Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

What are people's perceptions on the patriarchal nature of Christian and Muslim religions? It seems unfair that only men (Pope, Ayatollah, Bishops, etc.) are given all these positions of power and respect in most religions. Where is the representation for women here? Are women happy with this religious social construct? Do they even care?
I don't want to be like that which I criticize so I'm not saying that women MUST have problems with these issues (considering I am a guy), I am just wondering what the view on this issue is from women AND men. All opinions from everyone, please.

If a woman gained power in the Southern Baptist Church, for example, they would stand up and yell about how atheists and homosexuals and Muslims and every one else are going to Hell, just like their male counterparts; if you're going to be a member of a universally intolerant religion, you sort of give up the right to complain when your religion starts repressing you, in my opinion. Same with Islam.

Meanwhile, in liberal Protestant denominations, women are often allowed to rise to positions of power, so it's hardly a universal Christian thing.

Your suggesting women would just blindly follow the ideological male concensus of the respective religion they are apart of. So actually there would be no sort variation of ideas. I see your point. Certain religions themselves don't allow room for new ideas and revolutionary thought among their members, so a women in a respectable and more equal position to that of her male counterpart wouldn't really be any different than having some, for example, radically conservative preacher.

Do you really think God said that women can't be priests? Also, just because women in our, and most, cultures are supdued and tend to be very passive doesn't mean they can't be strong and aggresive.

The muslim men who like to have their women dress from head to toe in black robes in 100 f degree weather and then have them always walk 5 feet behind them are definitely suffering from some sort of complex. I don't understand that treatment of women. I don't want to sound like some sort of self-radical liberator who feels these women have to stop following this custom but they should at least be allowed to be educated and taught that there are other cultures where they can dress, talk, and act in a more free way.

It simply reflects a paradigmatic shift in societal views.

This has since swung somewhat back the other way, but it is still obvious in religion, and some cultures.

This is because these are areas of life where we are scared to intrude.

Women used to be in positions of leadership until the Patriarchal church was established and down casted women as sinful, evil, dirty and vile. Before that women where very much looked up to in religions, many.

Women will never be equal to men in Christianity. The doctrine is anti women. I am a Buddhist, and Buddhism is the only religion where a woman is truly equal to a man. Some 3000 years ago Buddha in the Lotus Sutra stated that woman will also gain enlightenment and he was the first to have nuns and monks.

It is true that in earlier sutras Buddha said that women can not gain enlightenment, but in the Lotus Sutra (one of his last Sutras) he had a change of heart. Witch goes to show that even Buddha was able to grow and change.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Women will never be equal to men in Christianity. The doctrine is anti women. I am a Buddhist, and Buddhism is the only religion where a woman is truly equal to a man. Some 3000 years ago Buddha in the Lotus Sutra stated that woman will also gain enlightenment and he was the first to have nuns and monks.

It is true that in earlier sutras Buddha said that women can not gain enlightenment, but in the Lotus Sutra (one of his last Sutras) he had a change of heart. Witch goes to show that even Buddha was able to grow and change. The ability to see fault in ones thinking and changing to more new truths are something admirable. The believers in the bible will never do that...It's "Gods word is the same yesterday, today, and tomorrow." No evolution at all..Same as the Koran I suspect. As long as people adhere to an old outdated belief there will be no change in view, and the gap will grow even wider as thought changes and old books don't...Funny though, if a person did his/her studies they would see how the bible was formulated to cast out matriarchal in favor of patriarchal leaders in worship, though I think it should at least be equal.

So what, if anything, should be done about this? Do you think we, men and women, should actively try to make changes in certain cultures to give women more of a say in their respective cultures or should we not do anything and stick to the argument that if the women are content with the way things are we should leave them to their own devices. I think a good middle ground for helping to get women more rights is simply to fight for their, and everyones, right to a satisfactory education. This posses problems, though. Many societies will not tolerate their unrepresentated population getting a handout of free education. How else will these people understand other people if their own people who rule wont let them?

It's not unfair that only men get those positions. I don't know where all this bullshit about "equality" came from. Women should be making our dinner, not trying to mess with our shit.

Originally posted by Uberking Robert
It's not unfair that only men get those positions. I don't know where all this bullshit about "equality" came from. Women should be making our dinner, not trying to mess with our shit.

You need to rethink your position.

Women were part of OT scripture and even in some NT scripture as well along with the earlier religions..Women held equall positions, and in many religions they were the leaders. The idea of women leading a congregation in worship should not be threatening. I don't see why it would be unless the men have an ego problem. Though it was Paul and paul alone who said women had no authority which later through out history became horrid as were not allowed to sit with their husbands in church, but on the other side of the church, keep silent have not say, couldn't vote...etc...All stemmed from what the church twisted in reference to Paul.

Women have been denied leadership roles, they are told to be submissive, and religious doctrines are used to control them both in society and the family. Women have always held important leadership roles in the churches, but men have resented this and kept them as far in the background as possible.

However, I am proud that our cardinal Godfried Daneels added his voice to the chorus calling for women to be admitted as Catholic priests.

As far as Arabia goes, before Islam, women were allowed to be priestesses, and many were. In fact 2 out of 3 biggest revolts against Islam came from women which were priestesses.

Since Islam is almost exactly the same in practice as Judaism, then I guess many customs have been adopted from there. Christianity is the same - women were never allowed to be in position of power, because, if you remember, it was Eve's fault for the original sin - woman was seen as a traitorous snake.

I don't think women need to be in that position of power. We have other duties and obligations to perform. I'm not saying that as a sexist remark either. I know so many roll eyes at the Mormon religion, but in the structure of our church...women have an orginization called the Relief Society. We use this organization to learn how to better raise our children with the gospel, support our husbands in their callings, and we are very much about helping others in need and doing service projects which can range anywhere from volunteering to making dinner for one of the sisters in the church that is ill or just had a baby...or perhaps to bring meals and offer assistance to a family that has recently lost someone. Besides that, we have teachers who teach children's classes, young adult classes, and of course the Relief Society presidency and teachers, Sunday school, visiting teaching, putting together Enrichment Night activities, and often we speak in our sacrament meetings.
The women in our church play a huge role. The Relief Society is one of the greatest church women's societies in the world. With all the responisbility that the women in our church hold...I don't see why we should try to butt into the duties that the Lord called the men to do. That's just so much more work that we would have to add to our already full schedules.


I don't know how other religions view women, but the LDS church holds women in very high esteem and I, nor the other women that I know in my area of the church have any desire to join the priesthood of our church. The men have to do something.

Originally posted by Uberking Robert
It's not unfair that only men get those positions. I don't know where all this bullshit about "equality" came from. Women should be making our dinner, not trying to mess with our shit.

Yeah. What is the world coming to? I mean, it's ticking along fine in an oppressive patriarchal way, and next thing you know... wham!!!! Somebodies pointed out that men and women are actually equal. Next thing you know they want to vote, and not be forced into marriage and be more then baby producing factories and have the right to happiness as well and so on. I mean, where do they get off?

Still I guess things change, most people are happier now, not that many want to go back to the delightful cave man ways of old.

And maybe it should be men making dinner, not the other way round. Actually that's practical as well, all the greatest chefs have been men... and all the worst Church leaders have also been men... and most of the worlds worst political leaders have also been men... I think it's clear. Men should cook, women should care for the spiritual well being of humanity.

I like to think that some problems will be solved by that.

Originally posted by Kella
I don't think women need to be in that position of power. We have other duties and obligations to perform. I'm not saying that as a sexist remark either. I know so many roll eyes at the Mormon religion, but in the structure of our church...women have an orginization called the Relief Society. We use this organization to learn how to better raise our children with the gospel, support our husbands in their callings, and we are very much about helping others in need and doing service projects which can range anywhere from volunteering to making dinner for one of the sisters in the church that is ill or just had a baby...or perhaps to bring meals and offer assistance to a family that has recently lost someone. Besides that, we have teachers who teach children's classes, young adult classes, and of course the Relief Society presidency and teachers, Sunday school, visiting teaching, putting together Enrichment Night activities, and often we speak in our sacrament meetings.
The women in our church play a huge role. The Relief Society is one of the greatest church women's societies in the world. With all the responisbility that the women in our church hold...I don't see why we should try to butt into the duties that the Lord called the men to do. That's just so much more work that we would have to add to our already full schedules.


I don't know how other religions view women, but the LDS church holds women in very high esteem and I, nor the other women that I know in my area of the church have any desire to join the priesthood of our church. The men have to do something.

http://www.landoverbaptist.org/news0702/wiccans.html

i just want you guys to check out this site. it's a christian site that crushed me, i swear.

Originally posted by padmeXskywalker
http://www.landoverbaptist.org/news0702/wiccans.html

i just want you guys to check out this site. it's a christian site that crushed me, i swear.

This is off topic.

Originally posted by Kella
I don't think women need to be in that position of power. We have other duties and obligations to perform. I'm not saying that as a sexist remark either. I know so many roll eyes at the Mormon religion, but in the structure of our church...women have an orginization called the Relief Society. We use this organization to learn how to better raise our children with the gospel, support our husbands in their callings, and we are very much about helping others in need and doing service projects which can range anywhere from volunteering to making dinner for one of the sisters in the church that is ill or just had a baby...or perhaps to bring meals and offer assistance to a family that has recently lost someone. Besides that, we have teachers who teach children's classes, young adult classes, and of course the Relief Society presidency and teachers, Sunday school, visiting teaching, putting together Enrichment Night activities, and often we speak in our sacrament meetings.
The women in our church play a huge role. The Relief Society is one of the greatest church women's societies in the world. With all the responisbility that the women in our church hold...I don't see why we should try to butt into the duties that the Lord called the men to do. That's just so much more work that we would have to add to our already full schedules.


I don't know how other religions view women, but the LDS church holds women in very high esteem and I, nor the other women that I know in my area of the church have any desire to join the priesthood of our church. The men have to do something.

That is all nice, if you want to do these things.

However, I disagree - i would like the place of power - I don't want to none of those things - i dont want to cook, clean, look after children and support my husbend, while my ambitions are pout aside.

I wanna travel, have a good job, go out as a please and buy when and what i please. Once when the time for getting kids comes, then that will happen, but i will not give up my whole life and devote it to my kid and husband only.

Originally posted by Imperial_Samura
And maybe it should be men making dinner, not the other way round. Actually that's practical as well, all the greatest chefs have been men... and all the worst Church leaders have also been men... and most of the worlds worst political leaders have also been men... I think it's clear. Men should cook, women should care for the spiritual well being of humanity.

I like to think that some problems will be solved by that.

I can't cook, my fella can. That settles it

Seriously though, you make a valid point.

Men should cook, women should care for the spiritual well being of humanity.

Mind if I put that line in my signature?

Originally posted by Kella
I don't think women need to be in that position of power. We have other duties and obligations to perform. I'm not saying that as a sexist remark either. I know so many roll eyes at the Mormon religion, but in the structure of our church...women have an orginization called the Relief Society. We use this organization to learn how to better raise our children with the gospel, support our husbands in their callings, and we are very much about helping others in need and doing service projects which can range anywhere from volunteering to making dinner for one of the sisters in the church that is ill or just had a baby...or perhaps to bring meals and offer assistance to a family that has recently lost someone. Besides that, we have teachers who teach children's classes, young adult classes, and of course the Relief Society presidency and teachers, Sunday school, visiting teaching, putting together Enrichment Night activities, and often we speak in our sacrament meetings.
The women in our church play a huge role. The Relief Society is one of the greatest church women's societies in the world. With all the responisbility that the women in our church hold...I don't see why we should try to butt into the duties that the Lord called the men to do. That's just so much more work that we would have to add to our already full schedules.


I don't know how other religions view women, but the LDS church holds women in very high esteem and I, nor the other women that I know in my area of the church have any desire to join the priesthood of our church. The men have to do something.

Understandable, and I can see how this works for you and yours. But what of someone like me? Someone who perhaps does not want children, immediately removing all future prospects for themselves because they have decided not to reproduce. If you're happy to play shadow to your husband that's fine, but you seem entirely submissive and perfectly satisfied with that. Please don't be offended, I'm genuinely interested in how you feel about this, but can you tell me whether your views are actually your own or are they what your husband and church would want you to say?

Originally posted by Syren
I can't cook, my fella can. That settles it

Seriously though, you make a valid point.

Men should cook, women should care for the spiritual well being of humanity.

Mind if I put that line in my signature?

I am a fairly good cook...

When ever we say "men should... or women should..." we miss the mark. The difference between men and women are mostly in our heads. I am not saying that there are no differences, but that these differences do not qualify or disqualify anyone for any place in society. Or at least that is how I see it.

Well said, fundamental differences aren't meant to separate us on society's level.

Paul the one that down played the importance of women and the churched just ate it up..All through out history there has been women priests or priestess. Women were considered magical impart because they could create life. Men could not. People didn't understand the mystery about it. The monthly blood flow was also thought to carry magic and was sacred...There were ceremonies done with it's use...The whole Mother goddess earth with it's fertile waters and lands were in most part part of the early beliefs in one form or another....These early beliefs had much respect for earth and its care unlike the church now also. In fact most christian believers don't care much about the earth stating that Jesus is going to come back and destroy the earth to make a new one in it's place, so why bother.

Originally posted by debbiejo
All through out history there has been women priests or priestess.

At one time, there was even a female pope.

It is a persistent and popular legend, but there is little evidence supporting it.

Oh don't be a party pooper...Let's just say there was. I think it was Joan.....Though she would have to hide the fact I think since the church was male dominate. Women also engaged in battles by dressing up as men and fighting alone side them...very true.

Originally posted by debbiejo
Oh don't be a party pooper...Let's just say there was. I think it was Joan.....Though she would have to hide the fact I think since the church was male dominate. Women also engaged in battles by dressing up as men and fighting alone side them...very true.

Joan Jet?

This Joan....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pope_Joan

Though Joan Jett is way cooler.

Originally posted by debbiejo
This Joan....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pope_Joan

Though Joan Jett is way cooler.

wallbash ohhhhhhhh I missed a "T"

As I understand it, before organized and semiorganized religion, when "faiths" were naturalistic, women were very much in positions of power. This is because early societies saw the obvious, common thread between women and nature: reproduction.

When societies got bigger and competition for resources became more intense, war figured more prominantly, the value of male muscle increased. Thus, societies started to grow more patriarchial.

At some point, men started to fear women's superior sexual prowess, leading to further repression.

BTW, there is a prayer in Judaism in which man thanks God for "not making me a woman." While this is popularly interpreted as a put-down (man, thank God He didnt turn me into a broad), it is really an acknowledgment of the awesome responsibility women have in making a pious home and raising children while the man studies Torah.

In "Yentyl," when the Barbara Steisand character says to her father (a rabbi, I think; it's been a long time since I last saw the film), something to the effect of studying Torah is the most important thing a person can do, her father says, "Children! Children are the most important thing! Without children, there is no one to pass Torah onto."

God Bless women. Not just the best thing since sliced bread; there'd be no sliced bread if not for women!

I like you.^^

notworthy

Originally posted by Syren
Understandable, and I can see how this works for you and yours. But what of someone like me? Someone who perhaps does not want children, immediately removing all future prospects for themselves because they have decided not to reproduce. If you're happy to play shadow to your husband that's fine, but you seem entirely submissive and perfectly satisfied with that. Please don't be offended, I'm genuinely interested in how you feel about this, but can you tell me whether your views are actually your own or are they what your husband and church would want you to say?

Uhm...I am a 24 year old single woman. I am unable to have children. I am currently attending college to persue a PhD in Zoology/Animal Biology. I was abandoned by my father when I was 6 years old. And spent my life being raised by only my mother.

Am I submissive...never. Am I timid and reforming to my church...no...not really. Can you be LDS and a free woman...hell yes. I don't know what kind of guys you know...the guys I've known are normal, everyday guys...go to work, pay their bills, goof off with their friends, do really dumb things for attention, are obsessed with Xbox and the like, etc. If I should someday marry one, though I am not 100% that I want to get married...I would love and honor him and support (verbally, emotionally) him in his church callings as well as any other thing he does in his life...as I would expect him to do for me. My future career is extremely important to me. My education is extrememly important to me. So the man that is mean to be with me will have to also find these things important...as well as not really have a strong desire to want children.

The man that you choose to marry in the LDS church is the same as the man you choose to marry if you were any other religion. You have to marry someone that is right for you. So...my guy would be a good man and my partner and he would respect me and love me and I would hope that he was also a good man in the LDS church.

The LDS church does not hinder women from anything. Nor do the husbands in the church....no more than the men in the rest of the world. So please, now that you know a little of me...please don't think I'm a brainwashed Molly Mormon. I am very much a normal person. I have goals and ambitions. I have dreams that I intend to fulfill. It doesn't make me less of a person in anyone's eyes in the LDS church. Actually, the leaders of the church fully support education and following your dreams. They also hope that you choose to someday have a family, but are not ignorant that this is not always possible.

anyways...it's my views. I know the requirements of the priesthood in my church and I do not want their position. I like that there are men in those positions rather than women. I prefer the Relief Society and the friends and duties that I have there. I like helping others. Am I domestic...not really no. Are any of my friends at church domestic...no...again...not really. Are all of my friends in college pursuing their goals? Yes. Do any of them want the power of the Priesthood...no. Why? They're already too busy with the rest of life. Like I said....

the men have to have something to do.

Originally posted by Syren
I can't cook, my fella can. That settles it

Seriously though, you make a valid point.

Men should cook, women should care for the spiritual well being of humanity.

Mind if I put that line in my signature?

Hehehe. Be my guest.

Saying 'the men must have something to do' is no defence of a system that denies freedom of opportunity to all by arbitrarily assigning gender roles,- there is no choice in your system- and is certainly no defence of a system where all the true authority and control goes to the men.

I am sorry, but you are greatly stretching credulity by saying you are not submissive. By accepting that system you clearly are.

Any system which continues to deny freedom of opportunity to women is morally wrong.

Give good reasons why women should not hold positions of genuine power inside the Church. Why should a woman not lead the LDS church, for example? What actually makes that wrong?

It's funny how so many women and young girls as yound as like 9 years old were persecuted and executed for having a knowledge of herbs and incite, even owning cats or other animals. So superstitious people were. Really it wasn't funny but sad because executions were in the tens of thousands if not more, and it probably was more. All from ignorance of healing properties of plants and what we would now called sciences. But of course women were evil and conspired with satan at that time.

Yes, hard to believe sometimes the things humans do to each other, and the deep mistrust that has existed at various times throughout history between women and men. Madness really.

One can only be thankful we are living in a reasonably more enlightened world today where such things are far less common.

Originally posted by Ushgarak

Give good reasons why women should not hold positions of genuine power inside the Church. Why should a woman not lead the LDS church, for example? What actually makes that wrong?

Why would a woman want to lead the LDS church? Why shouldn't that duty belong to the men? I suppose you could call me submissive to the system of my church if you like, but it is only because...I would not want to call my mom Dad and my dad Mom. That's just stupid and immature to protest the duty given to those parents. Just as it's pointless to put women in a position that God delegated for a man.

You look at things the wrong way. You see me saying that some positions in the hierarchy of the church are for men...not women...and you see someone submissive and brainwashed. I'm just wondering why you find it sexist and submissive to be okay with the role of power given in the churches. Why is it wrong to obey God's commandments? God appointed men to those positions for a reason. Do we know the reason, yes and no. I don't exactly have personal conversations with Him asking Him why He does the things He does. God holds women in the highest respect, despite what you may believe.
It says somewhere in Genesis that when woman had been created that His work was complete. We were the crowning jewel in God's creation.

Originally posted by Kella
Why is it wrong to obey God's commandments? God appointed men to those positions for a reason.

Because ''God's commands'' are commands written by men, for men. Men appointed other men for a position they claim God did.

Originally posted by lil bitchiness
Because ''God's commands'' are commands written by men, for men. Men appointed other men for a position they claim God did.

I agree with you, but it's a hard sale.

There is nothing in the 10 commandments about women. Otherwise I think most of Paul's writings are the ones that mentions subservient places for women. In the OT god appointed Priestesses. Paul goes against the word the OT god.

Originally posted by debbiejo
There is nothing in the 10 commandments about women. Otherwise I think most of Paul's writings are the ones that mentions subservient places for women. In the OT god appointed Priestesses. Paul goes against the word the OT god.

I think Paul was the Antichrist. After all, he was crucified up side down.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
I think Paul was the Antichrist. After all, he was crucified up side down. No, that was Peter....

Originally posted by debbiejo
No, that was Peter....

What? I thought it was Paul. He was leaving Rome, and saw Jesus going into the city with his cross. You know Jesus always has that cross with him.

When they were going to crucify Peter, he said I'm not worthy to be crucified like my lord, crucify me upside down....If you look at what the Pope holds and some of the emblems they are upside down crosses since they feel Peter was the first pope, or the Rock that the church was built on..

Originally posted by debbiejo
When they were going to crucify Peter, he said I'm not worthy to be crucified like my lord, crucify me upside down....If you look at what the Pope holds and some of the emblems they are upside down crosses since they feel Peter was the first pope, or the Rock that the church was built on..

That is why, when writing a story, you are not supposed to have two people with names that start with the same letter.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
That is why, when writing a story, you are not supposed to have two people with names that start with the same letter. Peter, Paul, and Pilot

tomcat <<<<------Pilot