|
sirius
Apr 20, 2009 11:46:54 GMT -5
Post by grandmalou on Apr 20, 2009 11:46:54 GMT -5
I have no clue how to start a new thread, as my dear daughter suggested, and so when she gets back from Minneapolis maybe she can show me how. But since beginning to read her blog, I find myself nit-picking? at my poor dh a lot, and then getting really mad at first him, then myself for being that way. Just wondered if any of the rest of you feel that way...like pretty much you have a dh who is super good to you, an answer to prayer (so to speak)...and then he does some little itty bitty dumb thing, like maybe a typical man thing, KWIM? And it hits some hot button in you, and POOF! the wicked witch from the west takes over! And suddenly I remember what made me decide WHY I never wanted to get married again, and what made me want to start a "Million Women Mad March" in the 70's... Sirius, perhaps this is what is happening to you right now...you basically stepped into the middle of a PILE of estrogen overload... poor guy!
|
|
marie
New Member
Posts: 39
|
sirius
Apr 20, 2009 15:19:54 GMT -5
Post by marie on Apr 20, 2009 15:19:54 GMT -5
grandmalou, I can understand that feeling. sometimes things are going along so well and then one little teeny things happen and "BAM", my poor husband is wondering what went wrong and then I realize that I have been thinking about some poor woman's story. I think I am transfering anger and confusion from that place over mine. So you are not alone. But after reading what a lot of women have endured in abuse and neglect from their husbands, it has made me really thankful for my husband. I guess I thought for a long time that since I had it so good that this is what men were generally like (that coupled with a good father, kind brothers and in-laws). And I think it would be easy for me to pontificate on the "right" way to do things because I think everyone's situation is like my own. I think that might be where some churches are at fault too. The leadership judges everyone's experience by their own and are too quick to give out "one size fits all" solutions.
|
|
|
sirius
Apr 20, 2009 17:00:41 GMT -5
Post by sirius on Apr 20, 2009 17:00:41 GMT -5
I'll debate some more of Sirius's points. First he says: If the christian can’t get that right why does the intellectual consider they have anything right that they’d spend so much time refuting something Scripture obviously does not teach? Either the intellectual atheist isn’t so intellectual, they’re out to make a fast buck, they’re just a God hater for the sake of being a God hater, or any combination of the three. Then he says: The intellectual that argues with the christian isn’t stupid. I said the opposite.To which I say, if you can't even keep your story straight from one post to the next, give it up. since when is 'not as intellectual as they think' the same as stupid?
|
|
|
sirius
Apr 20, 2009 17:02:56 GMT -5
Post by sirius on Apr 20, 2009 17:02:56 GMT -5
I understand everybody's reaction to Sirius' tone, but if you read carefully what he is saying, he is saying that a large % of Christianity has it ALL WRONG...I totally agree. The point about the intellectual christian/atheist only said that most christians don't understand and the intellectual atheist is debating "unlearned" Christians. (sure what he said after that about being God haters was pretty inflammatory, but read the rest.) Ummm, at least I think that is what he was saying???Sirius, am I on the right track here? Correct! ...and thank you for reading between the lines and trying to understand me despite my texas tone!
|
|
|
sirius
Apr 20, 2009 17:24:20 GMT -5
Post by Kaderin on Apr 20, 2009 17:24:20 GMT -5
@sirius
The tone in your original post to which every one who posted here reacted badly. That tone. Honestly, you can't feign innocence when this is the only introduction thread anyone was attacked.
It's not about you asserting that 90% of all Christians are wrong (heck, I and others assert that about 100% of them), it's the way you assert it. The derision you display, as well as flaunting your superiority. How you set yourself and your own belief up as the standard and The Truth (TM)
WTF? You're completly ignoring reality, as in: it's a reality that millions of Christians hold the beliefe atheism equals immorality. Which contributes to atheist discrimination. It doesn't matter if it's not in the Scripute, it is a widely-held Christian belief. I bet you don't believe in Catholic doctrine, but that doesn't mean it doesn't exist, nor that you shouldn't argue against it. Actually, that gives us even more reason to argue against it. Just because YOU don't believe it, that doesn't mean it's not worth addressing.
Oh, and who exactly are you calling "weak-minded"? *raises eyebrow* Because I have a suspicion, but I'm giving you the benefit of doubt here...
And just because you share some positions with atheists rather than Christians, that doesn't make it all better for me - what's your measure of not thinking that atheist you linked is an idiot? That's right, he's not an idiot because he agrees with you. Woohoo, I feel so validated.
Look, everyone here was offended by your behaviour. Stop pretending oblivion, acknowledge it, apologize (<- this one's optional, but it would be nice) and don't do it again. Then we can all be happy little campers and actually discuss the points you raised.
@vicky
Ha! That post is hilarious! And it really does sound insane...
@grandma Lou
I generally really like your posts, but this statement here...
really hit my berserk button.
First of all - No. Just no. We have legitimate reason to dislike sirius' conduct. Also, I doubt Jeb in particular suffers from estrogen poisoning.
It's been a longtime tactic of the patriarchy to write women's anger off as illegitimate. Always portrayed as fickle, emotional creatures - obviously, when women get angry, it's never anything done to them, it's always their own nature's fault.
Just like with this stupid PMS question - "Are you PMSing right now?" as in "I doubt that anger is valid and due to something I've done and should take responsibility for. Must be your hormones." A man's anger is never doubted.
So, um...yeah. Just wanted to add that.
|
|
|
sirius
Apr 20, 2009 17:31:22 GMT -5
Post by sirius on Apr 20, 2009 17:31:22 GMT -5
Sirius ~ I absolutely will not address anything in your post. Why not? Got it all figured out? Was this before or after not following man to follow the men that interpreted and defined scripture for you via the Young's Concordance? Was this after you took Job and applied his situation to all humans to perceive God as a mean sovereign God that rules all human hearts arbitrarily? You continue to work out how your experience played out but you will not revisit your theology, the root? Interesting indeed!
|
|
|
sirius
Apr 20, 2009 17:35:18 GMT -5
Post by sirius on Apr 20, 2009 17:35:18 GMT -5
But since beginning to read her blog, I find myself nit-picking? at my poor dh a lot, and then getting really mad at first him, then myself for being that way. Just wondered if any of the rest of you feel that way...like pretty much you have a dh who is super good to you, an answer to prayer (so to speak)...and then he does some little itty bitty dumb thing, like maybe a typical man thing, KWIM? And it hits some hot button in you, and POOF! the wicked witch from the west takes over! And suddenly I remember what made me decide WHY I never wanted to get married again, and what made me want to start a "Million Women Mad March" in the 70's... Sirius, perhaps this is what is happening to you right now...you basically stepped into the middle of a PILE of estrogen overload... poor guy! Yes, well, it is definitely part of it. If I posted as a female I would be slammed for my 'tone' and beliefs but not to the degree we have seen. I expected to be slammed but not to this degree. Speaks volumes doesn't it?
|
|
|
sirius
Apr 20, 2009 18:15:11 GMT -5
Post by sirius on Apr 20, 2009 18:15:11 GMT -5
WTF? You're completly ignoring reality, as in: it's a reality that millions of Christians hold the beliefe atheism equals immorality. Which contributes to atheist discrimination. It doesn't matter if it's not in the Scripute, it is a widely-held Christian belief. I bet you don't believe in Catholic doctrine, but that doesn't mean it doesn't exist, nor that you shouldn't argue against it. Actually, that gives us even more reason to argue against it. Just because YOU don't believe it, that doesn't mean it's not worth addressing. Oh, and who exactly are you calling "weak-minded"? *raises eyebrow* Because I have a suspicion, but I'm giving you the benefit of doubt here... If an atheist can read the bible and see that all are born moral that is what they should be arguing.....that scripture says all are moral. Why don't they? Why is scripture left out of the debate? No I don't believe catholic doctrine, neither do I debate it. I debate christian theology not the whore drunk with the blood of the saints theology. This doesn't mean there are no believers in the cc. The weak minded in that context was both atheist and christian, but mostly christian. If they weren't running around trying to control the world with such weak contradicting doctrine no one would feel the need to debunk their ignorance. They can't preach the gospel to change the world because they don't know what it is and they are hypocrites not living the gospel they claim. So they attempt to feel strong trying to insert their religion into politics and institutions instead of changing the heart of men with the gospel. And just because you share some positions with atheists rather than Christians, that doesn't make it all better for me - what's your measure of not thinking that atheist you linked is an idiot? That's right, he's not an idiot because he agrees with you. Woohoo, I feel so validated. Look, everyone here was offended by your behaviour. Stop pretending oblivion, acknowledge it, apologize (<- this one's optional, but it would be nice) and don't do it again. Then we can all be happy little campers and actually discuss the points you raised. He agrees with me on that issue, but in christianity it is The Issue -Total Depravity. Mans religious house of cards stands or falls on that one doctrine. Your validation in this is irrelevant, is it not? Am I wrong here? Do you know what any of it means? Just asking because I don't know your background well enough. Offended? Which definition are you using? Since this is all about apostasy from christianity I use the biblical definition so no, no one here was offended. What I know is that I am 'guilty' of being created a man and that I am 100% certain of my 18 year tried and tested beliefs. That not once in 13 years of marriage have I asked or required my wife to believe anything other than what she chooses to believe (that's an absurd impossibility), and that in 18 christian years I have not asked or required that any human believe anything other than what they choose to believe (that's an absurd impossibility).
|
|
|
sirius
Apr 20, 2009 18:29:47 GMT -5
Post by grandmalou on Apr 20, 2009 18:29:47 GMT -5
Kaderin; This really hits the nail on the head, doesn't it? I see what you mean, and WOW! realize now, that I wound up :-feeling 'repentant' and apologized later to my husband for being in a snit! But generally we wind up laughing about our goofy disagreements, and I actually never thought about it for many years now, that we women ARE expected to kowtow and hang our heads in shame when we've gotten angry, no matter how legit that anger is. I think I was sorta giving Sirius the benefit of the doubt, thinking maybe he had not really read about some of the horrendous abuses Laura's and "Vyckie's patriarchal husbands had imposed on them. Anyway, thanks for the 'wake-up' call.
"It's been a longtime tactic of the patriarchy to write women's anger off as illegitimate. Always portrayed as fickle, emotional creatures - obviously, when women get angry, it's never anything done to them, it's always their own nature's fault. "
|
|
|
sirius
Apr 20, 2009 18:35:00 GMT -5
Post by sirius on Apr 20, 2009 18:35:00 GMT -5
I have read, but why are all men included with those wack-jobs and guilty before proven innocent?
|
|
|
sirius
Apr 20, 2009 18:43:12 GMT -5
Post by jemand on Apr 20, 2009 18:43:12 GMT -5
all men aren't. But you are sirius, because you refuse to consider any explanation for our reaction other than "Poor me persecuted by the berserking women angry at me for being born male."
Nope. Couldn't possibly be something you said. HAD to be us women overreacting and unfairly punishing you for an accident of birth.
Which, along with what you said to begin with, lands you SQUARELY in the company of the whack-jobs and jerks.
|
|
linnea
Junior Member
Posts: 80
|
sirius
Apr 20, 2009 18:47:31 GMT -5
Post by linnea on Apr 20, 2009 18:47:31 GMT -5
since when is 'not as intellectual as they think' the same as stupid?
Since when are they opposites?
|
|
|
sirius
Apr 20, 2009 18:48:15 GMT -5
Post by anotheramy on Apr 20, 2009 18:48:15 GMT -5
I'm an 8th generation Texan, and this is not a tone I have ever encountered.
|
|
|
sirius
Apr 20, 2009 19:22:03 GMT -5
Post by nell65 on Apr 20, 2009 19:22:03 GMT -5
Hi Sirius - In the off chance you are serious about becoming part of this community, I suggest you spend some time on the following blog: finallyfeminism101.wordpress.com/Once you feel you have understood what is posted there, and addressed your questions there to those who have volunteered to lead new comers through the process of seeing the patriarchy all around them, then, you should be ready to be a full and supportive member of this community. While Vickie and Laura don't position themselves or their online community as feminist - nonetheless, they have lived patriarchy and they critique it from within certain knowledge of what it is. As does every nearly every woman who posts here, again self-named feminist or not. (Hints: Patriarchy does not mean 'all men'; if you don't behave in the named way, then it is *not about you*; if you do, the time to examine your own behavior and reactions is now.) You obviously don't have that knowledge, and honestly, no one here should waste their time answering your first questions and attending to your hurt feelings about new ideas and new world views. Once you are ready, there are people here - mostly women - who are ready and willing to engage in Christian teaching and biblical teaching with you. As an atheist, I am not. Whatever you have faith in is your business and I have no interest in whether or not you agree with the rest of Christians in this world (though your slamming of Catholicism there was pretty fracking ugly, if you ask me, and I recommend you definitely don't go there again, even in jest. If you do, I will ask Laura and Vickie to ban your ass. I won't be alone.) Finally - an introduction thread is most definitely not the place to demand that other people, and your hosts in particular 'respond to your points.' Nell
|
|
|
sirius
Apr 20, 2009 19:31:56 GMT -5
Post by krwordgazer on Apr 20, 2009 19:31:56 GMT -5
Sirius, I would encourage you to read your opening post again, and as you do so, imagine that you're encountering it for the first time, as a stranger who doesn't know you.
I would suggest that you picture the way your words would sound to a group of people who have rallied around one simple idea-- that patriarchal ideas of male superiority hurt women. Most of us have the scars to show it.
Whether or not you intended your words to sound as they sounded, you came across as saying, "let me, the all-wise male, come in and straighten all of you out." You spoke as one who had not considered your audience at all, and your words seemed to lack the gentleness of that wisdom which is "pure, peaceable, considerate, willing to yield, full of mercy, impartial and sincere." (James 3:17)
I do not believe that any of us has a corner on truth. We are finite and fallible, and none of us should be so convinced of our own position that we are unwilling to listen to or consider input from anyone else. James 3:13 says that humility comes from wisdom. But all we could find in your "wisdom" was arrogance. Why should we listen to such "wisdom"? How can we ignore your tone and address only the points you make, when your tone renders all of your points suspect?
The fact is that whatever you had to say was drowned out by the tone in which you said it-- a tone which disrespected atheists and theists alike, as you told us you were above us all. You are wrong about being above the rest of us-- so we are justified in thinking you may be just as wrong about everything else.
If you want to be listened to with respect, then speak with respect. We will respond in kind.
|
|
|
sirius
Apr 20, 2009 19:49:57 GMT -5
Post by sirius on Apr 20, 2009 19:49:57 GMT -5
all men aren't. But you are sirius, because you refuse to consider any explanation for our reaction other than "Poor me persecuted by the berserking women angry at me for being born male." I understand the reaction and I agree it is justified. I said I expected it. Nope. Couldn't possibly be something you said. HAD to be us women overreacting and unfairly punishing you for an accident of birth. Which, along with what you said to begin with, lands you SQUARELY in the company of the whack-jobs and jerks. Sure it is what I said. No one to blame but me. I can't take blame for the overreacting though. The 'whack-jobs' were insecure patriarch theologically wrong sorry excuses for men. You don't know me but no, that's not me. I don't abuse nature. No one here knows my world as Vyckie keeps alluding to.
|
|
|
sirius
Apr 20, 2009 19:51:33 GMT -5
Post by sirius on Apr 20, 2009 19:51:33 GMT -5
I'm an 8th generation Texan, and this is not a tone I have ever encountered. You must be in Dallas......
|
|
|
sirius
Apr 20, 2009 20:01:29 GMT -5
Post by sirius on Apr 20, 2009 20:01:29 GMT -5
You obviously don't have that knowledge, and honestly, no one here should waste their time answering your first questions and attending to your hurt feelings about new ideas and new world views. hurt feelings? new ideas? new world view? Can you explain what you are talking about please? Finally - an introduction thread is most definitely not the place to demand that other people, and your hosts in particular 'respond to your points.' I see no rule against it and see discussions in other intros, but thanks for your opinion.
|
|
|
sirius
Apr 20, 2009 20:15:03 GMT -5
Post by jadehawk on Apr 20, 2009 20:15:03 GMT -5
all men aren't. But you are sirius, because you refuse to consider any explanation for our reaction other than "Poor me persecuted by the berserking women angry at me for being born male." I understand the reaction and I agree it is justified. I said I expected it. Nope. Couldn't possibly be something you said. HAD to be us women overreacting and unfairly punishing you for an accident of birth. Which, along with what you said to begin with, lands you SQUARELY in the company of the whack-jobs and jerks. Sure it is what I said. No one to blame but me. I can't take blame for the overreacting though. The 'whack-jobs' were insecure patriarch theologically wrong sorry excuses for men. You don't know me but no, that's not me. I don't abuse nature. No one here knows my world as Vyckie keeps alluding to. don't spend much time on the internet, do you. "you" is what you write, and what you wrote so far was one No True Scotsman with attitude, followed by "oh poor me, attacked by the feminazis". As such, "you" are indeed squarely in "condescending jerk" territory
|
|
|
sirius
Apr 20, 2009 20:15:47 GMT -5
Post by sirius on Apr 20, 2009 20:15:47 GMT -5
I would suggest that you picture the way your words would sound to a group of people who have rallied around one simple idea-- that patriarchal ideas of male superiority hurt women. Most of us have the scars to show it. My balanced opinion there is that abuse of male superiority hurt women. I know many disagree of course and that's fine, but surely if both husband and wife are in agreement here and there is no abuse from either party there are no scars, correct? Whether or not you intended your words to sound as they sounded, you came across as saying, "let me, the all-wise male, come in and straighten all of you out." You spoke as one who had not considered your audience at all, and your words seemed to lack the gentleness of that wisdom which is "pure, peaceable, considerate, willing to yield, full of mercy, impartial and sincere." (James 3:17) Why is it the all wise male? If my wife had posted the same would it be the all wise female? Of course you'll say it would but.... I understand those that have been 'abused' by whack-jobs would perceive that I lack gentleness etc... I will be more considerate in this area when I can be. Thanks. I do not believe that any of us has a corner on truth. We are finite and fallible, and none of us should be so convinced of our own position that we are unwilling to listen to or consider input from anyone else. James 3:13 says that humility comes from wisdom. But all we could find in your "wisdom" was arrogance. Why should we listen to such "wisdom"? How can we ignore your tone and address only the points you make, when your tone renders all of your points suspect? The fact is that whatever you had to say was drowned out by the tone in which you said it-- a tone which disrespected atheists and theists alike, as you told us you were above us all. You are wrong about being above the rest of us-- so we are justified in thinking you may be just as wrong about everything else. If you want to be listened to with respect, then speak with respect. We will respond in kind. What you call arrogance I call confidence. I am willing to try and tone it down but I have yet to see anyone other than Kaderin address anything in my OP. I am used to people interpreting my words this way but they still discuss the issues. Can we meet somewhere in the middle and work on it from both ends? Sounds reasonable to me.
|
|
|
sirius
Apr 20, 2009 20:18:15 GMT -5
Post by sirius on Apr 20, 2009 20:18:15 GMT -5
don't spend much time on the internet, do you. over 30,000 forum post including admin and mod for 4 years
|
|
|
sirius
Apr 20, 2009 20:31:37 GMT -5
Post by jadehawk on Apr 20, 2009 20:31:37 GMT -5
don't spend much time on the internet, do you. over 30,000 forum post including admin and mod for 4 years how did that line go.... better to be silent and thought stupid, than to open your mouth and remove all doubt. I'll type slowly: your IRL "you" is irrelevant because ultimately not knowable here. your "you" on this board is that of a condescending jerk. you don't want to be treated like one, stop behaving like one.
|
|
|
sirius
Apr 20, 2009 20:45:00 GMT -5
Post by themomma on Apr 20, 2009 20:45:00 GMT -5
I see where you are coming from sirius, but I do agree that you need to tone it down so that we can discuss some of your "topics".
Attacking anything (CC, atheists, etc) will not bring about good dialogue. You might want to reconsider what your purpose for posting here really is and respond with an appropriate tone.
If you are here to get everybody riled up, don't change a thing. On the other hand, I am intrigued about what your message really is as I totally agree, Christianity for the most part, has very little that is Christ-like in it. Men take the bible and pervert it to fit their personal agendas...
I did read your last few posts and it looks like you are willing to at least try...I hope you do and stick around. If you upset somebody, let them know it that wasn't your intent. Usually it is the tone not the actual thing being discussed.
|
|
|
sirius
Apr 20, 2009 20:45:52 GMT -5
Post by themomma on Apr 20, 2009 20:45:52 GMT -5
grandmalou, I can understand that feeling. sometimes things are going along so well and then one little teeny things happen and "BAM", my poor husband is wondering what went wrong and then I realize that I have been thinking about some poor woman's story. I think I am transfering anger and confusion from that place over mine. So you are not alone. But after reading what a lot of women have endured in abuse and neglect from their husbands, it has made me really thankful for my husband. I guess I thought for a long time that since I had it so good that this is what men were generally like (that coupled with a good father, kind brothers and in-laws). And I think it would be easy for me to pontificate on the "right" way to do things because I think everyone's situation is like my own. I think that might be where some churches are at fault too. The leadership judges everyone's experience by their own and are too quick to give out "one size fits all" solutions. I did this today, too! Yikes...
|
|
|
sirius
Apr 20, 2009 20:57:12 GMT -5
Post by nell65 on Apr 20, 2009 20:57:12 GMT -5
No. I will not be your teacher in this. I advise you again to check out the link I posted.
You are a clueless one, aren't you. You've got the longest discussion thread going on this topic, and the issue we are choosing to discuss is your behavior and words *here.* Obviously, we find that more worthy of addressing than your proposed issues.
|
|