All women are evil and should be treated like property.

[snuggles911]

Sunshine Mary of sunshinemaryandthedragon.wordpress.com has a particularly disturbing post today in which she claims that all women are evil.

 

 

Quote

Christian women are also still women, subject to the same frailties and temptations when our natural hypergamous state is unconstrained by Man and Law. Women around here are trying to see the reality of female nature, but even when you see reality, that doesn’t mean you can then automatically change yourself

 

And, she backs this up with scripture:

 

 

Quote

Some get it a lot, some get it a little, and some don’t get it at all, but all women are like that. When Solomon wrote in Ecclesiastes 7:28

 

I found one upright man among a thousand,

but not one upright woman among them all.

 

He wasn’t lying to you, friends. All women are like that.

 

And with references to classic literature:

 

 

Quote

Not only the Bible, but also much of mankind’s classic literature describes how men may be motivated by honor but women are much more inclined toward treachery in order to satisfy their sexual desires.

 

But there's one solution:

 

 

Quote

And the most effective solution would be for women to be under the authority of men because we can’t sanctify ourselves. Whatever good you may see in the women around here is almost certainly due entirely to our men having control of us. But still: AWALT. The one positive thing I suppose we might take credit for is voluntarily putting ourselves into submission, whereas in saner days gone by, society at large held all women in legal subjection to their husbands or fathers.

 

And here's another:

 

Quote

What I am suggesting is rolling the clock back pre-1776.

 

She later expands on this thought:

 

 

Quote

But we should think critically about why women had such limited legal status before the American Revolution (or before the Reformation, if one prefers – a case could definitely be made for this). Was it just that men were big meanies or was there a good reason for this? Why exactly does the Bible require a woman to be in submission to her father and then her husband?

 

Out of curiosity, how many female readers here vote? Do any abstain due to moral opposition to the nineteenth amendment?

 

So, ladies do the world a favor and submit to your man because you are evil and need to have your evil nature reigned in. Oh, and don't vote unless you vote for the same candidates as your husband/father.

[GolightlyGrrl]

The fine folks at Traditional Christianity think the womenfolk should be owned, too, if they know what's good for them.

traditionalchristianity.wordpress.com/2013/07/01/the-priveleges-of-ownership/

[anjulibai]

So if all women are evil, where does that leave Sunshine Mary?

Is she trying to be the real life Serena Joy?

[lizziesmom]

I have come to the logical conclusion that many of these women are mentally ill.

[YPestis]

These women who ache to go back to the days when women were chattel may need to read up on those time periods again. When women were property, they were also barred from an education, or making public commentary, especially to MEN.

My grandmothers were born in pre-Revolutionary China. They were only one generation away from when women were truly, and legally chattel. When resources were scarce, it meant you sacrificed for the menfolks. Men may open doors for you, but you gave up meat and rice for your brothers. It meant when money was tight, you went without medicine so your brother can go to school. Never mind you going to school. People don't educate their pigs, why would they educate their women? It also meant, as the inferior gender, you were to keep silent on the topics of the day, especially in the presence of the menfolks. Your opinions were worthless and anyway, women should not deem themselves good enough to lecture men on important matters.

Sunshine Mary and her ilk seem to forget these little tidbits. They forget that in our modern life of plenty, gender inequality meant girls had the privilege of having doors opened for them and dinners paid for. However, for much of history, and even now in many parts of the world, gender inequality means girls are denied education and health care so their brothers can enjoy better food and higher education. It means they can be sold as child brides and abused at will. No one opens doors to chattel. Chattel is to be used at will and disposed of when it no longer provides a service. If you want to put yourself in such a vulnerable state, be my guest. However, I'm more than happy to open up my own doors, pay for my own dinners and NOT be beaten, bought and starved because of my gender.

[eowyn1217]

Does she even realize that in 1776, she would 1) not have a computer to voice her opinion 2) no one would want to hear her opinion because she would still be a woman, and too busy making babies/homeschooling/tending a home and crops with no electricity, running water, or heat to even put two thoughts together about how "women are stupid and men are awesome"?

[Angharad Crewe]

I like how her husband cheats on her and she concludes that it is women who are motivated by their sexual desires and men by honor.

Although to be fair, if I were married to someone as insufferable Shitstain Mary, I too would have a difficult time remaining faithful.

[Lainey]

The fine folks at Traditional Christianity think the womenfolk should be owned, too, if they know what's good for them.

traditionalchristianity.wordpress.com/2013/07/01/the-priveleges-of-ownership/

She...she's comparing women who are not property to...rented houses. And talking about their "curb appeal." I can't even... :shock:

[lilith]

Sunshine Mary of sunshinemaryandthedragon.wordpress.com has a particularly disturbing post today in which she claims that all women are evil.

Don't Sunshine Mary and co think that people are defined by gender and men should be masculine and women should be feminine? So if they believe those traits are innately female, shouldn't women cultivate them? Isn't trying to change ones feminine attributes to more closely resemble those of men what the claim feminists are doing and part of what they despise them for?

They can't even follow through with their own logic. They may talk about traditional gender roles and the need for masculine and feminine to balance each other, but basically they hate women and the only feminine traits that they find acceptable are those that their shallow and selfish men claim to value.

[kunoichi66]

I took one look at the subject line and thought "...sunshine mary...."

and LO! I was correct.

As to her claim that most classic literature agrees that women are all evil etc etc, I must ask FJ to excuse my flippany and reply, in the best traditions of Anne Elliot: 'but they were all written by men'.

That is all.

[OnceModestTwiceShy]

She...she's comparing women who are not property to...rented houses. And talking about their "curb appeal." I can't even... :shock:

Doesn't the metaphor sort of break down when you think about the fact that the majority of owned homes are not brand-new, so you still own a home that many have owned before?

I don't know why I'm looking for internal logic in such a disgustingly twisted worldview.

[Rescinded and Mended]

I'm just now going down the rabbit hole that is Sunshine Mary's blog, but the more I read, the more this whole thing comes across as a pitiful cry for attention. Sunshine Mary has no power in her own life and is incapable of demanding respect from her husband, so she's deluded herself into believing that she doesn't deserve it. What little influence she wields is in the form of her blog, where she attempts to shame and victimize other women so that they can feel as ashamed and miserable as she does.

Sunshine Mary is in desperate need of a therapist.

And has anyone seen this little gem yet?

[2xx1xy1JD]

She's really going for Most Misogynist and Self-Loathing Blogger Ever, isn't she?

Incidentally, I'm enough of a Bible geek that I actually looked up Ecclesiastes. Here's a fun quote for her (Eccl. 7:10):

Don't say, "How has it happened that former times were better than these?" For it is not wise of you to ask that question.

The whole book, btw, is basically "grumpy old man" advice. Some of it is profound enough that it gets quoted regularly, but the overall tone is "hey, sooner or later we're all gonna die". Read the whole thing, and you get the spirit of it. Also, keep in mind that it's not the word of God - it's the words of King Solomon. You know, the one with 700 wives/concubines, some of whom openly practiced idolatry? So, toward the end of his life, he's no longer a young stud, he realizes that he's going to die soon, he's realized that his harem has caused problems, and he's a bit bitter and grumpy. At the same time, he's nostalgic for his youth, so he also writes:

Enjoy happiness with a woman you love all the fleeting days of life that have been granted to you under the sun - all your fleeting days. For that alone is what you can get out of life and out of the means you acquire under the sun.

Eccl. 9:9

Meanwhile, if we are citing random Biblical quotes, how's this one?

God said to Abraham "...whatever Sarah tells you, do as she says..."

Genesis 21:12

Meanwhile, I did find something she said that wasn't complete BS:

The fact that she opposes the idea of women being in legal and physical subjection to their nearest male relative is because she is a feminist.

Yes, SSM. That would be an excellent description in one sentence as to why I am a feminist.

[Handmaiden of Dog]

Contrast with a marriage where a wife accepts that she is now the property and responsibility of her husband. He takes very seriously the responsibilities as well as the privileges that come with such ownership. He is free to make improvements, and she knows that rather than attempting to destroy her uniqueness, he is working to increase her value; to himself, his children, and others including her. When he questions the way she spends her time, she gives account and makes the necessary adjustments. When she doesn’t take proper care of her health and appearance, he calls her on it. Rather than take offense, she is motivated. She puts in the time and effort to be a more fit, healthy, and attractive wife. She willingly engages her husband physically, understanding that her body is not her own and that regular intimacy helps to keep the foundation of their relationship a solid one. She sees her children as the blessed result of love made with her husband rather then the fruit ripened solely as a result of her decision to loan herself as an incubator for 40 weeks. They are well loved but kept in their proper place. She doesn’t even own herself, so she knows she doesn’t own her children either.

This is so hard to read, my throat is actually choked up. The idea that women really think their body is not theirs, that it belongs to their husband is hard for me to take. I cannot imagine a more hellish marriage then one where the husband tells me what I can weigh, how I may wear my hair, when I will have sex, what clothes I can wear, and so on. And I hate, hate this idea that the Man is always first and the children-- no matter how young-- are always second. This just sounds like the formula for a miserable marriage. Woman as slave, man as master is a fun game but it becomes a burden for both when it is proscribed behavior at all times.

[Angharad Crewe]

I wonder if SSM's husband is allowed to sell her or her sexual favors? Because the next logical step to equating people with possessions is being able to trade, barter, sell or rent out the services of the possession. And, if we're going back to the good old days of the Old Testament, this type of thing definitely happened with Abraham and Sarah.

Also, if we're going to use "mankind's classical literature" as evidence for the way the world should/does work, in Thomas Hardy's Mayor of Casterbridge, the main character drunkenly sells his wife and daughter. So suck it SSM! There's plenty of classic lit that portrays men as treacherous assholes too! Although I suppose this means that Thomas Hardy was a beta feminist mangina who wickedly contributed to the destruction of the Natural Order.

[linnea27]

I cannot make fundie attitude towards women. Women are evil and to be submissive. You own them completely. Wothout your strong guidance they will fall into ruin. But leave them in charge of homeschooling your 10 kids all day. They will teach your sons what they need to know to have a successful career, even though women aren't capable of having a career themselves. Also, you will be sexually attracted to them. I mean, I know my 'bias' towards equal partnerships is showing in that last statement, but I really cannot fathom how one would be sexually attracted to someone he had little to no respect for.

[polecat]

What bothers me about that particular blog is that she describes an egalitarian relationships as a two-headed hydra. It's as though the concept of teamwork completely and utterly escapes her. My husband and I have a somewhat traditional relationship in that I work from home and he works out of the home, but we are still on equal footing. We work together as a team because we're married and we both want the best for our family. I'm not his property, and he wouldn't want me to be his property. He happens to like the individual I am -- that's why he married me. To become his property to mold and make as his own little project would destroy what makes me ME.

I find SSM both tragic and utterly fascinating. I don't know if her husband broke her through his repeated infidelities (btw, she claims that it is not wrong in the Bible for men to have affairs, so it's all ok, y'all) or if he's otherwise abusive. But I do know the male commenters on her blog have serious issues.

[lizziesmom]

She is showing her ignorance. Wives in the 18th century had few legal rights and were expected to simply obey their husbands. Husbands in Britain and its North American colonies were legally entitled to beat their wives for disobedience. Although spinsters and widows could legally own property in the United Kingdom, wives could not. In the United States, women could not own property. If they were to divorce, their children 'belonged' to the husband. In 1753, Sir William Blackstone summarized that the "legal existence of the woman is suspended during the marriage, or at least is incorporated and consolidated into that of the husband: under whose wing, protection and cover, she performs every thing."

Women who are 'morally opposed to the 19th Amendment' make me want to :pull-hair: Thousands of women suffered and died so that their daughters, nieces, granddaughters could vote. I choose to exercise my right to do so. I'm glad this idiot does not vote because people like Rick Perry are the result.

[snuggles911]

What puzzles me about Sunshine Mary and the bloggers at Traditional Christianity is that they say women would be treated better if they were considered property. Yet, they often give horrifying examples of how their husbands mistreat them.

Yesterday Sunshine gave this example of how her husband, Holy Hand Grenade or HHG treated her this past weekend:

Benevolent sexism. It keeps women in their proper position in a man’s mind but doesn’t cause him to be filled with anger and bitterness. I think that’s how my husband tends to be.

We had a flat tire in the middle of BFE on this weekend’s vacation. HHG got out to change the tire while doing the obligatory curse-like-a-sailor thing that guys tend to do in these sorts of situations. I was all consumed with guilt because I felt like it wasn’t fair that he had to change the tire and not me (yeah, I may be reading in the manosphere too much), so I was buzzing all around him, “Can I help? Do you want me to do that? Should I learn how to use a jack?†and he finally just lost it with me. He was like, “Will you get the (expletive) out my way and shut the (expletive) up so I can do this? I don’t care what you read on some blog. This is one of my jobs and you are in my (expletive) way, so move.â€

She doesn't think there's anything wrong with this. If it were my husband, I would have waited until he fixed the flat and then gunned my engine, leaving him at the side of the road while I continued on to our vacation destination.

[ILoveJellybeans]

Wow, what an asshole. He shouldnt talk to his wife like that, even if his wife is an awful person like Sunshine Mary.

[Rescinded and Mended]

Yeah, count me in for that sentiment - I also would have gunned the engine and left his sorry ass high and dry, never to look back!

[Carla Bruni]

If you read anything posted by any of her male readers in the comments, it becomes abundantly clear that they hate women because they're unable to maintain a relationship with one (I wonder why!). With her, though, I think it's a combination of mental illness coupled with a serious inferiority complex and years of abuse from that creature she calls her husband.

That said, I did actually take the time to put together a looooooong blog post on the (overwhelmingly) positive effects of female political & socioeconomic participation in the modern world, wholly based on this little thing I like to call statistics. The correlation coefficient between the UN's gender inequality index (lower is better, higher is worse) and the UN's human development index (higher is better, lower is worse) is a whopping -0.86 - kind of hard to argue with, you know, facts. I shall publish this once I get around to formatting a blog :)

[snuggles911]

If you read anything posted by any of her male readers in the comments, it becomes abundantly clear that they hate women because they're unable to maintain a relationship with one (I wonder why!). With her, though, I think it's a combination of mental illness coupled with a serious inferiority complex and years of abuse from that creature she calls her husband.

That said, I did actually take the time to put together a looooooong blog post on the (overwhelmingly) positive effects of female political & socioeconomic participation in the modern world, wholly based on this little thing I like to call statistics. The correlation coefficient between the UN's gender inequality index (lower is better, higher is worse) and the UN's human development index (higher is better, lower is worse) is a whopping -0.86 - kind of hard to argue with, you know, facts. I shall publish this once I get around to formatting a blog :)

Maybe you could post a synopsis on Sunshine's blog in the comments section. Could be quite helpful to her and her groupies.

[fatcat]

What puzzles me about Sunshine Mary and the bloggers at Traditional Christianity is that they say women would be treated better if they were considered property. Yet, they often give horrifying examples of how their husbands mistreat them.

Yesterday Sunshine gave this example of how her husband, Holy Hand Grenade or HHG treated her this past weekend:

Should Christian guys be cursing 'like sailors', though?

And does anyone else wonder if most of the interactions described on these blogs are mostly or partly made-up? Or am I being too hopeful here...

[curlytoes79]

From the Traditional Christianity page:

“Women were property!†was the clarion call of the women’s liberation movement. This is offered up as a bad thing, but I beg to differ. Women have degenerated markedly since becoming the authoresses of their own destiny. I submit that being the property of a man is a boon to the woman as well as to the property owner.

Drive through any community where there are a plurality of rented homes, and then drive through the ones where the majority of residents own their homes. The difference is striking. Rented property communities have very few houses where improvements are made regularly. The paint is faded on most of the homes, the yards are marginal at best....

She goes on to imply that autonomous women are like cheap rentals, and submissive godly women are beautiful owned homes with manicured lawns and gates that keep brown people out.

Speaking of which, read the first paragraph above and replace the word "women" with "blacks" and "men" with "whites." Yeah. I wonder if she's ever driven through a black inner-city and noticed the peeling paint and concluded that black people were better off when they were owned by whites.