but truly the answer is not to take away the whip from the man only to allow the women to wield it. The world has worldly answers, Gods children need to have Godly answers. We do what we can by legislation, God does the regeneration. Good laws created by man indeed help to protect the vulnerable.
The answer to the pain that women feel is the same as for men- God at work in my life to transform and change me from what I was to what God wants me to be.
Which is more difficult: a wife/woman to act like the church, or a man to lead like Christ? By far the greater task is for a man to pattern his life after Christ. It is a harder calling and one sometimes difficult to understand. It's absurd to think that the church (the bride) would berate the Christ. Should it not also be as absurd for the wife to berate the husband? Yet it is openly acknowledged as occuring among believers. Brothers and sisters, this ought not be so among us.
 
donnag said:
My point is that if you choose to be a stay at home person, all fine and well, but if you choose a career instead of a large family that should be ok too. I just get tired of women who want careers and to be independent being trivialized. NOTE: One of my friends is from Holland and she is very educated and has a great career, no kids and is actually happy, If you dare to believe that. Believe it or not, not all of us 'women' want to be housewives.

As I wrote already, the Dutch are not that different from the Germans when it comes to the fact that many wives only work part time and some don't work at all, in general there is not the economic pressure to consume that you have in other Western countries. It is amusing that the UK's Daily Mail mixes lack of ambition to anti feminist ideals, it is, of course very long running confluence that anything liberal = socialist ideals so using this socialist, liberal country as a beacon of anti feminism is pretty desperate.

One of the most independent women I know is also Dutch, she wears stockings and heels every day, she spends her evenings mending and making do, she cooks from scratch and is, by all accounts the perfect period housewife(her work is sporadic and low paid) but she has no husband or boyfriend (no, she isn't a lesbian). She just has a happy life living the way she chooses to and to me, that is what feminism is about.

Bels
 
John Whitten said:
but I have seen many more suffer the consequences of broken homes and families because of their rebellious spirit and the lack of good sense of when to keep their mouth closed and their thoughts to themselves. When police respond to domestic violence calls, they have to be very alert, because in most cases the "abused" woman turns on the police in defense of the man that she complained about. She didn't want deliverance, just a hand getting the uppermost of the man she was fighting with.

:shock:

And people wonder why so many are abandoning mainstream faiths..... :cry:

A very sad, B
 
Back
Top