Story
Your dogma...biting Jesus while praising Paul.
The Domestic Violence Cycle: It Reads Like a Dramatic Play
This was sent to me and unfortunately the author is unknown, but I think it is a wonderful way of describing the cycle of domestic violence.
Act One
You meet a neat person. You get to know them over a period of time -- often brief. You begin a relationship. You are in love. Everything is great. Then something happens that is not so great. An explosive argument, a jealous fit, a glass thrown across the room shatters against the wall. You're shocked, perhaps frightened. You assess things (maybe). You decide, okay until then the relationship has been perfect. Maybe the sex is great or the friendship is really important or you have so many things in common it seems predestined or maybe you were together in a former life or you are in sync on so many levels or you're just plain lonely. And you decide it wasn't that important. Maybe the person apologizes or maybe you do. After all, if you hadn't been so demanding or you hadn't been on the phone so long with your best friend or your mother hadn't come over, this wouldn't have happened. Your partner promises it won't happen again. Your partner brings you gifts, takes you out to dinner. So you carry on as if nothing happened.
Act Two
This repeats a few times, maybe taking different forms. Your partner puts you down. Or doesn't talk to you as much as before. But you're in love. So you try harder. Then you move in together, maybe even get married. Perhaps a commitment on your part will assure your partner of your love. Little incidents continue to happen. You continue to ignore them. Sometimes you may even throw a fit of your own. Then one night your partner doesn't come home at all. Or your partner comes home drunk. Or your partner is really angry and raises a hand at you. Or your partner puts you down. You're not thin enough, smart enough, don't make enough money. Okay, you're a little more frightened, maybe a little more angry. But you decide everyone has problems and you can deal with this. Your partner apologizes. Your partner brings you gifts, takes you out to dinner. Things are better than ever. Things go on for a while like this. You feel proud that you can accept your partner's idiosyncrasies. After all, it could be worse. And God knows, you're not perfect either.
Act Three
And then things change again. Maybe your partner ridicules you in public. Or maybe your partner even has sex with someone else, but says "It didn't mean anything." You're very hurt. Your partner apologizes, brings you gifts, takes you out to dinner, You forgive. Things are better than ever. Then something else happens. Something bigger than the last thing. Like maybe your partner disappears for a few days. Or maybe your partner comes to your office and throws a fit because you happen to work with other people and thus you've made your partner jealous. Or maybe your partner gets really mad and throws the glass at you. You explain and soothe your partner's feathers. You assure your partner it's okay, you love no one else, there's no reason to be jealous, everyone needs to get away every once in a while, and gee, there aren't any scars from the glass, so it's all okay. Your partner brings you gifts, takes you out to dinner. Things are better than ever. And things go on like this for a while.
Act Four
Then one night something big happens. Like your partner, whom you love with all your heart, gets angry yet again and locks your kids in their bedroom. Without supper. Without lights. And maybe you speak up. And maybe this time instead of a glass, it's a shoe of a chair or a ball bat that hits you. And you cry. And your partner apologizes. More gifts, more dinners, more promises it will never happen again. And you believe. Things are better than ever. Then it happens again. And each time it gets a little worse. Or it takes another form. Like your partner decides you shouldn't have a particular friend because that friend is the one causing all your problems. Or your partner should manage all the money because that will eliminate some of your partner's stress. And you agree, because after all, your partner wasn't like this in the beginning, so it must be something you're doing, right? Someday your partner may do something so bad that you kick your partner out of the house. Or you run away yourself. But oh, you miss the love, don't you? The good times? So when your partner apologizes this time, with more gifts, more promises, you go back home or let your partner back in the house, knowing this time your partner means it. This time it really will change. Things are better than ever.
Act Five
But things change again. If the abuse is physical, one night you find yourself in the emergency room, lying about how you got that black eye or that broken arm. If the abuse is emotional, you may find yourself in a therapist's office trying to figure out what you are doing wrong. Your family and friends try to talk to you. You pretend to listen but decide they don't know what they're talking about and after all, you love your partner and your partner loves you. You go back home. Your partner brings you gifts. You don't want to go out to dinner. Things are great for a while. Better than ever.
The Curtain Falls
And then things start going down hill again. More violence, more cruelty, more belittlement, more control, whatever form the abuse is taking, it just gets worse. And one day you don't come home. Because you're dead or have gone insane.
And why?
Because you kept doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.
That is the true definition of insanity.
But It Doesn't Have To Be Like This.
Wednesday, September 24, 2008
Sunday, September 21, 2008
Misogyny 101 For Teens and Council
Formerly the Frielink doctrine of "Why we should keep women under our thumbs 101"
Misogyny (IPA: /mɪˈsɒʤəˌni/) is hatred or strong prejudice against women; an antonym of philogyny. Although misogyny is sometimes confused with misanthropy, the terms are not interchangeable, for the latter refers more generally to the hatred of humanity. A concept related to misogyny is gynephobia, the fear of women, but not necessarily hatred of them.
Compared with anti-woman sexism or misandry (hatred, strong prejudice against men), misogyny is termed by most feminist theories as a political ideology like racism and antisemitism that justifies and maintains the subordination of women to men.
Forms of misogyny
There are many different forms of misogyny. In its most overt expression, a misogynist will openly hate all women simply because they are female. Other forms of misogyny may be less overt. Some misogynists may simply be prejudiced against all women, or may hate women who do not fall into one or more acceptable categories. Entire cultures may be said to be misogynist if they treat women in ways that can be seen as harmful. Examples include forcing women to tend to all domestic responsibilities, demanding silence from a woman, or beating a woman. Subscribers to one model, the mother/whore dichotomy, hold that women can only be "mothers" or "whores." Another variant is the virgin/whore dichotomy, in which women who do not adhere to a saintly standard of moral purity are considered "whores." [citation needed]
Frequently, the term misogynist is used in a looser sense as a term of derision to describe anyone who holds an unpopular or distasteful view about women as a group. A man who considers himself "a great lover of women," therefore, might somewhat paradoxically be termed a misogynist by those who consider his treatment of women sexist. Archetypes of this type of man might be Giacomo Casanova and Don Juan, who were both reputed for their many libertine affairs with women. Misogyny is a negative attitude towards women as a group, and so need not fully determine a misogynist's attitude towards each individual woman. The fact that someone holds misogynist views may not prevent them from having positive relationships with some women. Conversely, simply having negative relationships with some women does not necessarily mean someone holds misogynistic views. The term, like most negative descriptions of attitudes, is used as an epithet and applied to a wide variety of behaviors and attitudes. As with other terms, the more antipathetic one's position is in regards to misogyny, the larger the number of misogynists and the greater variety of attitudes and behaviors who fall into one's perception of "misogynist."[specify] This is, of course, the subject of much controversy and debate with opinions ranging widely as to the extent and breadth of misogyny in society.
Eve rides astride the Serpent on a capital in Laach Abbey church, 13th century
Misogyny in religion
See also: Feminist theology
Misogyny can be traced back to the origins of Modern civilization, such as in Greece and Judea, in which stories and legends on the Fall of Man into a world of tragedy and death had been brought about by a woman. In both cultures, the creation of man is primary, and woman an afterthought. In Greek mythology, the human race had already existed previous to the creation of women — a peaceful, autonomous existence as a companion to the gods. When Prometheus decides to steal the secret of fire from the gods, Zeus becomes infuriated and decides to punish humankind with an "evil thing for their delight" — Pandora, the first woman, who carried a jar (usually described — incorrectly — as a box) she was told to never open. Epimetheus (the brother of Prometheus) is overwhelmed by her beauty, disregards Prometheus' warnings about her, and marries her. Pandora cannot resist peeking into the jar, and by opening it unveils all evil into the world — labour, sickness, old age, and death.[1] During the Great Jubilee, Pope John Paul II issued an apology for all the past sins of the Roman Catholic Church, dividing the sins into seven categories. Among general sins, sins in service of the truth, sins against Christian unity, sins against Jews, sins against respect of love, peace and culture, and sins against human rights, he also apologized for sins against the dignity of women and minorities.
The church has been criticized for being misogynistic. "The foundations of early Christian misogyny — its guilt about sex, its insistence on female subjection, its dread of female seduction — are all in St. Paul's epistles. They provided a convenient supply of divinely inspired misogynistic texts for any Christian writer who chose to use them; his statements on female subjection were still being quoted in the twentieth century opponents of equality for women."[2] Writers such as John Knox have been singled out for criticism.
However, given that Mary Magdalene became a saint and was one of the first witnesses to the Resurrection of Jesus, many argue that Christianity has ultimately raised the status of women, despite the attitudes of some individuals. In the New Testament, Jesus treats women with respect, even going so far as to save a woman caught in adultery from stoning in John 8. The apostle Paul in 1 Corinthians 5 states that wives belong to their husbands, and equally husbands belong to their wives. See the article on Christian feminism for a fuller discussion.
Misogyny in philosophy
Arthur Schopenhauer is famous for his essay "On Women" (Über die Weiber), in which he expressed his opposition to what he called "Teutonico-Christian stupidity" on female affairs. He claimed that "woman is by nature meant to obey." The essay does give two compliments however: that "women are decidedly more sober in their judgment than men are" and are more sympathetic to the suffering of others. However, the latter was discounted as weakness rather than humanitarian virtue.
Nietzsche is known for arguing that every higher form of civilization implied stricter controls on women (Beyond Good and Evil, 7:238); he frequently insulted women, but is best known for phrases such as "Women are less than shallow," and "Are you going to women? Do not forget the whip!"[3] Nietzsche's reputation as a misogynist is disputed by some, pointing out that he also made unflattering statements about men. Nietzsche can easily be interpreted as anti-feminist, believing that women were primarily mothers and opposing the modern notion of women's liberation on the grounds that he considered it a form of slave morality. Whether or not this amounts to misogyny, whether his polemic statements against women are meant to be taken literally, and the exact nature of his opinions of women, are more controversial.[4]
The philosopher Otto Weininger, in his 1903 book Sex and Character, characterized the "woman" part of each individual as being essentially "nothing," and having no real existence, having no effective consciousness or rationality.[5] Weininger says, "No men who really think deeply about women retain a high opinion of them; men either despise women or they have never thought seriously about them." The author August Strindberg praised Weininger for probably having solved the hardest of all problems, the "woman problem."
Misogyny (IPA: /mɪˈsɒʤəˌni/) is hatred or strong prejudice against women; an antonym of philogyny. Although misogyny is sometimes confused with misanthropy, the terms are not interchangeable, for the latter refers more generally to the hatred of humanity. A concept related to misogyny is gynephobia, the fear of women, but not necessarily hatred of them.
Compared with anti-woman sexism or misandry (hatred, strong prejudice against men), misogyny is termed by most feminist theories as a political ideology like racism and antisemitism that justifies and maintains the subordination of women to men.
Forms of misogyny
There are many different forms of misogyny. In its most overt expression, a misogynist will openly hate all women simply because they are female. Other forms of misogyny may be less overt. Some misogynists may simply be prejudiced against all women, or may hate women who do not fall into one or more acceptable categories. Entire cultures may be said to be misogynist if they treat women in ways that can be seen as harmful. Examples include forcing women to tend to all domestic responsibilities, demanding silence from a woman, or beating a woman. Subscribers to one model, the mother/whore dichotomy, hold that women can only be "mothers" or "whores." Another variant is the virgin/whore dichotomy, in which women who do not adhere to a saintly standard of moral purity are considered "whores." [citation needed]
Frequently, the term misogynist is used in a looser sense as a term of derision to describe anyone who holds an unpopular or distasteful view about women as a group. A man who considers himself "a great lover of women," therefore, might somewhat paradoxically be termed a misogynist by those who consider his treatment of women sexist. Archetypes of this type of man might be Giacomo Casanova and Don Juan, who were both reputed for their many libertine affairs with women. Misogyny is a negative attitude towards women as a group, and so need not fully determine a misogynist's attitude towards each individual woman. The fact that someone holds misogynist views may not prevent them from having positive relationships with some women. Conversely, simply having negative relationships with some women does not necessarily mean someone holds misogynistic views. The term, like most negative descriptions of attitudes, is used as an epithet and applied to a wide variety of behaviors and attitudes. As with other terms, the more antipathetic one's position is in regards to misogyny, the larger the number of misogynists and the greater variety of attitudes and behaviors who fall into one's perception of "misogynist."[specify] This is, of course, the subject of much controversy and debate with opinions ranging widely as to the extent and breadth of misogyny in society.
Eve rides astride the Serpent on a capital in Laach Abbey church, 13th century
Misogyny in religion
See also: Feminist theology
Misogyny can be traced back to the origins of Modern civilization, such as in Greece and Judea, in which stories and legends on the Fall of Man into a world of tragedy and death had been brought about by a woman. In both cultures, the creation of man is primary, and woman an afterthought. In Greek mythology, the human race had already existed previous to the creation of women — a peaceful, autonomous existence as a companion to the gods. When Prometheus decides to steal the secret of fire from the gods, Zeus becomes infuriated and decides to punish humankind with an "evil thing for their delight" — Pandora, the first woman, who carried a jar (usually described — incorrectly — as a box) she was told to never open. Epimetheus (the brother of Prometheus) is overwhelmed by her beauty, disregards Prometheus' warnings about her, and marries her. Pandora cannot resist peeking into the jar, and by opening it unveils all evil into the world — labour, sickness, old age, and death.[1] During the Great Jubilee, Pope John Paul II issued an apology for all the past sins of the Roman Catholic Church, dividing the sins into seven categories. Among general sins, sins in service of the truth, sins against Christian unity, sins against Jews, sins against respect of love, peace and culture, and sins against human rights, he also apologized for sins against the dignity of women and minorities.
The church has been criticized for being misogynistic. "The foundations of early Christian misogyny — its guilt about sex, its insistence on female subjection, its dread of female seduction — are all in St. Paul's epistles. They provided a convenient supply of divinely inspired misogynistic texts for any Christian writer who chose to use them; his statements on female subjection were still being quoted in the twentieth century opponents of equality for women."[2] Writers such as John Knox have been singled out for criticism.
However, given that Mary Magdalene became a saint and was one of the first witnesses to the Resurrection of Jesus, many argue that Christianity has ultimately raised the status of women, despite the attitudes of some individuals. In the New Testament, Jesus treats women with respect, even going so far as to save a woman caught in adultery from stoning in John 8. The apostle Paul in 1 Corinthians 5 states that wives belong to their husbands, and equally husbands belong to their wives. See the article on Christian feminism for a fuller discussion.
Misogyny in philosophy
Arthur Schopenhauer is famous for his essay "On Women" (Über die Weiber), in which he expressed his opposition to what he called "Teutonico-Christian stupidity" on female affairs. He claimed that "woman is by nature meant to obey." The essay does give two compliments however: that "women are decidedly more sober in their judgment than men are" and are more sympathetic to the suffering of others. However, the latter was discounted as weakness rather than humanitarian virtue.
Nietzsche is known for arguing that every higher form of civilization implied stricter controls on women (Beyond Good and Evil, 7:238); he frequently insulted women, but is best known for phrases such as "Women are less than shallow," and "Are you going to women? Do not forget the whip!"[3] Nietzsche's reputation as a misogynist is disputed by some, pointing out that he also made unflattering statements about men. Nietzsche can easily be interpreted as anti-feminist, believing that women were primarily mothers and opposing the modern notion of women's liberation on the grounds that he considered it a form of slave morality. Whether or not this amounts to misogyny, whether his polemic statements against women are meant to be taken literally, and the exact nature of his opinions of women, are more controversial.[4]
The philosopher Otto Weininger, in his 1903 book Sex and Character, characterized the "woman" part of each individual as being essentially "nothing," and having no real existence, having no effective consciousness or rationality.[5] Weininger says, "No men who really think deeply about women retain a high opinion of them; men either despise women or they have never thought seriously about them." The author August Strindberg praised Weininger for probably having solved the hardest of all problems, the "woman problem."
Tuesday, September 16, 2008
Negative Religious View of Women
Fodder (or mockery) for the Jihadists (yes I'm talking to you Council). Joan.
Negative Religious Views of Women
Hinduism
It is the nature of women to seduce men in this (world); for that reason, the wise are never unguarded in the (company of) females. For women are able to lead astray in (this) world not only a fool, but even a learned man, and (to make) him a slave of desire and anger.
(When creating them) Manu allotted women (a love of their) bed, (of their) seat and (their) ornaments, impure desires, wrath, dishonesty, malice, and bad conduct.
Laws of Manu 2:213, p. 69; 9:14, p. 330)[1]
Theravada Buddhism
‘How are we to conduct ourselves, Lord, with regard to womankind?’
‘As not seeing them, Ananda.’
‘But if we should see them, what should we do?’
‘No talking, Ananda.’
‘But if they should speak to us, Lord, what are we to do?’
‘Keep wide awake, Ananda.’
(Maha Parinnibana Suttana, 5:9, Digha Nikaya 2:141, in Rhys Davids, Dialogues of the Buddha, vol. 2, p. 154)
Mahayana Buddhism
You should know that when men have close relationships with women, they have close relationships with evil ways…
Fools lust for women like dogs in heat..
Women can ruin the precepts of purity.
They can also ignore honor and virtue.
Causing one to go to hell, they prevent rebirth in heaven.
Why should a wise delight in them?
(Speech of the Buddha to King Udayana, from the Mahratnakuta, quote in Paul, Women in Buddhism, pp. 30, 31, 41-2.
Christianity
Do you not all know that each of you (Women) is also an Eve?...You are the Devil/s gateway, you are the unsealer of the forbidden tree, you are the first deserter of the divine law, you are the one who persuaded him who the devil was too weak to weak to attack. How easily you destroyed man, the image of God! Because of the death which you brought upon us, even the Son of God had to die.
(Tertullian, Church Father, in De Cultu Feminarum 1:1, quote in D. Bailey, The Man Woman Relation)
Islam
Men are the maintainers of women because Allah has made some of them to excel others and because they spend out of their property; the good women are therefore obedient, guarding the unseen as Allah has guarded; and (as to) those on whose part you fear desertion, admonish them, and leave them alone in the sleeping-places and beat them; then if they obey you, do not seek a way against them; surely Allah is High, Great.
(Qur’an 4:34)[2]
[1] Laws of Manu, trans. G. Buhler. Sacred books of the East vol. 25. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1886.
[2] The Koran, Trans. M. H. Shakir; Electronic Text Center, University of Virginia (10/19/01)<http://etext.virginia.edu/koran.html >.
Negative Religious Views of Women
Hinduism
It is the nature of women to seduce men in this (world); for that reason, the wise are never unguarded in the (company of) females. For women are able to lead astray in (this) world not only a fool, but even a learned man, and (to make) him a slave of desire and anger.
(When creating them) Manu allotted women (a love of their) bed, (of their) seat and (their) ornaments, impure desires, wrath, dishonesty, malice, and bad conduct.
Laws of Manu 2:213, p. 69; 9:14, p. 330)[1]
Theravada Buddhism
‘How are we to conduct ourselves, Lord, with regard to womankind?’
‘As not seeing them, Ananda.’
‘But if we should see them, what should we do?’
‘No talking, Ananda.’
‘But if they should speak to us, Lord, what are we to do?’
‘Keep wide awake, Ananda.’
(Maha Parinnibana Suttana, 5:9, Digha Nikaya 2:141, in Rhys Davids, Dialogues of the Buddha, vol. 2, p. 154)
Mahayana Buddhism
You should know that when men have close relationships with women, they have close relationships with evil ways…
Fools lust for women like dogs in heat..
Women can ruin the precepts of purity.
They can also ignore honor and virtue.
Causing one to go to hell, they prevent rebirth in heaven.
Why should a wise delight in them?
(Speech of the Buddha to King Udayana, from the Mahratnakuta, quote in Paul, Women in Buddhism, pp. 30, 31, 41-2.
Christianity
Do you not all know that each of you (Women) is also an Eve?...You are the Devil/s gateway, you are the unsealer of the forbidden tree, you are the first deserter of the divine law, you are the one who persuaded him who the devil was too weak to weak to attack. How easily you destroyed man, the image of God! Because of the death which you brought upon us, even the Son of God had to die.
(Tertullian, Church Father, in De Cultu Feminarum 1:1, quote in D. Bailey, The Man Woman Relation)
Islam
Men are the maintainers of women because Allah has made some of them to excel others and because they spend out of their property; the good women are therefore obedient, guarding the unseen as Allah has guarded; and (as to) those on whose part you fear desertion, admonish them, and leave them alone in the sleeping-places and beat them; then if they obey you, do not seek a way against them; surely Allah is High, Great.
(Qur’an 4:34)[2]
[1] Laws of Manu, trans. G. Buhler. Sacred books of the East vol. 25. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1886.
[2] The Koran, Trans. M. H. Shakir; Electronic Text Center, University of Virginia (10/19/01)<http://etext.virginia.edu/koran.html >.
Tuesday, September 9, 2008
Welcome Back for Season Two
After a summer hiatus I am happy to announce that the blog is back in motion bringing the rights for the disadvantaged, the weak and the downtrodden (the things that Jesus would do) to the misogynist, Exeter CRC Council's attention. Please continue to email and sent your submissions.
If last season was an indicator of how this season will go we should see a widened audience while keeping the "Islamic jihadists" at bay. The Hank Den Hollanders, Mark Den Hollanders, Evert VanSligtenhorsts, Albert Hummels, Tim DeWeerds, Fred Nymans, Albert Mulder, the self acclaimed leader of the church Harry Frielink and the Ken Boersmas is be (again) our greatest customers. Thanks for your patronage. I especially appreciate (council's insider letters) your letters of support. This year as last will make sure that you anonymity is protected.
I see that the Exeter CRC site has been updated and lists Jennifer Branderhorst, her father and mother Henry and back door troll Sadie Post as well as Harold and Alida DeVries as "leaders" of the church. Wow. Of course the biggest picture was not of the biggest group but gee whiz, Harry Frielink. Go figure.
Church certainly took a dump on attendance for the summer and the outdoor service was a flop. But, then again the Exeter CRC is not really about getting new people to the church it is about self perpetuating the same people. Best, part was the holding onto the Ozzie and Harry(iette) show and holding onto 1950's values when you only have to convince your kids. Outreach has been reduced to an incestuous relaitonship. Kinfolk need only apply.
The finances are out of control but that often occurs when a preacher is not performing as a shepherd. You can't rule with an iron fist because the banging hand of irreligiousity is scaring the flock.
Welcome back.
Joan
If last season was an indicator of how this season will go we should see a widened audience while keeping the "Islamic jihadists" at bay. The Hank Den Hollanders, Mark Den Hollanders, Evert VanSligtenhorsts, Albert Hummels, Tim DeWeerds, Fred Nymans, Albert Mulder, the self acclaimed leader of the church Harry Frielink and the Ken Boersmas is be (again) our greatest customers. Thanks for your patronage. I especially appreciate (council's insider letters) your letters of support. This year as last will make sure that you anonymity is protected.
I see that the Exeter CRC site has been updated and lists Jennifer Branderhorst, her father and mother Henry and back door troll Sadie Post as well as Harold and Alida DeVries as "leaders" of the church. Wow. Of course the biggest picture was not of the biggest group but gee whiz, Harry Frielink. Go figure.
Church certainly took a dump on attendance for the summer and the outdoor service was a flop. But, then again the Exeter CRC is not really about getting new people to the church it is about self perpetuating the same people. Best, part was the holding onto the Ozzie and Harry(iette) show and holding onto 1950's values when you only have to convince your kids. Outreach has been reduced to an incestuous relaitonship. Kinfolk need only apply.
The finances are out of control but that often occurs when a preacher is not performing as a shepherd. You can't rule with an iron fist because the banging hand of irreligiousity is scaring the flock.
Welcome back.
Joan
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)