Men who act like women, Women, who act like men.

[Ora et Labora]

[quote name='photosynthesis' date='Sep 5 2005, 06:05 PM']This still doesn't address what I said earlier about ranking.  Unfortunately, in the society that we live in, male characteristics are thought of as better than those of women.  A man is the head of the household, and Christ is the head of the Church.  Men are supposed to love their wives as Christ loved the Church, women are supposed to submit to their husbands, to serve him as the Church serves Christ.

The Church is eternally submitted to Christ, and Christ (God) is always above the Church.

Would this not suggest that men are in some way better than women, because they are the ones in the "God" role, and women are in the "Church" role?

I'm a woman and this makes me feel uncomfortable.
[right][snapback]712353[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

What you said....

[cmotherofpirl]

"I still stand that masculine and feminine are social constructions, taught to children in the home and at school. The idea that girls need to be pretty and submissive to be loved is false, and we all know that. The idea that guys need to be strong and commanding and have a trophey wife is also incorrect. I don't want a husband to rule over me, I want a partner to raise children with. Men and women don't have to subscribe to these ideas of masculine and feminine to succeed in life, they have to be true to themselves and thier own habits, and one day they will find a partner who compliments them."

No. Masculine and feminine are innate characteristics shaped by what ever culture you happen to live in. They are not purely social constructs.

[photosynthesis]

aren't some of these gender differences also consequences of the Fall? specifically, submissiveness in women. God did say to Eve, "Yet your urge shall be for your husband, and he shall be your master," after the Fall.

[Socrates]

[quote name='photosynthesis' date='Sep 5 2005, 05:50 PM']Why would it ever be OK for a man to boast about having bedded 90 women?  That's just revolting.  Most people don't get married 90 times, so i would assume this would involve boasting about adultery, which is a mortal sin.  And who'd boast about mortal sin?  The idea that it is somehow more OK for men to be unchaste comes straight from the pit of hell.  Chastity is a virtue that everyone must strive for.

I firmly believe that if a woman is going to be submissive to her husband, then he needs to be just as chaste and just as faithful.
[right][snapback]712335[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

I am not in any way condoning this! I was simply pointing out how promiscuity especially goes against the natural virtues of a woman. I was not intending to imply that it is permissible for men.

I was speaking in this example of how men and women tend to behave naturally, not how they ought to behave as Christians. Most women, on their own, do not strive to be as promiscuous as they can.

[Socrates]

[quote name='photosynthesis' date='Sep 5 2005, 05:51 PM']Why would you post something if you didn't want people to read into it?
[right][snapback]712338[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

Sometimes, at the moment it's hard to come up with just the right words to express a point, and not see how words will be taken in the wrong way.

[photosynthesis]

[quote name='Socrates' date='Sep 5 2005, 08:12 PM']I am not in any way condoning this!  I was simply pointing out how promiscuity especially goes against the natural virtues of a woman.  I was not intending to imply that it is permissible for men.

I was speaking in this example of how men and women tend to behave naturally, not how they ought to behave as Christians.  Most women, on their own, do not strive to be as promiscuous as they can.
[right][snapback]712363[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
ah, I see. yeah, male promiscuity is disgusting... I don't know why women would want that.

[Guest pitcher]

[quote name='Norseman82' date='Sep 5 2005, 12:39 AM']I like the good ole days when men wore the tattoos and women wore the earrings....
[right][snapback]711458[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

Oh,, man, me too!!!

The most useful way I've found to look at the masculine-feminine issue is in the context of "vision", where I use the word in the psychological sense. What I mean is that men tend to be psychologically farsighted, or 'hyperopic', and women tend to be psychologically nearsighted, or 'myopic.' Men tend to focus their attention on the distance. They tend to look towards the horizon. Women tend to look at things within a relatively small circle centered on themselves.

I've never found a good way of accounting for the otherwise odd fact that God is God the Father. That's what Jesus called Him, so it must be true. And, of course, Jesus himself was male, as were the apostles. So, what it is about being male that inclined God to reveal himself that way? One obvious answer seems to be that God is the giver of laws or commandments. He gave Adam and Eve one commandment. Then He gave the Jews a bunch of them through Moses. Then Jesus, the Son of God, founded his Church, the Bride of Christ. Obviously female. So, what is there about the Church that makes her female?

Think about it. I live very close to a major courthouse. What does one find in the lobby of a courthouse? A figure of a woman, blindfolded, holding up the scales of justice. Males give the law. Females give justice.

To put it another way, males as lawgivers say, "This is what all people should do at all times, everywhere. God as Lawgiver says, "Thou (all of you) shalt not (ever) kill."

Females as justice, on the other hand, say, "Okay, given that, let's look at the particular circumstances and people involved here. Oh, self defence? This person is innocent!"

Men generalize. Women particularize. Men say things like, "Men make generalizations; women particularize." Women say things like, "You can't make generalizations like that!! Everybody's unique!!"

The thing is, neither of these aspects is wrong. Both are right; both are incomplete in themselves. Together, when men and women are acting out their proper roles, we have sound, stable communities. When either is trying to assume the other's proper role, things get screwed up. As they are at present.

[avemaria40]

[quote name='MichaelFilo' date='Sep 5 2005, 07:57 PM']We should all emulate Jesus, but Mary did it in such a way that would set the example for women. A woman could follow Jesus, but oculd she follow the example of Jesus in child-rearing? I suppose not, unless you are a fan of the Da Vinci Code. That is, Mary was a woman, and Jesus a man, and a woman may more readily connect with Mary when it comes to things that are specifically feminine, like child-rearing.

Now, whether women should act like women and men like men, you are arguing conventionality. PErsonally, If ind the home the natural abode of a female and the workplace that of a male's. Lo and behold, I go to one of the top schools in the US as far as acadmics, and the women do make such a sour face at such suggestions and call me a bigot and a sexist. However, I still find it silly when a woman says a man belongs in the home more than she; he cannot bear children nor breastfeed them. Equally ridiculous is the woman who works instead of rearing children. It is a sad day when 2 children are enough. I have often told my mother that the marriage bond holds as one of it's purposes the procreation of the human race and that is the first duty of both male and female entering into one. Putting the job first is an error on both sides of this stick. Seriously, I agree, women should act like women, and men should act like men. And in the case of femininity and masculinity, people fall into line by themselves, and there will always be exceptions. However, the current trend for both male and female to stay away from the home in exchange for long hours at the job is really disturbing. Thats why I'm glad I'm related to several families that have 10 kids each, and boy are they the holiest families ever, rich too, but not materialistic at all. It's beautiful. So I agree. Men and women need to fall into their roles, on the strictly biological sense.

God bless,
Mikey
[right][snapback]712348[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

Hey Mikey, i see ur point esp. since i would love to have many children and breastfeed them if God sees fit to bless me w/children if i am called to the married life. but i also would like to hold down a job as well. I am good at many things and even have a scholarship oppurtunity already for my schoolwork, and it just seems a waste if i can't share my gifts with others. Also, some female saints have not stayed home with children but went out into the world, as i have pointed out in my posts. And i really do hate it that careers seem more important than children and women should not try to act like men

[philothea]

[quote name='photosynthesis' date='Sep 5 2005, 06:05 PM']This still doesn't address what I said earlier about ranking.  Unfortunately, in the society that we live in, male characteristics are thought of as better than those of women.  A man is the head of the household, and Christ is the head of the Church.  Men are supposed to love their wives as Christ loved the Church, women are supposed to submit to their husbands, to serve him as the Church serves Christ.

The Church is eternally submitted to Christ, and Christ (God) is always above the Church.

Would this not suggest that men are in some way better than women, because they are the ones in the "God" role, and women are in the "Church" role?

I'm a woman and this makes me feel uncomfortable.
[right][snapback]712353[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
Male attributes may be considered greater, as you say, "in the society that we live in." But the society that we live in is malformed.

I am sorry if I offend anyone, but obedience and humility are greater virtues than strength and leadership. Mary was the greatest wholly human person ever created, because of her hiddenness, humility, and obedience: all those "feminine" virtues. Great men strive for these virtues above all others too.

(I am struck by the irony of the original meaning of "virtue" in this conversation. Ha, how I amuse myself.)

[photosynthesis]

[quote name='pitcher' date='Sep 5 2005, 08:19 PM']The thing is, neither of these aspects is wrong. Both are right; both are incomplete in themselves. Together, when men and women are acting out their proper roles, we have sound, stable communities. When either is trying to assume the other's proper role, things get screwed up. As they are at present.
[right][snapback]712369[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
I agree with this, thanks for clarifying.

[photosynthesis]

[quote name='avemaria40' date='Sep 5 2005, 08:21 PM']Also, some female saints have not stayed home with children but went out into the world, as i have pointed out in my posts.[right][snapback]712372[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
like St. Gianna! she was a doctor.

[Cathurian]

We all know there are differences.

I'm not defining masculinity and femininity, as that's a bit difficult, but I think we can all agree that these two qualities do exist and we have a general idea of what they are.

There are actions which have varying degrees of femininity and masculinity to them. It's almost as if you could assign a rough numerical value to actions, with 0 being completely neutral, +x being feminine and -x being masculine. A very masculine person would have a high negative number and a very feminine one a high positive number. People closer to the middle would have a low number on one side or the other, depending on whether they are more masculine or feminine.

And there's a certain value which it is unacceptable to cross.

There are differences between men and women, notably, in that men are never going to have a high positive value and women will never have a strong negative one.

In my opinion. I might not be the best person to listen to, but here it is for discussion.

[White Knight]

[quote name='ReinnieR' date='Sep 5 2005, 02:57 PM']so you're saying i'm in the wrong here because i'm metrosexual??

and i'm the princess of open mic
[right][snapback]712184[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]


There is no such thing as a metrosexual, that is a term that was recently made up people are ethier heteralsexually, bisexually, or homosexually.

[Paladin D]

[quote name='White Knight' date='Sep 5 2005, 09:39 PM']There is no such thing as a metrosexual, that is a term that was recently made up people are ethier heteralsexually, bisexually, or homosexually.
[right][snapback]712467[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

Metrosexual is a term used strictly for [b]straight men[/b], that are into things that are considered feminine in a way.

[White Knight]

[quote name='Paladin D' date='Sep 5 2005, 08:43 PM']Metrosexual is a term used strictly for [b]straight men[/b], that are into things that are considered feminine in a way.
[right][snapback]712470[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]


No offence but it sounds more like a cityname lol, rather than a sexual type.