We're not misogynists, but this isn't a woman's world.

[Gil]

 

Sent to me by the significant other. How on Earth can you, as a woman, support a church that excludes you from the entire planet?

[DarkAnts]

Picture is missing.

These women must have a low sense of worth if they are willing to be part of a church that excludes them. its sad that their self-esteem is so low.

[Gil]

It's displaying for me, so that's weird. I'll try to fix it...

eta: I think it's working now, though it's much smaller than before.

[themadapple]

On the contrary, it's everybody's world. It was never truly and inherently a man's and things do not have to continue as if it were. I don't know what pisses me off more. The misogyny (and oh yes, this is misogyny) or the general limited mindset certain people want to take that there can never be any reform because things just are the way they are.

[thoughtful]

The Church of James Brown? :?

wd1-HM234DE

[ElphabaGalinda]

How that church get any women to attend, I have no idea. For the women who do attend, it's sad that they'll accept that their church excludes them from the entire planet.

[Anxious Girl]

Isn't it weird how people hate like these hate to be called anti-choicers, homophobes, and misogynists when their actions claim otherwise? I wonder why? :think:

[kunoichi66]

The Church of James Brown? :?

wd1-HM234DE

I'm glad I wasn't the only person to instantly have that song in my head....

[lovefromgirl]

Sent to me by the significant other. How on Earth can you, as a woman, support a church that excludes you from the entire planet? :?

...but they forgot the part where it ain't nothin' without a woman or a girl!

[edit]we haven't...]

[Nothing2CHere]

So, being curious, I decided to look up those Bible passages that are referenced (BibleGateway.com is my go-to online source). I made sure I looked up the King James version!

Genesis 2:15-23

King James Version (KJV)

15 And the Lord God took the man, and put him into the garden of Eden to dress it and to keep it.

16 And the Lord God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat:

17 But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.

18 And the Lord God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him.

19 And out of the ground the Lord God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof.

20 And Adam gave names to all cattle, and to the fowl of the air, and to every beast of the field; but for Adam there was not found an help meet for him.

21 And the Lord God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, and he slept: and he took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh instead thereof;

22 And the rib, which the Lord God had taken from man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man.

23 And Adam said, This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man.

Psalm 8:4-9

King James Version (KJV)

4 What is man, that thou art mindful of him? and the son of man, that thou visitest him?

5 For thou hast made him a little lower than the angels, and hast crowned him with glory and honour.

6 Thou madest him to have dominion over the works of thy hands; thou hast put all things under his feet:

7 All sheep and oxen, yea, and the beasts of the field;

8 The fowl of the air, and the fish of the sea, and whatsoever passeth through the paths of the seas.

9 O Lord our Lord, how excellent is thy name in all the earth!

*scratches head* OK, maybe I can very loosely see how they'd think these passages would support this, but especially with the psalm - methinks someone forgets learning that back in the day, "men" was often used in writing to reference men AND women. It's interesting to compare the psalm to the New International Version:

Psalm 8:4-9

New International Version (NIV)

4 what is mankind that you are mindful of them,

human beings that you care for them?

5 You have made them a little lower than the angels

and crowned them with glory and honor.

6 You made them rulers over the works of your hands;

you put everything under their feet:

7 all flocks and herds,

and the animals of the wild,

8 the birds in the sky,

and the fish in the sea,

all that swim the paths of the seas.

9 Lord, our Lord,

how majestic is your name in all the earth!

And that's enough Bible study for me for a Monday morning.

[grovelina]

Do you think they MEANT to come off as so misogynistic or is the patriarchy just so ingrained they didn't even notice the sexism in that statement? It's certainly hard to miss but as Nothing2Chere pointed out, those verses can be interpreted differently. I can imagine easily a church that says men are more important, but its hard to think of them saying that women dont belong here at all!

[caito]

>:(

Why do these people exist in 2012? Wtf?

[jenny_islander]

Anyone willing to take a bet on how many women this preacher has had sex with while he was "husband of one wife?"

"It's a man's world" nearly always means "I think women are put on this Earth to provide friction for my penis."

[Little_Eyes]

Anyone willing to take a bet on how many women this preacher has had sex with while he was "husband of one wife?"

"It's a man's world" nearly always means "I think women are put on this Earth to provide friction for my penis."

^^^ This. What fuckfaces would even put that shit on a billboard? Not "Jesus Loves You!" Not even "Come to church so you don't go to Hell" or whatever. Nope it's "Fuck you women, don't even bother"

Yeah, like that's fulfilling the words of Jesus? Methinks they forgot their idea of the Great Commission. Rather, they think it's the Great Omission. Omit the wimminz. Asshats.

[Cran]

I was putting it internally in a more favourable light: Doesn't the English language allow for man to be used in the sense of mankind, women and men?

Of course, the use is very suspicious :?

[Gil]

I was putting it internally in a more favourable light: Doesn't the English language allow for man to be used in the sense of mankind, women and men?

Of course, the use is very suspicious :?

I think the difference is that there's the indefinite article -- "a man" is different than "man" to me.

[Anxious Girl]

Do you think they MEANT to come off as so misogynistic or is the patriarchy just so ingrained they didn't even notice the sexism in that statement? It's certainly hard to miss but as Nothing2Chere pointed out, those verses can be interpreted differently. I can imagine easily a church that says men are more important, but its hard to think of them saying that women dont belong here at all!

Damn, aren't you new to patriarchy. Christianity supports patriarchy in its teachings. The Bible is has plenty of supportive passages of it being a "man's world" only.

[grovelina]

grovelina wrote:

Do you think they MEANT to come off as so misogynistic or is the patriarchy just so ingrained they didn't even notice the sexism in that statement? It's certainly hard to miss but as Nothing2Chere pointed out, those verses can be interpreted differently. I can imagine easily a church that says men are more important, but its hard to think of them saying that women dont belong here at all!

Damn, aren't you new to patriarchy. Christianity supports patriarchy in its teachings. The Bible is has plenty of supportive passages of it being a "man's world" only.

I do know that patriarchy is inherently patriarchal. It's hard to miss with all the talk of sheltering and submission on fundie blogs. But even they (except for maybe the stinking housewife) pretend to be pro-woman and give women a place in this world even if it's conceptually below a man's in importance or physically in the home or sitting silently in church. This billboard seems different to me. It's attempting to have mass appeal with it's snazzy graphics while stating that women have no place in this world at all. I am still trying to decide where they think we should go and who would be enticed by a church like that.

[RachelB]

I don't think fundies care so much about being enticing to women. They seem more interested in playing the "do it our way or go to hell" card. Maybe some women would be enticed by that, but I don't know any of them.

[Katydid]

I don't think fundies care so much about being enticing to women. They seem more interested in playing the "do it our way or go to hell" card. Maybe some women would be enticed by that, but I don't know any of them.

Honestly, I've always wondered what the draw of patriarchy is to women & why they convert in the first place (especially unmarried women). I see how if you grow up in it, it would be easy to accept.

[bananacat]

I was putting it internally in a more favourable light: Doesn't the English language allow for man to be used in the sense of mankind, women and men?

Of course, the use is very suspicious :?

Language changes over time, and it is actually pretty rare to see the generic "he" or generic "man" in English. At best, it sounds naively antiquated if coming from an older person. It's simply not standard anymore, even in formal writing. Some people will cling tightly to it, but those people are, like you said, suspicious.

[jenny_islander]

I'm going to dig into the Bible verses that this jerk quotes to support his thesis that women are the gravel on roads built for men.

Genesis 2:15-25 is the story of how the first woman came to be. In verse 15, God puts Adam into Eden (not the world) "to dress it and to keep it" (not own it--Adam is just a caretaker). God warns Adam away from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil (vv.16-17). Then he says (v.18): "[it is] not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him." This is the verse that spawned the neologism "helpmeet." This is generally understood to mean something like "subordinate" or "deputy." Actually the original text uses a word that is used elsewhere in the Bible to describe God himself. For example, Psalm 115:11 (KJV) translates the exact same word like this: "Ye that fear the LORD, trust in the LORD: he [is] their help and their shield."

But translation is elitist and intellectual and lukewarm and blah blah blah. So let's just go back to the KJV. In this version of the creation story (there are two versions interleaved in Genesis), Adam comes before the animals, who God creates in order to find the proper "help meet" for Adam (vv.19-20). But Adam doesn't find his companion among the animals. So God, who made Adam out of dirt, makes Eve out of Adam's own body (vv.21-22). Adam takes one look at her and says that she is "bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh" (v.23) and the text notes that the word for "woman" in Hebrew sounds like "out of man."

Here's the point of the story. All stories in the Bible have a point. The point is not generally obscure. It's spelled out clearly here: "Therefore [italics mine] a man shall leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh" (v.24). The point of the story of How the First Woman Came to Be is that this is why men feel the urge to "cleave unto" their wives. To cleave unto something, in the old sense, means to get so close that it would take considerable force in order to separate again. (Verse 25 explains that the first people did not feel ashamed of being naked. Why this is tacked on I don't know. Maybe because the preacher is sloppy.)

Onward to Psalm 8:4-9. Here is the whole passage in the KJV.

. . . what is man that thou art mindful of him? and the son of man, that thou visitest him? For thou has made him a little lower than the angels, and hast crowned him with glory and honour. Thou madest him to have dominion over the works of thy hands; thou has put all [things] under his feet; all sheep and oxen, yea, and the beasts of the field; the fowl of the air, and the fish of the sea, [and whatsover] passeth through the paths of the seas. O LORD our Lord, how excellent [is] thy name in all the earth!

As quoted, it sure sounds like it's a man's world. BUT. The modern habit of quoting verses as if they existed in isolation from the verses that came before or come after them can lead down a lot of rabbit holes. (Versification is no older than the Middle Ages and it is not a magical mystical guide to anything; it's just a navigational aid.) Here's the verse right before the what's a man--well he's barely lower than the angels--boss boss boss stuff. It's actually the first half of a sentence, a complete thought. It's the reason I put the ellipsis at the beginning of the quote and didn't capitalize the W. Here's verse 3:

"When I consider the heavens, the work of thy fingers, the moon and the stars, which thou hast ordained . . . "

God did all this. And in light of that knowledge, what is man? Note that God made man "a little lower than the angels" and gave man "glory" and "honour" and "dominion." The psalmist (King David, according to the headnote in v.1) is not trumpeting the go-getter attitude of man. The psalmist is bemused. Look at the vastness of the night sky, then look at man. If God did that, why does he pay any mind to men at all? At the same time, men are "a little lower than the angels" and have been set to rule over--to rule over what? The psalmist says "all things" and goes on to explain what he means: all animals.

Note who is missing.

Even if you believe that the gendered language here means literally an empeened person who is seen socially as a pointer not a setter, and not poetically all of (hu)mankind, you still have the problem that women are not mentioned in the list of creatures under man's dominion. Furthermore, according to the first passage cited on this ridiculous billboard, women, unlike animals, are part of the substance of man. And assuming that this means that a woman is just a man's fractious appendage runs into the problem that woman is not the only "help" of man named in the Bible; God is man's "help" too. Is God your appendage, you bloviating nitwit?

Are you in fact a shepherd (pastor)? How many sheep have you actually fed? And how much mutton have you eaten, I wonder?

[JaChelle Sugar]

Anyone willing to take a bet on how many women this preacher has had sex with while he was "husband of one wife?"

"It's a man's world" nearly always means "I think women are put on this Earth to provide friction for my penis."

:lol: :lol: You owe me a new keyboard!

[KitCatCadillac]

We're not misogynists, we just think women should do whatever we tell them to. Since we're better. Because we're men. Bible. Emotional. Penis.