Somehow in the last little while (few hundred years) some folks have been convinced that what has been working for a few thousand years (our Christian faith), the way we pair-up, support families, raise children for the last, what, 25,000 years, 50,000 years, 2,500,000 years, needs to be completely thrown out and replaced with its complete opposite. How's that been workin' for ya?
Where does this come from? Pride - arrogance - the source of all sin - Satan. Go ahead and say it: it's Satanic. I've gone along with the crowd and it flat doesn't work, I've repented and am working to get turned around. God help me!
Once upon a time decades ago, I was a female working in a male dominated field. At times, my job was physically challenging, and I could never do what a man could do. As a woman, I do not and will never have the same upper body strength as the average man. I accepted this, and, when an issue came up, my male co-workers helped me.
However, many of my female co-workers did NOT accept this. "Guuurl Power" and all. They treated the men badly and, as a result, THEY were treated badly. In my mind they lived in a fantasy world in regards to their abilities.
They were sold on "men and women are totally equal." And this was decades ago; I'm sure it's worse now. And... it's simply arrogance on the part of women. And yes, it's Satanic.
Many people (most) are confused about equality. They associate equality with sameness. They believe that to be equal people must be the same. They completely fail to understand the fact that men and women are equal yet DIFFERENT, and that these differences in no way imply inequality, anymore than differences in skin colors imply inequality.
Women and men might not be equal in physical strength, but they are equal as HUMAN BEINGS.
Many women, including many feminists past and present, have been completely and utterly fooled into believing that they must mimic men, do all that men do and essentially become men in words and deeds in order to be respected as equals by men. So today they join the military and want combat roles even while pregnant (fighter pilots). This is beyond absurd, it is completely insane. The Soviet Union also did this, in the name of an equality they confused with sameness, they had women working in the mines and laying railroad tracks.
How can so many be made so incapable of thinking critically, or just thinking? Women do not have to mimic men in order to be respected as women, and men do not have to mimic women in order to be respected as men. We are DIFFERENT and EQUAL. And neither should "submit" (a religious term that usually implies that men are in charge) to the other but live in equal partnership and cooperation with the other.
Cooperation is difficult, in all human endeavors. It is always easier to dominate and control, and it is the MOST PRIMITIVE choice (the animal choice)...but there is no love in this. Love is crushed by dominance and perverted by control. It can only flourish in cooperation, equality and freedom, not coercion, not submission to another.
When a woman has no independent source of income, no economic power, her relationship with a man is unbalanced, not matter how loving and loyal he might be. Such a woman is put in a position of DEPENDENCE, which is infantilizing by definition, and not very dignified.
Interesting point regarding equality and sameness. I think part of the reason that equality = sameness is due to the movie industry. How many films have we seen in which small, thin women literally beat up larger, stronger men with ease? On some level, I think many women want to believe that they are capable of doing that, because feminism has made them feel less than equal. Aka "being a man is the ideal, so I must prove I can do everything a man can do to be ideal."
Exactly! Which is interesting, in the sense that radical feminism, by looking at the male standard as the ideal standard, is completely denying and betraying the intrinsic value of the feminine. These women who seek to mimic men, then, it could be said, are truly anti-women, the ultimate misogynists.
What's funny in my former job is that I could do things that many of the men didn't have the patience to do, and they appreciated the tasks that I did.
The men seemed happy that I acknowledged our differences, and that I didn't try to negate their contribution. Conversely, they appreciated me, and when I needed help, they did not hesitate to step up without being asked. I think it's called mutual respect.
Yes...different and equal. We do not oppose but complement each other, which is why we are different but equal in value as human beings. This is respect indeed, respecting our differences and honoring our equality.
You miss the obvious which is that women must move forward in trust and that is why marriage is sacred, it is necessary to seek God’s grace in this dynamic, what you call ‘undignified’
The Divine does not demand that women submit to men and become totally dependent on men, as if they were children. But I understand that religions do, especially the 3 Abrahamic, Middle Eastern religions (Christianity, Judaism, Islam).
In the old days, thousands of years ago, when survival demanded that one be able to successfully hunt and kill a wholly mammoth, a women's dependence on a man was necessary. But we no longer hunt wholly mammoths, and anyone can earn an income today.
You have the right to your own antiquated beliefs. But do you realize that in this regard (women "submitting" to men) you share the same perspective as Muslims?
As a matter of fact the word Islam means submission. Christians and Muslims are like brothers after all. They don't worship the same God, but they worship the same way. Don't you feel weird about this? I would. I wouldn't want to have anything in common with Muslims.
And again, regarding "submission", it can be understandable that some men would want women to do this...because they want to be in control and in charge, they want to be the little king of their little castle.
But for women to believe this way, that's a little more difficult to understand. What kind of person would want to submit to another? After all, we are not monkeys.
22Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord. 23For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the Saviour of the body. 24Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in every thing. 25Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it; 26That he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word, 27That he might present it to himself a glorious church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish. 28So ought men to love their wives as their own bodies. He that loveth his wife loveth himself. -- Ephesians Ch. 5
And how old are these writings? And where do they come from? The Middle East, the same place that birthed Islam and its similar beliefs. No wonder they like to marry 9 years old girls.
No thank you. I wouldn't want a wife-child who would "submit" to me. I prefer adult women with independent minds.
I wish I had a good man in my life to protect and love me. Mine of 35 years fell prey to the social engineering and liberal feminist ideology. His status in the community demanded it of him...my story:
Ma’am, I’m sorry, but no serious scientist believes the earth is flat. Your 20 years of personal research cannot possibly compete with centuries of data, observations, and study. This is my last comment. I don’t have time to engage in discussions about certifiably wacky theories.
God doesn’t lie but a lot of people have some whacked, twisted interpretations of his truth. The irony of you telling me to “do research lady” is laughable.
I also believe God cannot lie and men do all the time. There are over 200 verses to support a level, stationary earth in the Bible. You'd have to believe in fairy tales to accept NASA's (Not A Space Agency) impossiBALL story. If we were flying through space, don't you think the Bible would have at least ONE verse mentioning it? Do some research, lady. You appear to "trust the scientism theories."
God doesn’t lie but a lot of people have some whacked, twisted interpretations of his truth. The irony of you telling me to “do research lady” is laughable.
I’ve studied it over twenty years, almost daily. I just believe what it says, to whom it says it. I can give you twenty verses making your rotating ball impossible. Can you give me one to support your theory?
Yes. A man is not a plan. I mean I have an awesome boyfriend who wants to provide for me and protect me and I let him do it, but I am not counting on him to always be able to do that. Disability and death happens, no matter how decent a person is there are things beyond our control. I saw that growing up and it was a big part of my decision to not have kids unless I could find a way to provide for them and homeschool them at the same time. Men are awesome but you have to have a backup plan, just as they should have a backup plan for women and know how to cook decently and keep the house reasonably clean with minimal time investment.
Right. I like how you assume that because I want a backup plan so I can properly raise my kids that my boyfriend and I are not planning to adopt in the future.
Besides, I hate cats with a passion. The only crazy cat lady I know has 2 adult children who are trying to liquidate her estate and stick her in a nursing home even though she is still competent and living independently. Her husband died 5 years ago, after cheating on her multiple times, including having another child with a mistress. Fortunately for the crazy cat lady her divorce lawyer sucked so they were still legally married when he died so she's got his pension.
Women should though. We all must take care of ourselves. Men though should see themselves as protectors too. But some women seem to be oblivious to their surroundings.
I agree and presumably you would agree that there is no need for women to compete on separate playing fields, basketball courts or swimming pools. For example there is no need for a women only WNBA or men only NFL/NBA/etc. Caitlin Clark could easily be a top scorer in the male NBA! Plus, we conscription for war should not be males only since women can protect themselves. You agree Vonu or are you going to back down like a schooled bitch?
I'll agree to it. One thing I learned from Leah Thomas is that women have no business being in sports. Except rhythmic gymnastics. Let's see a man change genders to compete there.
While I oppose any draft of anyone, we should allow women into any role they they are capable of performing, you're shooting yourself in the foot otherwise.
I am fine with women being in sports as long as they are not isolated and separated from males; we should have equal and inclusive playing fields, pools and courts. No reason to be sexist and exclude them or anyone else from competing against both or all genders.
Sure you are, you imagined women can protect themselves as well as men. At least you implied it. Don’t bring a knife to a gun fight and don’t bring a woman to a fight with men.
More Ron Paul. Really got into it as both protest to bailouts and against wars the neocons were and continue to push. Myself and 4 brothers served in the military and we’re opposed to neocon wars.
This is a fantastic discussion. I don't think it's a coincidence that as religious involvement has waned, deception in the form of feminism has flourished. Also, I see the big picture as a global agenda to reduce births through indoctrination; part of their whole genocidal scheme.
Agree. The whole goal of the 'global agenda' has been to destroy the family, traditional values, and self-reliance, so as to foster a dependence on the state to meet all of our needs. Increase tax rates to force wives out of the home into the job market, for instance.
Once viewed through that lens, it all becomes clear. And it is obvious that it has all been planned, since the 1960s at least and likely longer.
A bit of an anecdote: this past weekend, I attended a traditional Latin mass. One might expect it to be filled with old women; it was not. In fact, the majority there were young families with multiple children. As in "four children under five years old." Was the congregation huge? No. But then again, it is not in an area that has a huge Catholic population. But there were no tattoos, no weird hair and no disrespectful clothes.
A fun fact: Vatican II took place in the early to mid 1960s. Coincidence?
Nope. Vatican II was part of the show. The Catholic Church, along with every other church that has been around long enough to have a central authority structure, has long been corrupted by the Cabal. Like with all such organizations (the Freemasons come to mind) the 'local' people are fine folks, blissfully unaware of the evil perpetrated at the top of the organization. And many of the higher-level people also refuse to be compromised. Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò is an example; there are many others in the Catholic Church as in the other churches and organizations. Evil runs deep, but people of good will are fighting it. (Viganò even refuses to call the current Pope by his papal name -- still calls him 'Bergoglio.')
Yeah, I know Vatican II was part of the process. And I'm a big fan of Vigano.
The book "Windswept House" by Malachi Martin is a VERY interesting read. Fact disguised as fiction. BTW... Klaus Schwab is a minor character that makes a brief appearance.
This is the new reformation within the Roman Church. Vatican 2 was a mistake. The people are searching for a return to ancient traditions and forms of worship. As a Protestant, I find this to be very healthy. We have done similar things in our traditional denominations as each of the well know churches have already split over theological issues.
Female-centered cults have been the prime adversary of Christianity and Christians for millennia. Read the Bible, especially the account of Elijah, Jehu, Jezebel, and the House of Ahab. Or read James Frazer. Tells the same truth, really. Modern Christianity is feminized and woke-ified. Modern Christian men are gelded, subjugated to their wives and daughters, like their secular brethren.
The religion of America -- and the religion that America disperses by force or bribery throughout the planet -- is feminism and its offshoot, woke. Which is what political correctness used to be called.
Orthodox, traditional Christianity is increasing, outside of the old line mainline Protestant denominations. There is a stronger focus on marriage and child bearing. Our small church has many babies. Many of our mothers mostly homeschool and the fathers are the sole breadwinner. Everyone is more happy. Struggles? Of course. Unity? Absolutely.
All Elders and Deacons are men of character. Lord’s Day by Lord’s Day, we worship in old fashioned ways with much love within the congregation among the people. No laptop computers and no rock and rock bands.
The only American Protestant denomination that is growing in membership is the PCA, the Presbyterian Church in America.
We are those scary hardliner Calvinists who dare to exposit Scripture verbatim from our pulpits, and expect that our congregations understand that we who believe are being sanctified, becoming in God's eyes equal in holiness to His son Jesus.
Calvin made sense. There are others that join with the PCA that are similar. Sanctification takes a lifetime. We are all still sinners. I don’t wish to bash our Roman Catholic, nor our Eastern Orthodox brothers and sisters at all. King Jesus know His sheep, He will call them, and they will follow. In the in between times now, we teach in our little church…
Sola Scriptura
Our goal is to live Corum Deo, directly living in the face of our Lord and Saviour, King Jesus. On this earth it would kill us to see Him now in His Glorified body. On the Day of the Lord, the parousia, we will see Him face to face and King Jesus will give us our Glorified bodies, completely freed from sin. No more pain, no more suffering, no more disease, no more war, no more death. No more tears. Even for our loved family members who do not join us there. Not sure how. Human beings have extremely small brains and little imagination for what is possible. Jesus said “in my house there will be many mansions”.
This is our only hope. The blood of Jesus Christ at Calvary is our only righteousness.
“Jesus did it all, all to Him we owe, sin had left a crimson stain, He washed it white as snow.” Praise God from whom all blessings flow.
Excellent conversation! Thank you both. I completely agree. Women can stay home and nurture their husband and children, then work at a later time if they wish. I’ve seen it work happily.
I’m certain that I was born to care for a woman and our children, and to the extent that she feels the same more the blessing.
But I’m only one man, I’ve no interest in changing the competitive women who would be a poor fit anyway, so I found myself that woman, she had my children, God called her home and now my family is my children and grandchildren.
You awakened women can live as you please, but I’ll dodge you like potholes.
>Doctors are subject to malpractice claims if an intervention causes infertility. But no consequences befall a therapist whose advice is responsible for wasting a woman’s youth. Similarly, if you would go to a priest for advice, the religious agenda is readily apparent. Now, those who press on the levers of people’s life choices are allowed to give the impression they are unbiased and set above the trivial archaic notions of religion. They enjoy the esteem of being all-knowing about human psychology, while refusing to admit the most obvious truths.<
You truly do not know or even perceive the answer after reading this excellent discussion??
Hint: Wrong-headed feminist-brainwashed psychologists & psychiatrists are not held liable for misleading, misdirecting their patients (notably the female ones) into making choices that further the patients' stress, anxieties, and misery up to even ruining their lives. The professional shrinks keep their taped sessions private (doctor-patient privacy) so that their potentially destructive guidance cannot be at least shown in a courtroom to have taken the patient in a dangerous and further negative direction. Contrast this against a harmful / deadly outcome from medical treatment or surgery, where the physician may be proven by the physical evidence to have committed malpractice.
I won't argue your point since you apparently realize that obvious truths *DO* sometimes appear in opinion pieces (like this one); hence your choice of the adverb, "seldom"....
Now that Elizabeth is getting the numbers that she is, it's important to remember the first thing that we learned back in the early years of the Internet Relay Chat:
“Wives, submit to your own husbands, as to the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife even as Christ is the head of the church, his body, and is himself its Savior. Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit in everything to their husbands. Husbands, love your wives, as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her, that he might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the word, so that he might present the church to himself in splendor, without spot or wrinkle or any such thing, that she might be holy and without blemish. In the same way husbands should love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself. For no one ever hated his own flesh, but nourishes and cherishes it, just as Christ does the church, because we are members of his body. "Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and hold fast to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh." This mystery is profound, and I am saying that it refers to Christ and the church. However, let each one of you love his wife as himself, and let the wife see that she respects her husband.”
I read the entire passage. The rest is okay, but the part that I quoted is not, in my view. But to each his or her own, as long as it does not become law (as under Sharia law).
Islam literally means submission, which implies obeying the authority of the Prophet. Submission means obedience in religious contexts.
Respect is different, when you respect someone, it does not mean that you are under that person's authority...you can respect an equal.
Equality by the way does not mean sameness, although most people believe this. People can be different and equal...like women and men. Women do not have to fight in wars or to work on an oil rig or as lumberjacks to attempt to gain respect from men and prove that they are their equal.
False equivalence. You seem to be brainwashed and unable to think critically. Outside of the current popular culture. Popular culture is totally evil and highly destructive to human prosperity and happiness. Get educated and learn something real . That is the entire purpose of this excellent piece.
What do you know about sharia law? Women are mere property, a field a man can spread his seed on. It gets much worse. My mother lived in a military styled compound in Da’Haran, Saudi Arabia for several years with the western families. If they left the compound without a head to toe Burqua , they would be raped on sight. If they tried to drive a car, they would be arrested and beaten. By the sharia religious police.
Now go back and read the passages from Ephesians. What does God command the husband to do? Seems like you are brainwashed, just as the author of this piece is describing.
It feels so good to have found a nice rural Eastern Orthodox Church with tons of kids and families. Our priest is on number four of his own! I love singing the baptisms and renewing my faith that God will preserve His remnant until the end of time.
I love it when you write about feminism and misandry. Reading this, I recalled the interview (it's on Youtube) with Aaron Russo, in which he claimed that Nick Rockefeller told him the Rockefellers instituted feminism in order to double taxable income and have the state take over parenting and destroy the family. I also remembered Freud's nephew, propagandist Edward Bernays, promoting female smoking by calling cigarettes "Torches of Freedom". An early-feminist iteration of Bernays' vision, the Virginia Slims women's cigarette cheer, "You've come a long way, baby!", is mocked in the female misery catalogued by Janice and Hannah.
When Hannah reports that women are deliberately avoiding breastfeeding to saddle men with bottle-feeding duty, she emphasizes the break in the mother-child bond, but there is also the unnatural break in appropriate nutrition for the baby, making it dependent on commercial formula (unless the mother has expressed her milk). Another feminism-derived injury to the infant is the current prevalence of elective C-section deliveries to avoid childbirth pain. This deprives the child of beneficial vaginal probiotic bacteria that would otherwise colonize its skin and nasal and oral cavities as the baby emerges naturally.
I, too, have experienced the sweetness and solicitude of men toward women in contrast to the cuntcoalition-building of women ridiculing men. So much for toxic masculinity and the nurturing female! I think that Tradwife will catch on, as people are increasingly aware of our insidious social programming. Then both sexes can be more truly liberated from the state slaveholders enforcing feminism.
I am the Patriarch of my Christian family. I love my wife intensely and would die to protect her from deadly incoming harm and I am prepared and ready to do that anytime. Likewise I love all the women and girls in our church and work hard to show kindness, gentleness, and hospitality towards them. As well as their husbands, fathers, younger men, and boys.
Feminine women deserve respect and honor. Feminists? Not so much.
Women are NOT hardwired to love men, as the past 50 years of Total Feminism has proven conclusively. MEN are hardwired (created) to love and protect women. Women are hardwired to love infants, small children, and animals.
Women were created as HELPERS to the man -- not as his 'equal', not as his better, not as his 24/7 Hall Monitor and Judge. The manipulation of the inceptive urge in men to love women has led directly to the ruination of Western Civilization, and to the downfall of the U.S., Home Hive of the NWO. The New Woman Order.
Two things brought this planet into destruction, despair, and ruination: the desire of the female to have power over the male (and by extension, to have power over God the FATHER) and the failure of the male to restrict the female desire for 'liberation' and 'equality' and 'progress', and instead to Play the Hero by funding, enabling, and enforcing Total Feminism. These are, and were, all lies designed to annihilate your father-led families, dis-spirit you, and steal your wealth, power and freedom.
Janice Fiamengo has been at this a long time, though I have been at it longer. The Number One problem before the nation is not who is elected president -- shuck 'n jive -- but whether you can stop totalitarianism and slavery gradually being forced upon you via the collective power of women. And that tyranny was only possible when enough women had collective power to move the nation radically to the Left over a mere fifty years.
Women love having power and authority over men, though it is rebellion against God and devastation of societies and cultures. And men -- in general -- are too cowardly, weak and emasculated to stop them. Men have learned over the past century to go along with whatever women say, or else. Both the courts and LE have been on-board with the feminist program for four decades. Men are (quietly) fleeing from the Woke-Fem cultures of the anglo nations, and are turning their backs on nations that hate and persecute them. while chastising them for 'privilege' and 'toxicity'.
You can retain feminism and P.C. and your nations will fail and fall, soon. Or you can reject the brainwashing of the past century, and you may yet save and restore your nation. Suit yourselves.
Wow great wisdom, thanks for writing into this thread.
I am learning how well, when a respectful matriarchy works, the warriors, the protectors, the matriarchs, who, in their rightful place with their multidimensional wisdoms are at work for the greater good, works super well in Natural Law societies.
This is currently developing as we speak with the International Laws recognizing the North American Hereditary as the rightful claim holders of the Lands.
The matriarchs, mostly displaced or destroyed thru the Man War Machinery and the Trans-Atlantic controls, is slowly rebuilding.
Matriarchy worked in the past, with the concepts of spiritual connection as its primary element, something long lost in the worlds of divide and conquer.
Now in saying this, I am also saying each of us carry varying degrees of the Masculine and the Feminine Archetypal energies, no matter what sex we are born with.
And one concept I haven't dived into yet, was what one of my Hereditary Headsmen friends (Chief) said - I had it wrong, the women are actually the warriors, this actually makes sense, for who better be the 'protector' in spirit than a mother.
These are just words we can get hung up on... their origins are somewhat differing in each cultural language. When did the fighter protector, develop? The one who was only deemed necessary in a world where war is the primary focus. AND, who are we to dictate who goes to the battlefield? There is a role for the masculine/feminine in all roles we need to accomplish any task or we risk leaving out the multi-dimensionality approach.
There is much much we don't know about cultural balances, only what we are experiencing now, where the warrior is depicted as the man, the war machine and it doesn't seem to work.
So I do ponder instead of what are the influences on a society, versus a natural cultural world where the functionality of power either exists, or not, but the spiritual aspects of functionality for the greater good and protection of the whole develop the masculine and feminine roles.
I'm looking forward to hopefully seeing this returning shift toward matriarchy for the planet, not just North America.
No need to descend to Karl Jung’s archetype psychobabble.
Women will never protect society from evil, true evil. It takes a man to lead an army or a platoon to charge a hill in combat. Or to lead a SWAT team in a firefight in hand to hand combat. Women will get raped and killed pretty fast in any true exchange of force. It takes a man to be a Commander in Chief. Women are not qualified for that post. It has been like this for the entirety of human history for many thousands of years. Therefore, no woman is qualified to be our President or Vice President.
There are many ways to view matriarchy, certainly leaders aren't the doers.
I do definitely agree with you... in this war world we live in... but in the development towards peace we all (at least I hope we all) dream about will come from a genteel leadership.
That what I just said, also makes me think that I also know there are those who thrive in a battlefield and that warrior energy... perhaps this is your world? In any case I am grateful for protection when it is needed. However, I would never give up peace for it.
We have differing views - and I see no good in the current system of a 'government' that hasn't ties to evil energies - we need a reset alright!
Jung was an archetypal psychobabler? Had no idea - however if one wants to get hung up on differing perspectives... that is where babble dwells.
So Matriarchy is what I feel will shift the world into a spiritually enlightened humanity toward peace.
I'm sure you may wish to retort - but that is just a game in the bigger world of energetic influences. You know, like the forces of Mother Nature, one has nothing to compare to her strength.
Matriarchy is a cruel joke. There is only one God and no other, YHWH. There are no goddesses. When the Viking marches in, he will first rape you, then kill all the men, then make slaves of your male and female children, then burn your false temple to Ishtar and Gaia, then burn down your house. All your girls will become sex slaves in the harem. All your boys will be castrated and then forced into the army to fight or the harem so they can not impregnate the sex slaves there. Please grow up. Women need men to protect them from evil. American men used to do that in our country until the femenazis took control. Some of us old fashioned Christian men still do this. This what? Protect our women and children from danger. Why? We love them and can’t live without them. We will live with them for eternity in heaven, together. We love all the men, women, and children in our little church. We all want some of our grandchildren to spread the Gospel of Jesus Christ all over the earth. Perhaps your local tranny will protect you in his tutu and multicolored hair and fairy suit. Watch out, his face spikes might poke out your eyeball.
America needs far many more Christian masculine men who act like men and disregard all the femenist nonsense completely.
And by the way, exchange the word Viking with Islamic Jihadist. This will happen soon in Western Europe. Why do you think they are panicking now?
Bravo. This truth is so rarely, rarely spoken. And no wonder, in nations that long ago were conquered by Feminism and Globo-Woke.
Women, vastly empowered and privileged, refuse to hear the truth. While U.S. men are too neutered, cowardly, and fat from material comforts to dare to touch this Third Rail of life in New Amerika.
phew, I guess you can't actually hear me - I am after all in agreement when it comes to war!
I agree with you of the physical strength differences and the protection mode of a warrior. I do.
What I do believe also and don't feel you are hearing is that women, matriarchy - a true one that isn't infiltrated by Young Leaders with sidewards ambitions, could lead a society away from the need to be war like.
They are not the ones standing in front of the men on a battlefield -- not too many Joan of Arc's around these days, but there are a few... so many more soon with transhumanism perhaps.
But I think my picture of how I see a matriarchy is not what you can even conceive. Perhaps you are just soooo oriented towards war?
Perhaps this is what we have to go through to have our 'great reset'
maybe it is going through the worst imaginable that brings out the best in people?
I think there is a better way... but history keeps repeating with wars, herstory could be different.
The natural order of human beings in all time is that societies are led by men because they can enforce the laws with violence if necessary. Almost all normal men do not want violence because they will be ordered to war. Many men believe the highest aspirations for our women, is to be mothers and wives and sisters and grandmothers. Children are our future. Only biological women can do that. This is how YHWH made us. Wives and children need their husbands to protect them and provide for their physical needs for food, shelter, water, and energy, clothing, and all of it, etc….
Human beings love war, they always have and always will. Normal men do not wish to start useless wars that only protect Europe with the blood, treasure, and body bags of our American children. Just because some multiple billionaire gets more Ducats to toss up to the top of his pile and visit Davos every winter to plot our deaths and destruction.
There will not be a matriarchal reset. That’s how you turn a peaceful man into a Viking. Joan of Arc was a myth. I hear you perfectly clearly. I am saying you are just plain wrong and delusional with this line of thinking.
This is scripture in several places. “No one is good, no, not one”. With one exception YHWH the Son, fully man and fully God. History repeats with wars because the hearts of men are evil and desperately wicked. Not all men. It doesn’t take a lot of evil men to destroy society and a nation. This is why women like you need strong masculine good men to fight to protect you and your family. Our military is now trying to put our young soldiers in dresses and mutilate their genitals. Why? Who dreamed this insanity? A femenazi woman.
Many non-Indigenous people (Euro Americans) unfortunately believe that matriarchy is also about dominance and control, rather than spiritual connection. They see the universal order as a pyramid (hierarchy and dominance) rather than the circle (interrelation, kinship and interdependence).
It is difficult to break through such a mentality.
You keep making ridiculous assumptions, because you are incapable of thinking critically outside of your prejudices and tribal mindset.
I am and have always been anti-authoritarian, whether it comes from the left, the right, political ideology or religious dogma (such as Islam or any religious fundamentalism), or any institution or individual.
You have no idea who you are responding to.
Where did you stand on covid? I never wore a mask anywhere, never accepted the lockdown, claimed the freedom to come and go as I pleased everywhere and obviously never got the vaccine. The lockdowns, the mandates, that was authoritarianism, coercion, a violation of human rights. DID YOU COMPLY? Did you stay home like a good little obedient sheep? Did you wear a mask when asked to do so?
I DID NOT.
A patriarchal system and authoritarianism go hand in hand, because the patriarchy is about top down control, authority, dominant power. Whether a woman, a man or a donkey is in charge makes no difference under such a system.
You expressed your views. I expressed my views. We should agree to disagree. My views are 4000 years old. Feminists are trying to enforce their pagan views across society. Native Americans had no matriarchal society. Ever hear about Iroquois Nation? Or Aztecs? Or Blackfeet nation? They conquered other Indian nations, took slaves, killed the opposing men of the other tribes. Not so much Kumbaya. People are people in all cultures. Matriarchy projects weakness and invites invasion of more powerful Patriarchal conquistadors.
The Haudenosaunee Confederacy (Iroquois) actually had a council of elders, all WOMEN, who had the power to choose or demote a male chief. That's one form of matriarchy.
Here is more information about matriarchy in Native American cultures:
Matriarchy is not about dominant power, as patriarchy is. IT IS A SPIRITUAL WORLDVIEW. Matriarchy is symbolized by the circle (kinship and unity, interrelation, interdependence, balance, the cyclical aspect of life) rather than the pyramid, the patriarchal symbol (top down power, control, authority, dominance).
The universal symbol in Native American spirituality is the circle.
These are facts. You can have your own beliefs and worship the patriarchy, but you cannot deny facts about Native American cultures.
As far as Aztecs, yes they were patriarchal, which is why most ethnologists have so much admiration for them, because the Aztecs goal was DOMINANCE. Nothing excites patriarchal people more than even the mere thought of DOMINANCE, which is in and of itself a pathological obsession as well as the most PRIMITIVE choice one can make, unintelligently mimicking ANIMAL behavior.
One only can hope that the multidimensional capacities start opening up for more people... those who are robotically attuned to indoctrination are also those I would classify as in a box... Matt Ehret calls it the 'closed system' where only the defined boundaries are acceptable from data collection to how diverse one's community is. VS the open system of creative possibilities - these are people who are learned in the process of thinking... https://canadianpatriot.org/2022/08/28/biogeochemistry-and-open-system-thinking-with-vladimir-vernadsky/
"Women love having power and authority over men..."
Men had power, control and authority over women for centuries, and still do in some backward nations. So the wheels turn. I understand why so many women are so angry today. There is a variety of reasons, some valid, others not so. But, at the same time, I do not want to become their punching bag, so I avoid angry women.
As far as women and totalitarianism, here are a few thoughts, which might or might not be accurate. I think women, generally speaking, tend to favor safety. If a choice had to be made between freedom, which entails risks, and safety, a majority might choose safety. And where do most people run for safety, who do they expect will protect them? The government. Women might, generally speaking, expect more from the government than men, and expect it to legislate not so much to expand personal freedom but collective security, safety.
When some women are in positions of authority within the government, their focus might then be to strive to make us all safe, according to their own standards and whether we like it or not. And the end justifies the means, which is to say that totalitarianism and authoritarianism are justified when the common good is the professed goal.
Of course those are all generalizations, which might contain a hint of truth...or not.
Want for safety and security (what they advertised the covid shots were all about) false narrative apparently!
Want for control - some women in the political world are as domineering as men in that roll and even more vicious (Hilary) some are more spiritual (Marianne Williamson)
Want for Love and Approval - acceptance and soothing the ego
Want for Oneness - community and belongingness which has elements of them all...
But to want Freedom more than all these programs we've been imprinted with either by parenting or indoctrination, to want freedom more, IS Risky. It means self responsibility, self reliance, and self resiliency... most are taught to lean into the government for most of these things.
We would do well to bring back an education that taught these 3 most required elements for obtaining our Freedoms.
Nothing that Janice said, or that Elizabeth wrote, even was considered by you and your feminist friends here. And that, indeed, sums up the vile post-feminist nation you love so dearly. Faced with reality and the truth, you plug your ears and return to the vomit of your feminist cant about how The Evil Patriarchy oppressed women, and now it's Your Turn.
Lies. Attractive and yummy lies. As if The Evil Patriarchy (or men in general) EVER sought to destroy the human family, make endless war on men, little boys, and masculinity in general, and turn every societal institution into a resentment-drenched, mega-empowered feminist weapon against maleness.
You and your sisters will not be satisfied until all is in ruin around you, at which point you will STILL be looking around for some man or boy on whom to blame your selfishness, deceit, malevolence, and power-lust. May you reap double as you have sown.
Who are you ranting against, Micky? I am a man, and unlike you I do not fear women who claim their innate equality. I avoid angry, rageful women, hateful women, women who are prejudiced against men, but I welcome women who know who they are and do not believe that their place is below and behind a man. What kind a person would want a relationship or marriage with someone they consider to be below them? A psychopath?
The cultural disintegration we are witnessing is part of a program which has infiltrated all parts of society to divide and conquer us, and you are falling for it: divided by races, by sexes and a myriad of genders, by extreme ideologies.
I am well aware of forces dividing-and-conquering the dualities of this world. Far more aware than you. But whether male or female, you are a feminist.
You accuse just like a fembot. I won't go along with your childish men-had-their-turn and now it's womens' turn, and anybody not going along with that must FEAR WOMEN.
Like all fembots, you assume that any nation not genuflecting to your beloved Feminism and its fake Equality For Some is 'backward'. It is YOU and your feminist nation that are 'backward' . . . so backward you have completely inverted God's divine order, and nature's order, to inflict upon the world the fem-supremacist ideology you claim represents 'equality'.
Females did it because they covet power, rule over men, and unearned wealth. Males did it because they are self-deluding cowards and geldings.
Indeed, you claim like every fem-fascist that equality between men and women is 'innate'. Were you born yesterday? Do you still not understand the vast differences between female and male nature? Any man strong enough to reject the lies you gladly gobble down about 'innate equality' between male and female must . . . fear women.
Riiight. Now we're back on good ole familiar fem-turf! False accusations are your daily bread. Because that's EXACTLY the same jive from feminists I have heard the past four decades . . . oh, you won't go along with our fem-first 'equality' program? . . . well then you must FEAR AND HATE WOMEN. A misogynist. A hater. Lives in mommy's basement. Ad infinitum.
That is the argumentation of an ideological thug and coward, and I hate and make war on ideological thugs. Male or female. How's that for Equality?
You understand the truth but like the rest of modern Amerikans, you don't have the integrity nor the sand to face it. So you find subtle ways of accusing and demeaning those who do.
Michael, I'm sad for you to feel this way, its showing how poorly you've been treated by women. May you some day find someone in your path with the true caring touch and loving hands of a truly genuinely nice woman.
yawn yawn same lame rap from every fembot the past three loooong decades: Oh! I'm SO sorry for you! [fake sympathy] you must hate women/live in your mother's basement/be an incel/strangle baby ducks/fill-in-the-shaming-blank.
You don't get it prissy missy. I am WAY beyond your passive-aggressive attacks. My life has been full of good relationships with women. Your assumption otherwise, and your attempt to weaponize same, reveals the malice of your shriveled heart, and that of your demonic movement of 'liberation'.
It is you who is an object of pity. The true tragedy (for everybody, yourself included) is that you are legion by the tens-of-millions, and you are in charge. My bossy little missy! lol
"Slavery gradually being forced on you via the collective power of women"?and "tyranny was only possible when enough women had collective power to move the nation radically to the left over a mere fifty years"? What planet are you on? The slavery that is happening right now en masse, worldwide, is human trafficking be it for sex, organ transplants, labor, etc. and you are going to say that women are behind it? Really? All this paedophilia going on behind closed doors of government, religious institutions, corporations, are women? Who are the ones that have built all the DUMBS over the last 50yrs? Who has built this into the largest GNP worldwide? You have lost the thread as they say. There's a much bigger picture going on here.
You would not call me a fool to my face, and you know it. And that is the problem with New Amerika. Punk thugettes like you who spew their lies and malice without consequence.
I am a parent of both now-adult boys and girls. Among their female friends, and one of mine, who are 40-ish, I've heard interesting tales.
One, upon being told in college that she was repressed, argued that she wasn't. She was then told by the female instructor that she was too repressed to know how repressed she was! (Non-minority Canadian).
Another, who'd grown up in a large homeschooling, Catholic family, made it into the PhD realm. On being told, in Women's Studies, how badly women were repressed in the Middle Ages, aptly pointed out that MOST people in the Middle Ages were "repressed". She has since paused her studies to marry and start a family.
Another PhD gal I know is now happily married and raising a family.
It is happening. It should be supported. Wasn't feminism about "choice"?
Why would women care for men? Men are not children in need of a mother and can cook an egg, shop for groceries or do laundry as well as work at their job or business.
Why would men protect and provide for women? Women are not children looking for a father, and can change a light bulb, hammer a nail as well as work or run a business. Furthermore we are no longer living in an age when men had to hunt mammoths to feed their family and protect women against saber tooth tigers or enemy tribes.
Most women might be hardwired to care for their young children.
Most men might be hardwired to protect and provide for their young children.
But neither men nor women are children, although many want to be, and expect the state to be their caring and protective mommy or daddy.
No one wants to work at a job that is meaningless. So some women find out that work is not fulfilling. What a surprise and welcome to the men's world!...How many men are fulfilled by their work, exactly? Most men don't complain because they have been programmed not to (whining is not "masculine", which is why men die younger than women), but almost all men hate their job, and rightly so.
By the way the idea that women are meant to stay home to cook and take care of the children is an American middle class modern invention (just like the nuclear family...the true traditional family was always the extended family). In old Europe, the farmer's wife (and children) worked in the field alongside the man, and later during the industrial revolution they worked in factories.
The idea that work should be fulfilling is also an American middle class invention, the invention of a rather spoiled and soft-headed people who get the real work done by others. Ask a farm worker from Guatemala if her priority is to "find herself" while she is laboring in a pesticides-saturated strawberries field under 100 degree weather and no shade in central California! Work is work. And no one, neither man nor woman, is hardwired to work to provide. No person in his or her right mind would work if not forced to do so to pay bills.
Respectfully, I think you are wrong on many accounts. In reality men across time have worked diligently to improve the lot and lives of women. The modern world is evidence of that everywhere around us.
My point is precisely not to look across time but to live in the modern world, today, not yesterday. Furthermore I pointed to historical facts that demonstrated that women did work in previous centuries, and very hard, in the fields and in factories. The extended family took care of the young children while the mother and father - and older children - worked.
Your "nuclear family" and your stay at home "homemaker" are North American inventions which came with economic prosperity in a rich land replete with resources and opportunities.
As far as men "working diligently to improve the lot and lives of women", not exactly. For centuries women had no right to property. Men got rich, not women.
Well, then, you’re exactly the kind of worse-than-useless man who has aided “feminism” in destroying the culture, society, safe streets, good education, etc. Nothing non-factual about it. And, given your ideology, you describe yourself as a “man,” but likely can define neither “man” nor “woman,” so there’s really no point in any adult paying you any attention at all, is there?
More ignorant assumptions. But given the fact that you want women to be homemakers, might you be the type that fully supports totally unfair divorce laws which heavily penalize and ruin men financially and whose origin was a time when women were thought to be unable to take care of themselves and to need alimony payments to survive? That's what you get when women do not work. Remember that.
Have to agree with your point about this post being more representative of western middle class views and concerns, based on my experience working in many so-called developed and developing countries at the community level with both men and women. In many countries today, women continue to work in agriculture (and even the kids) or have to spend their entire day procuring water supplies and preparing food etc. The western world is very out of touch with both life in so-called developing countries and life in rural (or indigenous) communities of their own countries.
I can understand why people don't get it because I had ongoing culture shock going between my professional existence in an office (even in a developing country) and visits to rural communities. And yet most of the world consists of the latter -- and the kinds of concerns expressed in this post are an absolute luxury for women in those countries and communities.
I also have to say that most of the women in the developing countries that I encountered wanted jobs and professions, or at least enterprise opportunities, because that was the only way to have economic power and a say in how the family finances were used. Entrepreneurship programs have always been in massive demand by women.
It seems that western women forget that they were in that very same position of having no economic power until the 1960s. (Have they not watched "Mad Men"?) Having grown up in the 1960s myself, I know that my mother's generation of homemakers were what you could call the frustrated generation, because they had post-WW2 aspirations after women helped with the war effort but then were shown the exit door after the war was over. They were denied mortgages or credit cards without their husband's signature. They couldn't even compete in many sports until the late 60s and early 70s. My grandmother was left by her husband at the age of 65 and had to clean motels to get by, because he took his pension and social security with him, and what did she have after raising kids?
Not to mention that many women need intellectual and emotional stimulation just as much as men do -- my friends with kids agree that kids do not provide this -- and in some cases they need economic power to remain safe. (Do we have to dredge up the stats on violence among males in the 18 to late 30s age group again? Female safety is an issue worldwide, and we're talking about safety from male family and community members for the most part, even among middle and upper class women. Earning power is often the most important factor in keeping them safe and giving them options for escape.)
Do we also have to talk about the clear stats that women took on jobs and careers expecting that men would step up to the plate to assume an equal share of duties in the home, but this did not pan out? Childcare and home care duties are still disproportionately handled by women even in developed economies and among middle class women. Perhaps it is this fact that has caused many younger women to take a step back and re-assess why they're doing a double shift when their partners are not. Or why they are doing the elder care even for their partners' parents.
The feminist revolution in the west was not about encouraging women to go into the workforce. It was about giving them the choice to do so or to be a stay-at-home mom or to forge their own path whatever that might be, and in so doing to give them more power over their own lives. It was also meant to give men more options in terms of their own careers and their roles as fathers, and it has done that as well.
Anyone who wants to roll that back should go back and look at where we came from, or look at women (and men) in societies where they don't have choice. Personally, I don't want to go back to the way things were before feminism as it has been a win-win for both men and women in my view.
All great points. Feminism was originally totally necessary. But today feminism has morphed into something else entirely, and has consequently acquired a bad name. Today's so-called feminists should focus on helping women who still suffer in poor countries and under oppressive regimes rather than worry about "manspreading" and "masculine toxicity" in the west.
But they won't do this because of their extreme leftist politics. Questioning, as an example, fundamentalist Islam's policies towards women or the treatments of women and girls in poor nations would be considered "racist" or "islamophobic", so these new feminists cannot avoid looking foolish, hypocritical and irrelevant.
I have to admit that I don't understand feminism today and what its priorities are. To add to your point, I would think the feminist agenda would include human trafficking of women and children at the US border and in the Ukraine, the high percentage and numbers of women and children killed in Gaza, and female genital mutilation in northern Africa. Perhaps there is some focus on these critical issues, but I've not noticed it. Although manspreading can be annoying, it can be addressed in person right there on the bus or subway through some direct and respectful communication. But the enslavement and loss of many lives is a big and urgent problem, and addressing it would have profound consequences.
Very true....there are so many grave and urgent issues concerning women and girls throughout the world.
But again the woke feminists/marxists cannot touch these issues anymore than they dare address the issue of girls losing scholarships in sports and getting injured because forced to compete against so called "trans females" (biological males), not to mention having to share bathrooms, locker rooms and showers with them (and having to do the same in prisons, and being exposed to rape by these "trans females", most of whom are biologically intact).
We hear nothing from today's fake feminists, who are nothing but militant marxists, on these issues.
As far as manspreading, yes, that's an individual problem to be addressed individually...just like "womanspreading" - has anyone ever shared a clothes closet or a bathroom with a woman? :))
I agree that work is supposed to be work, but even though the whole family was toiling in the field, I don’t think they longed for the end of the day the way the modern worker longs for the end of the week. I am a pastured poultry farmer and I don’t own a tractor. All of my management is done by hand, transferring feed, moving chickens, cutting weeds, processing chickens. I work in 95 degree heat and freezing weather It is a 70-80 week job from March-December. But it isn’t the tedious work of answering emails and looking at a spreadsheet while your soul gets sucked out through your eyeballs. Modernity is the worst of everything. It robs of us useful work. It robs us of sunshine. It robs us of productive exercise. It robs us of autonomy, independence. Modernity punishes those who choose to use their bodies for productive use for their neighbors and rewards the thieves, grifters and psychopaths. We are at peak unhappiness because our ecology is off. Humans need massive amounts of sunshine, sweat, temperature changes and quality nutrition and sleep. We don’t need automobiles, climate controlled environments, LED lit offices or childcare. Run away as fast as you can from modernity, it is killing you and your lineage.
"Modernity is the worst of everything. It robs of us useful work. It robs us of sunshine. It robs us of productive exercise. It robs us of autonomy, independence. Modernity punishes those who choose to use their bodies for productive use for their neighbors and rewards the thieves, grifters and psychopaths. We are at peak unhappiness because our ecology is off. Humans need massive amounts of sunshine, sweat, temperature changes and quality nutrition and sleep. We don’t need automobiles, climate controlled environments, LED lit offices or childcare. Run away as fast as you can from modernity, it is killing you and your lineage."
I couldn't agree more....1000%!
And here is another point, going beyond what you stated: Native American men had no qualms whatsoever about being the providers, because many provided by hunting, which is now considered to be a recreational activity for men. They did not want to work like the white men and did not like that kind of work, because they felt free and independent by hunting, and it was for them a sport as well. Men naturally like to be physical, adventurous, to challenge themselves and face a certain amount of danger. At least normal men. Who wants to work in an office, sit all day and look at walls and a screen? No human being was ever created for this!
As I wrote, no one if hardwired to work...to provide, perhaps, but not to work. How many people win the lottery and keep working, unless they really love what they do, in which case it is not work but a calling?
Your example of native Americans (a fake term) shows a counterpoint to your original post. Women and men haven’t in fact been working in the fields for all of humanity. There are many cultures that have separate roles for men and women. Most historical examples I have seen/read have historical women in charge of the home (water, firewood, cooking) while men are responsible for hunting or farming.
I would love to see some documentation of your assertion that men and women worked side by side and equally 1000+ years ago.
Sorry but I have no interest in quibbling over this or any other matter. Life is too short. You are free to believe whatever you want as long as it works for you.
Men die younger because they don’t whine? Evidence please.
Men are programmed not to whine? Evidence of who the programmer is please.
The author said nothing about a man “wanting” to work and provide. More that they were better dispositioned to do it and when fully empowered to do it, possibly gain additional motivation.
Also disagree man isn’t disposed to provide. If a man has a baby with a woman, hopefully he loves her. That weakness and vulnerability in the mother of his child should - and time shows - does generate the will to work in a man. Something similar occurs when providing for a family. Is it easy? Nope. Is it desired? Sometimes not. Is it a genuine desire to serve and bless others at the expense of self ? Yep.
You might say the distinction between wanting to work and being capable and willing is meaningless. But I think humans have a long enough track record of doing this exact formula that it’s evidence of something intrinsic and inherent.
Fascinating conversation which resonates on many levels. For what it is worth, I would do the dishes (and do) every day if it spared me the agony of grocery shopping and errands.
2. Women believing evolutionary gender roles selected for over millions of years (yes, the primates from which we descended had/have gender roles), suddenly can be ignored/rejected because a few women decided a century ago that they didn’t like them. LOL.
Somehow in the last little while (few hundred years) some folks have been convinced that what has been working for a few thousand years (our Christian faith), the way we pair-up, support families, raise children for the last, what, 25,000 years, 50,000 years, 2,500,000 years, needs to be completely thrown out and replaced with its complete opposite. How's that been workin' for ya?
Where does this come from? Pride - arrogance - the source of all sin - Satan. Go ahead and say it: it's Satanic. I've gone along with the crowd and it flat doesn't work, I've repented and am working to get turned around. God help me!
Once upon a time decades ago, I was a female working in a male dominated field. At times, my job was physically challenging, and I could never do what a man could do. As a woman, I do not and will never have the same upper body strength as the average man. I accepted this, and, when an issue came up, my male co-workers helped me.
However, many of my female co-workers did NOT accept this. "Guuurl Power" and all. They treated the men badly and, as a result, THEY were treated badly. In my mind they lived in a fantasy world in regards to their abilities.
They were sold on "men and women are totally equal." And this was decades ago; I'm sure it's worse now. And... it's simply arrogance on the part of women. And yes, it's Satanic.
Many people (most) are confused about equality. They associate equality with sameness. They believe that to be equal people must be the same. They completely fail to understand the fact that men and women are equal yet DIFFERENT, and that these differences in no way imply inequality, anymore than differences in skin colors imply inequality.
Women and men might not be equal in physical strength, but they are equal as HUMAN BEINGS.
Many women, including many feminists past and present, have been completely and utterly fooled into believing that they must mimic men, do all that men do and essentially become men in words and deeds in order to be respected as equals by men. So today they join the military and want combat roles even while pregnant (fighter pilots). This is beyond absurd, it is completely insane. The Soviet Union also did this, in the name of an equality they confused with sameness, they had women working in the mines and laying railroad tracks.
How can so many be made so incapable of thinking critically, or just thinking? Women do not have to mimic men in order to be respected as women, and men do not have to mimic women in order to be respected as men. We are DIFFERENT and EQUAL. And neither should "submit" (a religious term that usually implies that men are in charge) to the other but live in equal partnership and cooperation with the other.
Cooperation is difficult, in all human endeavors. It is always easier to dominate and control, and it is the MOST PRIMITIVE choice (the animal choice)...but there is no love in this. Love is crushed by dominance and perverted by control. It can only flourish in cooperation, equality and freedom, not coercion, not submission to another.
When a woman has no independent source of income, no economic power, her relationship with a man is unbalanced, not matter how loving and loyal he might be. Such a woman is put in a position of DEPENDENCE, which is infantilizing by definition, and not very dignified.
Interesting point regarding equality and sameness. I think part of the reason that equality = sameness is due to the movie industry. How many films have we seen in which small, thin women literally beat up larger, stronger men with ease? On some level, I think many women want to believe that they are capable of doing that, because feminism has made them feel less than equal. Aka "being a man is the ideal, so I must prove I can do everything a man can do to be ideal."
Exactly! Which is interesting, in the sense that radical feminism, by looking at the male standard as the ideal standard, is completely denying and betraying the intrinsic value of the feminine. These women who seek to mimic men, then, it could be said, are truly anti-women, the ultimate misogynists.
What's funny in my former job is that I could do things that many of the men didn't have the patience to do, and they appreciated the tasks that I did.
The men seemed happy that I acknowledged our differences, and that I didn't try to negate their contribution. Conversely, they appreciated me, and when I needed help, they did not hesitate to step up without being asked. I think it's called mutual respect.
/it's OK to have different abilities
Yes...different and equal. We do not oppose but complement each other, which is why we are different but equal in value as human beings. This is respect indeed, respecting our differences and honoring our equality.
You miss the obvious which is that women must move forward in trust and that is why marriage is sacred, it is necessary to seek God’s grace in this dynamic, what you call ‘undignified’
The Divine does not demand that women submit to men and become totally dependent on men, as if they were children. But I understand that religions do, especially the 3 Abrahamic, Middle Eastern religions (Christianity, Judaism, Islam).
In the old days, thousands of years ago, when survival demanded that one be able to successfully hunt and kill a wholly mammoth, a women's dependence on a man was necessary. But we no longer hunt wholly mammoths, and anyone can earn an income today.
God abosolutely DOES demand that women submit to men. Also that Christ submits to Father, and men submit to Christ.
Your beloved Egalite and Feminism have driven nations of the West to the brink of collapse.
You have the right to your own antiquated beliefs. But do you realize that in this regard (women "submitting" to men) you share the same perspective as Muslims?
As a matter of fact the word Islam means submission. Christians and Muslims are like brothers after all. They don't worship the same God, but they worship the same way. Don't you feel weird about this? I would. I wouldn't want to have anything in common with Muslims.
And again, regarding "submission", it can be understandable that some men would want women to do this...because they want to be in control and in charge, they want to be the little king of their little castle.
But for women to believe this way, that's a little more difficult to understand. What kind of person would want to submit to another? After all, we are not monkeys.
22Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord. 23For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the Saviour of the body. 24Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in every thing. 25Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it; 26That he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word, 27That he might present it to himself a glorious church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish. 28So ought men to love their wives as their own bodies. He that loveth his wife loveth himself. -- Ephesians Ch. 5
And how old are these writings? And where do they come from? The Middle East, the same place that birthed Islam and its similar beliefs. No wonder they like to marry 9 years old girls.
No thank you. I wouldn't want a wife-child who would "submit" to me. I prefer adult women with independent minds.
A comment with plenty of practical wisdom for modern women and girls.
6,000 years, if you're referencing the Scriptural text rather than evolutionary theories.
Thank you for this.
I am a supporter of femininity, not feminism.
Women should be protected.
THANK-YOU FOR YOUR COMMENT.
I wish I had a good man in my life to protect and love me. Mine of 35 years fell prey to the social engineering and liberal feminist ideology. His status in the community demanded it of him...my story:
https://risingdawn360.substack.com/p/the-disintegration-of-the-family
https://risingdawn360.substack.com/p/four-corners-of-the-earth-rediscovered
I opened the link and skimmed your story. I was shocked to see you believe in 9/11 conspiracy theories and that the earth is flat.
Most would consider him an expert on the subject of the 9/11 coverup...
https://jermwarfare.com/conversations/andrew-johnson-on-the-cover-up-of-the-9-11-cover-up
Ma’am, I’m sorry, but no serious scientist believes the earth is flat. Your 20 years of personal research cannot possibly compete with centuries of data, observations, and study. This is my last comment. I don’t have time to engage in discussions about certifiably wacky theories.
God doesn’t lie but a lot of people have some whacked, twisted interpretations of his truth. The irony of you telling me to “do research lady” is laughable.
I also believe God cannot lie and men do all the time. There are over 200 verses to support a level, stationary earth in the Bible. You'd have to believe in fairy tales to accept NASA's (Not A Space Agency) impossiBALL story. If we were flying through space, don't you think the Bible would have at least ONE verse mentioning it? Do some research, lady. You appear to "trust the scientism theories."
God doesn’t lie but a lot of people have some whacked, twisted interpretations of his truth. The irony of you telling me to “do research lady” is laughable.
I’ve studied it over twenty years, almost daily. I just believe what it says, to whom it says it. I can give you twenty verses making your rotating ball impossible. Can you give me one to support your theory?
Women should take responsibility for self-protection.
Yes. A man is not a plan. I mean I have an awesome boyfriend who wants to provide for me and protect me and I let him do it, but I am not counting on him to always be able to do that. Disability and death happens, no matter how decent a person is there are things beyond our control. I saw that growing up and it was a big part of my decision to not have kids unless I could find a way to provide for them and homeschool them at the same time. Men are awesome but you have to have a backup plan, just as they should have a backup plan for women and know how to cook decently and keep the house reasonably clean with minimal time investment.
I see many cats in your future.
Right. I like how you assume that because I want a backup plan so I can properly raise my kids that my boyfriend and I are not planning to adopt in the future.
Besides, I hate cats with a passion. The only crazy cat lady I know has 2 adult children who are trying to liquidate her estate and stick her in a nursing home even though she is still competent and living independently. Her husband died 5 years ago, after cheating on her multiple times, including having another child with a mistress. Fortunately for the crazy cat lady her divorce lawyer sucked so they were still legally married when he died so she's got his pension.
. . . and boxed wine. I see boxed wine too.
Oh darn, the not in my last comment must have been autocorrect. We are planning to adopt once financially able to properly raise kids.
I don't even like wine. Got any more assumptions?
Women are awesome, but a man has to have a backup plan.
One must deliberately effect control to have any hope of retaining it.
You would then live in a spiritual vacuum
Spirit being a non-locality, a vacuum would be impossible.
Biology: women are physically weaker than men and are at a great disadvantage if assaulted. They also create life.
Why would you not want to help protect something so precious?
Women should though. We all must take care of ourselves. Men though should see themselves as protectors too. But some women seem to be oblivious to their surroundings.
Caitlin Clark must be an exception.
Because it is unknown to me by its own inaction.
I agree and presumably you would agree that there is no need for women to compete on separate playing fields, basketball courts or swimming pools. For example there is no need for a women only WNBA or men only NFL/NBA/etc. Caitlin Clark could easily be a top scorer in the male NBA! Plus, we conscription for war should not be males only since women can protect themselves. You agree Vonu or are you going to back down like a schooled bitch?
I'll agree to it. One thing I learned from Leah Thomas is that women have no business being in sports. Except rhythmic gymnastics. Let's see a man change genders to compete there.
While I oppose any draft of anyone, we should allow women into any role they they are capable of performing, you're shooting yourself in the foot otherwise.
I am fine with women being in sports as long as they are not isolated and separated from males; we should have equal and inclusive playing fields, pools and courts. No reason to be sexist and exclude them or anyone else from competing against both or all genders.
All of that can begin as soon as men can survive labor.
Lol. You sure caved quick. From women are equal to only equal when males can survive labor. Folded like a cheap suit. Next!
As least I'm not imagining things.
Sure you are, you imagined women can protect themselves as well as men. At least you implied it. Don’t bring a knife to a gun fight and don’t bring a woman to a fight with men.
Trans women survive get pregnant and survive labor all the time don’t ya know. Such a conservative putz.
You must be a Chase Oliver libertarian.
More Ron Paul. Really got into it as both protest to bailouts and against wars the neocons were and continue to push. Myself and 4 brothers served in the military and we’re opposed to neocon wars.
How's that working out for you? Tuco has 24 likes at this point and you? One.
Tuco was a candidate for the LP nomination?
This is a fantastic discussion. I don't think it's a coincidence that as religious involvement has waned, deception in the form of feminism has flourished. Also, I see the big picture as a global agenda to reduce births through indoctrination; part of their whole genocidal scheme.
Agree. The whole goal of the 'global agenda' has been to destroy the family, traditional values, and self-reliance, so as to foster a dependence on the state to meet all of our needs. Increase tax rates to force wives out of the home into the job market, for instance.
Once viewed through that lens, it all becomes clear. And it is obvious that it has all been planned, since the 1960s at least and likely longer.
A bit of an anecdote: this past weekend, I attended a traditional Latin mass. One might expect it to be filled with old women; it was not. In fact, the majority there were young families with multiple children. As in "four children under five years old." Was the congregation huge? No. But then again, it is not in an area that has a huge Catholic population. But there were no tattoos, no weird hair and no disrespectful clothes.
A fun fact: Vatican II took place in the early to mid 1960s. Coincidence?
Nope. Vatican II was part of the show. The Catholic Church, along with every other church that has been around long enough to have a central authority structure, has long been corrupted by the Cabal. Like with all such organizations (the Freemasons come to mind) the 'local' people are fine folks, blissfully unaware of the evil perpetrated at the top of the organization. And many of the higher-level people also refuse to be compromised. Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò is an example; there are many others in the Catholic Church as in the other churches and organizations. Evil runs deep, but people of good will are fighting it. (Viganò even refuses to call the current Pope by his papal name -- still calls him 'Bergoglio.')
Yeah, I know Vatican II was part of the process. And I'm a big fan of Vigano.
The book "Windswept House" by Malachi Martin is a VERY interesting read. Fact disguised as fiction. BTW... Klaus Schwab is a minor character that makes a brief appearance.
https://www.amazon.com/Windswept-House-Vatican-Malachi-Martin/dp/0385492316/ref=sr_1_1?sr=8-1
Apparently Viganò's disrespect was too much for Bergoglio, who has summoned Viganò to the Vatican to face excommunication:
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2024/06/exclusive-archbishop-carlo-maria-vigano-summoned-vatican-be/
Thanks, I'll have to check it out 💖
This is the new reformation within the Roman Church. Vatican 2 was a mistake. The people are searching for a return to ancient traditions and forms of worship. As a Protestant, I find this to be very healthy. We have done similar things in our traditional denominations as each of the well know churches have already split over theological issues.
Female-centered cults have been the prime adversary of Christianity and Christians for millennia. Read the Bible, especially the account of Elijah, Jehu, Jezebel, and the House of Ahab. Or read James Frazer. Tells the same truth, really. Modern Christianity is feminized and woke-ified. Modern Christian men are gelded, subjugated to their wives and daughters, like their secular brethren.
The religion of America -- and the religion that America disperses by force or bribery throughout the planet -- is feminism and its offshoot, woke. Which is what political correctness used to be called.
Orthodox, traditional Christianity is increasing, outside of the old line mainline Protestant denominations. There is a stronger focus on marriage and child bearing. Our small church has many babies. Many of our mothers mostly homeschool and the fathers are the sole breadwinner. Everyone is more happy. Struggles? Of course. Unity? Absolutely.
All Elders and Deacons are men of character. Lord’s Day by Lord’s Day, we worship in old fashioned ways with much love within the congregation among the people. No laptop computers and no rock and rock bands.
The only American Protestant denomination that is growing in membership is the PCA, the Presbyterian Church in America.
We are those scary hardliner Calvinists who dare to exposit Scripture verbatim from our pulpits, and expect that our congregations understand that we who believe are being sanctified, becoming in God's eyes equal in holiness to His son Jesus.
Calvin made sense. There are others that join with the PCA that are similar. Sanctification takes a lifetime. We are all still sinners. I don’t wish to bash our Roman Catholic, nor our Eastern Orthodox brothers and sisters at all. King Jesus know His sheep, He will call them, and they will follow. In the in between times now, we teach in our little church…
Sola Scriptura
Our goal is to live Corum Deo, directly living in the face of our Lord and Saviour, King Jesus. On this earth it would kill us to see Him now in His Glorified body. On the Day of the Lord, the parousia, we will see Him face to face and King Jesus will give us our Glorified bodies, completely freed from sin. No more pain, no more suffering, no more disease, no more war, no more death. No more tears. Even for our loved family members who do not join us there. Not sure how. Human beings have extremely small brains and little imagination for what is possible. Jesus said “in my house there will be many mansions”.
This is our only hope. The blood of Jesus Christ at Calvary is our only righteousness.
“Jesus did it all, all to Him we owe, sin had left a crimson stain, He washed it white as snow.” Praise God from whom all blessings flow.
Excellent conversation! Thank you both. I completely agree. Women can stay home and nurture their husband and children, then work at a later time if they wish. I’ve seen it work happily.
I’m certain that I was born to care for a woman and our children, and to the extent that she feels the same more the blessing.
But I’m only one man, I’ve no interest in changing the competitive women who would be a poor fit anyway, so I found myself that woman, she had my children, God called her home and now my family is my children and grandchildren.
You awakened women can live as you please, but I’ll dodge you like potholes.
>Doctors are subject to malpractice claims if an intervention causes infertility. But no consequences befall a therapist whose advice is responsible for wasting a woman’s youth. Similarly, if you would go to a priest for advice, the religious agenda is readily apparent. Now, those who press on the levers of people’s life choices are allowed to give the impression they are unbiased and set above the trivial archaic notions of religion. They enjoy the esteem of being all-knowing about human psychology, while refusing to admit the most obvious truths.<
A thought provoking comment.
What are the most obvious truths?
You truly do not know or even perceive the answer after reading this excellent discussion??
Hint: Wrong-headed feminist-brainwashed psychologists & psychiatrists are not held liable for misleading, misdirecting their patients (notably the female ones) into making choices that further the patients' stress, anxieties, and misery up to even ruining their lives. The professional shrinks keep their taped sessions private (doctor-patient privacy) so that their potentially destructive guidance cannot be at least shown in a courtroom to have taken the patient in a dangerous and further negative direction. Contrast this against a harmful / deadly outcome from medical treatment or surgery, where the physician may be proven by the physical evidence to have committed malpractice.
Obvious truths seldom appear in opinion pieces.
If they weren't elucidated in the instant opinion piece, I doubt you are going to improve on it.
I won't argue your point since you apparently realize that obvious truths *DO* sometimes appear in opinion pieces (like this one); hence your choice of the adverb, "seldom"....
A very frank and refreshing dialogue here, much appreciated.
Now that Elizabeth is getting the numbers that she is, it's important to remember the first thing that we learned back in the early years of the Internet Relay Chat:
Don't Feed the Trolls!
I found this passage in an ancient Book…
“Wives, submit to your own husbands, as to the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife even as Christ is the head of the church, his body, and is himself its Savior. Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit in everything to their husbands. Husbands, love your wives, as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her, that he might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the word, so that he might present the church to himself in splendor, without spot or wrinkle or any such thing, that she might be holy and without blemish. In the same way husbands should love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself. For no one ever hated his own flesh, but nourishes and cherishes it, just as Christ does the church, because we are members of his body. "Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and hold fast to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh." This mystery is profound, and I am saying that it refers to Christ and the church. However, let each one of you love his wife as himself, and let the wife see that she respects her husband.”
Ephesians 5:22-33
"Wives, submit to your own husbands..."
This is sick. Or let's just say it's outdated.
But you would (will?) love Sharia law. Fundamentalist Muslims believe the same as you do.
Should have read the whole thing. The man has the most difficult part in a way. To love as Christ loved… nothing like sharia law.
I read the entire passage. The rest is okay, but the part that I quoted is not, in my view. But to each his or her own, as long as it does not become law (as under Sharia law).
It is the Law of Christ, that appeals to hearts.
How different is respect from submit?
Islam literally means submission, which implies obeying the authority of the Prophet. Submission means obedience in religious contexts.
Respect is different, when you respect someone, it does not mean that you are under that person's authority...you can respect an equal.
Equality by the way does not mean sameness, although most people believe this. People can be different and equal...like women and men. Women do not have to fight in wars or to work on an oil rig or as lumberjacks to attempt to gain respect from men and prove that they are their equal.
False equivalence. You seem to be brainwashed and unable to think critically. Outside of the current popular culture. Popular culture is totally evil and highly destructive to human prosperity and happiness. Get educated and learn something real . That is the entire purpose of this excellent piece.
What do you know about sharia law? Women are mere property, a field a man can spread his seed on. It gets much worse. My mother lived in a military styled compound in Da’Haran, Saudi Arabia for several years with the western families. If they left the compound without a head to toe Burqua , they would be raped on sight. If they tried to drive a car, they would be arrested and beaten. By the sharia religious police.
Now go back and read the passages from Ephesians. What does God command the husband to do? Seems like you are brainwashed, just as the author of this piece is describing.
It feels so good to have found a nice rural Eastern Orthodox Church with tons of kids and families. Our priest is on number four of his own! I love singing the baptisms and renewing my faith that God will preserve His remnant until the end of time.
I love it when you write about feminism and misandry. Reading this, I recalled the interview (it's on Youtube) with Aaron Russo, in which he claimed that Nick Rockefeller told him the Rockefellers instituted feminism in order to double taxable income and have the state take over parenting and destroy the family. I also remembered Freud's nephew, propagandist Edward Bernays, promoting female smoking by calling cigarettes "Torches of Freedom". An early-feminist iteration of Bernays' vision, the Virginia Slims women's cigarette cheer, "You've come a long way, baby!", is mocked in the female misery catalogued by Janice and Hannah.
When Hannah reports that women are deliberately avoiding breastfeeding to saddle men with bottle-feeding duty, she emphasizes the break in the mother-child bond, but there is also the unnatural break in appropriate nutrition for the baby, making it dependent on commercial formula (unless the mother has expressed her milk). Another feminism-derived injury to the infant is the current prevalence of elective C-section deliveries to avoid childbirth pain. This deprives the child of beneficial vaginal probiotic bacteria that would otherwise colonize its skin and nasal and oral cavities as the baby emerges naturally.
I, too, have experienced the sweetness and solicitude of men toward women in contrast to the cuntcoalition-building of women ridiculing men. So much for toxic masculinity and the nurturing female! I think that Tradwife will catch on, as people are increasingly aware of our insidious social programming. Then both sexes can be more truly liberated from the state slaveholders enforcing feminism.
I am the Patriarch of my Christian family. I love my wife intensely and would die to protect her from deadly incoming harm and I am prepared and ready to do that anytime. Likewise I love all the women and girls in our church and work hard to show kindness, gentleness, and hospitality towards them. As well as their husbands, fathers, younger men, and boys.
Feminine women deserve respect and honor. Feminists? Not so much.
Fortunately, they're rarely seen in church.
Well…. You said it. I agree.
Women are NOT hardwired to love men, as the past 50 years of Total Feminism has proven conclusively. MEN are hardwired (created) to love and protect women. Women are hardwired to love infants, small children, and animals.
Women were created as HELPERS to the man -- not as his 'equal', not as his better, not as his 24/7 Hall Monitor and Judge. The manipulation of the inceptive urge in men to love women has led directly to the ruination of Western Civilization, and to the downfall of the U.S., Home Hive of the NWO. The New Woman Order.
Two things brought this planet into destruction, despair, and ruination: the desire of the female to have power over the male (and by extension, to have power over God the FATHER) and the failure of the male to restrict the female desire for 'liberation' and 'equality' and 'progress', and instead to Play the Hero by funding, enabling, and enforcing Total Feminism. These are, and were, all lies designed to annihilate your father-led families, dis-spirit you, and steal your wealth, power and freedom.
Janice Fiamengo has been at this a long time, though I have been at it longer. The Number One problem before the nation is not who is elected president -- shuck 'n jive -- but whether you can stop totalitarianism and slavery gradually being forced upon you via the collective power of women. And that tyranny was only possible when enough women had collective power to move the nation radically to the Left over a mere fifty years.
Women love having power and authority over men, though it is rebellion against God and devastation of societies and cultures. And men -- in general -- are too cowardly, weak and emasculated to stop them. Men have learned over the past century to go along with whatever women say, or else. Both the courts and LE have been on-board with the feminist program for four decades. Men are (quietly) fleeing from the Woke-Fem cultures of the anglo nations, and are turning their backs on nations that hate and persecute them. while chastising them for 'privilege' and 'toxicity'.
You can retain feminism and P.C. and your nations will fail and fall, soon. Or you can reject the brainwashing of the past century, and you may yet save and restore your nation. Suit yourselves.
Wow great wisdom, thanks for writing into this thread.
I am learning how well, when a respectful matriarchy works, the warriors, the protectors, the matriarchs, who, in their rightful place with their multidimensional wisdoms are at work for the greater good, works super well in Natural Law societies.
This is currently developing as we speak with the International Laws recognizing the North American Hereditary as the rightful claim holders of the Lands.
The matriarchs, mostly displaced or destroyed thru the Man War Machinery and the Trans-Atlantic controls, is slowly rebuilding.
Matriarchy worked in the past, with the concepts of spiritual connection as its primary element, something long lost in the worlds of divide and conquer.
Now in saying this, I am also saying each of us carry varying degrees of the Masculine and the Feminine Archetypal energies, no matter what sex we are born with.
And one concept I haven't dived into yet, was what one of my Hereditary Headsmen friends (Chief) said - I had it wrong, the women are actually the warriors, this actually makes sense, for who better be the 'protector' in spirit than a mother.
These are just words we can get hung up on... their origins are somewhat differing in each cultural language. When did the fighter protector, develop? The one who was only deemed necessary in a world where war is the primary focus. AND, who are we to dictate who goes to the battlefield? There is a role for the masculine/feminine in all roles we need to accomplish any task or we risk leaving out the multi-dimensionality approach.
There is much much we don't know about cultural balances, only what we are experiencing now, where the warrior is depicted as the man, the war machine and it doesn't seem to work.
So I do ponder instead of what are the influences on a society, versus a natural cultural world where the functionality of power either exists, or not, but the spiritual aspects of functionality for the greater good and protection of the whole develop the masculine and feminine roles.
I'm looking forward to hopefully seeing this returning shift toward matriarchy for the planet, not just North America.
No need to descend to Karl Jung’s archetype psychobabble.
Women will never protect society from evil, true evil. It takes a man to lead an army or a platoon to charge a hill in combat. Or to lead a SWAT team in a firefight in hand to hand combat. Women will get raped and killed pretty fast in any true exchange of force. It takes a man to be a Commander in Chief. Women are not qualified for that post. It has been like this for the entirety of human history for many thousands of years. Therefore, no woman is qualified to be our President or Vice President.
There are many ways to view matriarchy, certainly leaders aren't the doers.
I do definitely agree with you... in this war world we live in... but in the development towards peace we all (at least I hope we all) dream about will come from a genteel leadership.
That what I just said, also makes me think that I also know there are those who thrive in a battlefield and that warrior energy... perhaps this is your world? In any case I am grateful for protection when it is needed. However, I would never give up peace for it.
We have differing views - and I see no good in the current system of a 'government' that hasn't ties to evil energies - we need a reset alright!
Jung was an archetypal psychobabler? Had no idea - however if one wants to get hung up on differing perspectives... that is where babble dwells.
So Matriarchy is what I feel will shift the world into a spiritually enlightened humanity toward peace.
I'm sure you may wish to retort - but that is just a game in the bigger world of energetic influences. You know, like the forces of Mother Nature, one has nothing to compare to her strength.
Matriarchy is a cruel joke. There is only one God and no other, YHWH. There are no goddesses. When the Viking marches in, he will first rape you, then kill all the men, then make slaves of your male and female children, then burn your false temple to Ishtar and Gaia, then burn down your house. All your girls will become sex slaves in the harem. All your boys will be castrated and then forced into the army to fight or the harem so they can not impregnate the sex slaves there. Please grow up. Women need men to protect them from evil. American men used to do that in our country until the femenazis took control. Some of us old fashioned Christian men still do this. This what? Protect our women and children from danger. Why? We love them and can’t live without them. We will live with them for eternity in heaven, together. We love all the men, women, and children in our little church. We all want some of our grandchildren to spread the Gospel of Jesus Christ all over the earth. Perhaps your local tranny will protect you in his tutu and multicolored hair and fairy suit. Watch out, his face spikes might poke out your eyeball.
America needs far many more Christian masculine men who act like men and disregard all the femenist nonsense completely.
And by the way, exchange the word Viking with Islamic Jihadist. This will happen soon in Western Europe. Why do you think they are panicking now?
Bravo. This truth is so rarely, rarely spoken. And no wonder, in nations that long ago were conquered by Feminism and Globo-Woke.
Women, vastly empowered and privileged, refuse to hear the truth. While U.S. men are too neutered, cowardly, and fat from material comforts to dare to touch this Third Rail of life in New Amerika.
phew, I guess you can't actually hear me - I am after all in agreement when it comes to war!
I agree with you of the physical strength differences and the protection mode of a warrior. I do.
What I do believe also and don't feel you are hearing is that women, matriarchy - a true one that isn't infiltrated by Young Leaders with sidewards ambitions, could lead a society away from the need to be war like.
They are not the ones standing in front of the men on a battlefield -- not too many Joan of Arc's around these days, but there are a few... so many more soon with transhumanism perhaps.
But I think my picture of how I see a matriarchy is not what you can even conceive. Perhaps you are just soooo oriented towards war?
Perhaps this is what we have to go through to have our 'great reset'
maybe it is going through the worst imaginable that brings out the best in people?
I think there is a better way... but history keeps repeating with wars, herstory could be different.
I guess we can agree to disagree, calmly.
There is no matriarchy, period.
The natural order of human beings in all time is that societies are led by men because they can enforce the laws with violence if necessary. Almost all normal men do not want violence because they will be ordered to war. Many men believe the highest aspirations for our women, is to be mothers and wives and sisters and grandmothers. Children are our future. Only biological women can do that. This is how YHWH made us. Wives and children need their husbands to protect them and provide for their physical needs for food, shelter, water, and energy, clothing, and all of it, etc….
Human beings love war, they always have and always will. Normal men do not wish to start useless wars that only protect Europe with the blood, treasure, and body bags of our American children. Just because some multiple billionaire gets more Ducats to toss up to the top of his pile and visit Davos every winter to plot our deaths and destruction.
There will not be a matriarchal reset. That’s how you turn a peaceful man into a Viking. Joan of Arc was a myth. I hear you perfectly clearly. I am saying you are just plain wrong and delusional with this line of thinking.
This is scripture in several places. “No one is good, no, not one”. With one exception YHWH the Son, fully man and fully God. History repeats with wars because the hearts of men are evil and desperately wicked. Not all men. It doesn’t take a lot of evil men to destroy society and a nation. This is why women like you need strong masculine good men to fight to protect you and your family. Our military is now trying to put our young soldiers in dresses and mutilate their genitals. Why? Who dreamed this insanity? A femenazi woman.
Mother Nature is a crazy hag. She thinks she's so large 'n in-charge. She will learn different before this is all over.
Many non-Indigenous people (Euro Americans) unfortunately believe that matriarchy is also about dominance and control, rather than spiritual connection. They see the universal order as a pyramid (hierarchy and dominance) rather than the circle (interrelation, kinship and interdependence).
It is difficult to break through such a mentality.
A man is the head of his family as Christ is the head of his church. Patriarchy is the natural order of the world.
No, it is the order of your Middle Eastern (Abrahamic) world. Matriarchal and matrilineal social systems predate the patriarchy.
Please keep your world to yourself and do not try to impose it on others.
LOL! Say the very people who have FORCED total feminism and totalitarian P.C. on us for fifty years.
But . . . but that's ok, y'see. It's ok when you coerce us. Because you are on the Right Side of History! :O)
You keep making ridiculous assumptions, because you are incapable of thinking critically outside of your prejudices and tribal mindset.
I am and have always been anti-authoritarian, whether it comes from the left, the right, political ideology or religious dogma (such as Islam or any religious fundamentalism), or any institution or individual.
You have no idea who you are responding to.
Where did you stand on covid? I never wore a mask anywhere, never accepted the lockdown, claimed the freedom to come and go as I pleased everywhere and obviously never got the vaccine. The lockdowns, the mandates, that was authoritarianism, coercion, a violation of human rights. DID YOU COMPLY? Did you stay home like a good little obedient sheep? Did you wear a mask when asked to do so?
I DID NOT.
A patriarchal system and authoritarianism go hand in hand, because the patriarchy is about top down control, authority, dominant power. Whether a woman, a man or a donkey is in charge makes no difference under such a system.
You expressed your views. I expressed my views. We should agree to disagree. My views are 4000 years old. Feminists are trying to enforce their pagan views across society. Native Americans had no matriarchal society. Ever hear about Iroquois Nation? Or Aztecs? Or Blackfeet nation? They conquered other Indian nations, took slaves, killed the opposing men of the other tribes. Not so much Kumbaya. People are people in all cultures. Matriarchy projects weakness and invites invasion of more powerful Patriarchal conquistadors.
The Haudenosaunee Confederacy (Iroquois) actually had a council of elders, all WOMEN, who had the power to choose or demote a male chief. That's one form of matriarchy.
Here is more information about matriarchy in Native American cultures:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kuTdvDk1cxw
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u7SCNuki-Bk
Matriarchy is not about dominant power, as patriarchy is. IT IS A SPIRITUAL WORLDVIEW. Matriarchy is symbolized by the circle (kinship and unity, interrelation, interdependence, balance, the cyclical aspect of life) rather than the pyramid, the patriarchal symbol (top down power, control, authority, dominance).
The universal symbol in Native American spirituality is the circle.
These are facts. You can have your own beliefs and worship the patriarchy, but you cannot deny facts about Native American cultures.
As far as Aztecs, yes they were patriarchal, which is why most ethnologists have so much admiration for them, because the Aztecs goal was DOMINANCE. Nothing excites patriarchal people more than even the mere thought of DOMINANCE, which is in and of itself a pathological obsession as well as the most PRIMITIVE choice one can make, unintelligently mimicking ANIMAL behavior.
Here is more information about the matriarchy:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S4V5_ZEepF8
One only can hope that the multidimensional capacities start opening up for more people... those who are robotically attuned to indoctrination are also those I would classify as in a box... Matt Ehret calls it the 'closed system' where only the defined boundaries are acceptable from data collection to how diverse one's community is. VS the open system of creative possibilities - these are people who are learned in the process of thinking... https://canadianpatriot.org/2022/08/28/biogeochemistry-and-open-system-thinking-with-vladimir-vernadsky/
Thank you, I will check the Canadian Patriot link.
"Women love having power and authority over men..."
Men had power, control and authority over women for centuries, and still do in some backward nations. So the wheels turn. I understand why so many women are so angry today. There is a variety of reasons, some valid, others not so. But, at the same time, I do not want to become their punching bag, so I avoid angry women.
As far as women and totalitarianism, here are a few thoughts, which might or might not be accurate. I think women, generally speaking, tend to favor safety. If a choice had to be made between freedom, which entails risks, and safety, a majority might choose safety. And where do most people run for safety, who do they expect will protect them? The government. Women might, generally speaking, expect more from the government than men, and expect it to legislate not so much to expand personal freedom but collective security, safety.
When some women are in positions of authority within the government, their focus might then be to strive to make us all safe, according to their own standards and whether we like it or not. And the end justifies the means, which is to say that totalitarianism and authoritarianism are justified when the common good is the professed goal.
Of course those are all generalizations, which might contain a hint of truth...or not.
Comes down to the root programs you speak of:
Want for safety and security (what they advertised the covid shots were all about) false narrative apparently!
Want for control - some women in the political world are as domineering as men in that roll and even more vicious (Hilary) some are more spiritual (Marianne Williamson)
Want for Love and Approval - acceptance and soothing the ego
Want for Oneness - community and belongingness which has elements of them all...
But to want Freedom more than all these programs we've been imprinted with either by parenting or indoctrination, to want freedom more, IS Risky. It means self responsibility, self reliance, and self resiliency... most are taught to lean into the government for most of these things.
We would do well to bring back an education that taught these 3 most required elements for obtaining our Freedoms.
Very well said!
Nothing that Janice said, or that Elizabeth wrote, even was considered by you and your feminist friends here. And that, indeed, sums up the vile post-feminist nation you love so dearly. Faced with reality and the truth, you plug your ears and return to the vomit of your feminist cant about how The Evil Patriarchy oppressed women, and now it's Your Turn.
Lies. Attractive and yummy lies. As if The Evil Patriarchy (or men in general) EVER sought to destroy the human family, make endless war on men, little boys, and masculinity in general, and turn every societal institution into a resentment-drenched, mega-empowered feminist weapon against maleness.
You and your sisters will not be satisfied until all is in ruin around you, at which point you will STILL be looking around for some man or boy on whom to blame your selfishness, deceit, malevolence, and power-lust. May you reap double as you have sown.
Who are you ranting against, Micky? I am a man, and unlike you I do not fear women who claim their innate equality. I avoid angry, rageful women, hateful women, women who are prejudiced against men, but I welcome women who know who they are and do not believe that their place is below and behind a man. What kind a person would want a relationship or marriage with someone they consider to be below them? A psychopath?
The cultural disintegration we are witnessing is part of a program which has infiltrated all parts of society to divide and conquer us, and you are falling for it: divided by races, by sexes and a myriad of genders, by extreme ideologies.
I am well aware of forces dividing-and-conquering the dualities of this world. Far more aware than you. But whether male or female, you are a feminist.
You accuse just like a fembot. I won't go along with your childish men-had-their-turn and now it's womens' turn, and anybody not going along with that must FEAR WOMEN.
Like all fembots, you assume that any nation not genuflecting to your beloved Feminism and its fake Equality For Some is 'backward'. It is YOU and your feminist nation that are 'backward' . . . so backward you have completely inverted God's divine order, and nature's order, to inflict upon the world the fem-supremacist ideology you claim represents 'equality'.
Females did it because they covet power, rule over men, and unearned wealth. Males did it because they are self-deluding cowards and geldings.
Indeed, you claim like every fem-fascist that equality between men and women is 'innate'. Were you born yesterday? Do you still not understand the vast differences between female and male nature? Any man strong enough to reject the lies you gladly gobble down about 'innate equality' between male and female must . . . fear women.
Riiight. Now we're back on good ole familiar fem-turf! False accusations are your daily bread. Because that's EXACTLY the same jive from feminists I have heard the past four decades . . . oh, you won't go along with our fem-first 'equality' program? . . . well then you must FEAR AND HATE WOMEN. A misogynist. A hater. Lives in mommy's basement. Ad infinitum.
That is the argumentation of an ideological thug and coward, and I hate and make war on ideological thugs. Male or female. How's that for Equality?
You understand the truth but like the rest of modern Amerikans, you don't have the integrity nor the sand to face it. So you find subtle ways of accusing and demeaning those who do.
Michael, I'm sad for you to feel this way, its showing how poorly you've been treated by women. May you some day find someone in your path with the true caring touch and loving hands of a truly genuinely nice woman.
yawn yawn same lame rap from every fembot the past three loooong decades: Oh! I'm SO sorry for you! [fake sympathy] you must hate women/live in your mother's basement/be an incel/strangle baby ducks/fill-in-the-shaming-blank.
You don't get it prissy missy. I am WAY beyond your passive-aggressive attacks. My life has been full of good relationships with women. Your assumption otherwise, and your attempt to weaponize same, reveals the malice of your shriveled heart, and that of your demonic movement of 'liberation'.
It is you who is an object of pity. The true tragedy (for everybody, yourself included) is that you are legion by the tens-of-millions, and you are in charge. My bossy little missy! lol
"My life has been full of good relationships with women"...
Has any one of them stuck around long enough to see and understand your rage against them?
Does anything EVER exit your mouth that is not an accusation?
"Slavery gradually being forced on you via the collective power of women"?and "tyranny was only possible when enough women had collective power to move the nation radically to the left over a mere fifty years"? What planet are you on? The slavery that is happening right now en masse, worldwide, is human trafficking be it for sex, organ transplants, labor, etc. and you are going to say that women are behind it? Really? All this paedophilia going on behind closed doors of government, religious institutions, corporations, are women? Who are the ones that have built all the DUMBS over the last 50yrs? Who has built this into the largest GNP worldwide? You have lost the thread as they say. There's a much bigger picture going on here.
S.H.R. Standard Hysterical Reaction to the truth.
You address none of my points, but instead seek to distract immediately via the most emotional trigger-point you could find: human trafficking.
D.C. relies on exactly the same tactic, tho usually accompanied by a personal attack on the character of the Offender.
I exactly addressed your retarded points. Your reading comprehension is nil. And you failed to answer not one of my questions, fool.
You would not call me a fool to my face, and you know it. And that is the problem with New Amerika. Punk thugettes like you who spew their lies and malice without consequence.
I will be seeing you down the road, mouthy.
Good points!
I am a parent of both now-adult boys and girls. Among their female friends, and one of mine, who are 40-ish, I've heard interesting tales.
One, upon being told in college that she was repressed, argued that she wasn't. She was then told by the female instructor that she was too repressed to know how repressed she was! (Non-minority Canadian).
Another, who'd grown up in a large homeschooling, Catholic family, made it into the PhD realm. On being told, in Women's Studies, how badly women were repressed in the Middle Ages, aptly pointed out that MOST people in the Middle Ages were "repressed". She has since paused her studies to marry and start a family.
Another PhD gal I know is now happily married and raising a family.
It is happening. It should be supported. Wasn't feminism about "choice"?
It claimed to be about 'choice,' but in reality it was about coercion. It was only 'choice' if you made approved choices.
"I didn't burn my bra so you could go home and have kids!!"
Exactly
Why would women care for men? Men are not children in need of a mother and can cook an egg, shop for groceries or do laundry as well as work at their job or business.
Why would men protect and provide for women? Women are not children looking for a father, and can change a light bulb, hammer a nail as well as work or run a business. Furthermore we are no longer living in an age when men had to hunt mammoths to feed their family and protect women against saber tooth tigers or enemy tribes.
Most women might be hardwired to care for their young children.
Most men might be hardwired to protect and provide for their young children.
But neither men nor women are children, although many want to be, and expect the state to be their caring and protective mommy or daddy.
No one wants to work at a job that is meaningless. So some women find out that work is not fulfilling. What a surprise and welcome to the men's world!...How many men are fulfilled by their work, exactly? Most men don't complain because they have been programmed not to (whining is not "masculine", which is why men die younger than women), but almost all men hate their job, and rightly so.
By the way the idea that women are meant to stay home to cook and take care of the children is an American middle class modern invention (just like the nuclear family...the true traditional family was always the extended family). In old Europe, the farmer's wife (and children) worked in the field alongside the man, and later during the industrial revolution they worked in factories.
The idea that work should be fulfilling is also an American middle class invention, the invention of a rather spoiled and soft-headed people who get the real work done by others. Ask a farm worker from Guatemala if her priority is to "find herself" while she is laboring in a pesticides-saturated strawberries field under 100 degree weather and no shade in central California! Work is work. And no one, neither man nor woman, is hardwired to work to provide. No person in his or her right mind would work if not forced to do so to pay bills.
Respectfully, I think you are wrong on many accounts. In reality men across time have worked diligently to improve the lot and lives of women. The modern world is evidence of that everywhere around us.
My point is precisely not to look across time but to live in the modern world, today, not yesterday. Furthermore I pointed to historical facts that demonstrated that women did work in previous centuries, and very hard, in the fields and in factories. The extended family took care of the young children while the mother and father - and older children - worked.
Your "nuclear family" and your stay at home "homemaker" are North American inventions which came with economic prosperity in a rich land replete with resources and opportunities.
As far as men "working diligently to improve the lot and lives of women", not exactly. For centuries women had no right to property. Men got rich, not women.
Well, you’re the kind of utterly useless woman this article was written to enlighten and to warn against.
Haha, that's really funny how narrow-minded assumptions work, given the fact that I am a man.
You don't seem to deal well with facts.
Well, then, you’re exactly the kind of worse-than-useless man who has aided “feminism” in destroying the culture, society, safe streets, good education, etc. Nothing non-factual about it. And, given your ideology, you describe yourself as a “man,” but likely can define neither “man” nor “woman,” so there’s really no point in any adult paying you any attention at all, is there?
More ignorant assumptions. But given the fact that you want women to be homemakers, might you be the type that fully supports totally unfair divorce laws which heavily penalize and ruin men financially and whose origin was a time when women were thought to be unable to take care of themselves and to need alimony payments to survive? That's what you get when women do not work. Remember that.
Have to agree with your point about this post being more representative of western middle class views and concerns, based on my experience working in many so-called developed and developing countries at the community level with both men and women. In many countries today, women continue to work in agriculture (and even the kids) or have to spend their entire day procuring water supplies and preparing food etc. The western world is very out of touch with both life in so-called developing countries and life in rural (or indigenous) communities of their own countries.
I can understand why people don't get it because I had ongoing culture shock going between my professional existence in an office (even in a developing country) and visits to rural communities. And yet most of the world consists of the latter -- and the kinds of concerns expressed in this post are an absolute luxury for women in those countries and communities.
I also have to say that most of the women in the developing countries that I encountered wanted jobs and professions, or at least enterprise opportunities, because that was the only way to have economic power and a say in how the family finances were used. Entrepreneurship programs have always been in massive demand by women.
It seems that western women forget that they were in that very same position of having no economic power until the 1960s. (Have they not watched "Mad Men"?) Having grown up in the 1960s myself, I know that my mother's generation of homemakers were what you could call the frustrated generation, because they had post-WW2 aspirations after women helped with the war effort but then were shown the exit door after the war was over. They were denied mortgages or credit cards without their husband's signature. They couldn't even compete in many sports until the late 60s and early 70s. My grandmother was left by her husband at the age of 65 and had to clean motels to get by, because he took his pension and social security with him, and what did she have after raising kids?
Not to mention that many women need intellectual and emotional stimulation just as much as men do -- my friends with kids agree that kids do not provide this -- and in some cases they need economic power to remain safe. (Do we have to dredge up the stats on violence among males in the 18 to late 30s age group again? Female safety is an issue worldwide, and we're talking about safety from male family and community members for the most part, even among middle and upper class women. Earning power is often the most important factor in keeping them safe and giving them options for escape.)
Do we also have to talk about the clear stats that women took on jobs and careers expecting that men would step up to the plate to assume an equal share of duties in the home, but this did not pan out? Childcare and home care duties are still disproportionately handled by women even in developed economies and among middle class women. Perhaps it is this fact that has caused many younger women to take a step back and re-assess why they're doing a double shift when their partners are not. Or why they are doing the elder care even for their partners' parents.
The feminist revolution in the west was not about encouraging women to go into the workforce. It was about giving them the choice to do so or to be a stay-at-home mom or to forge their own path whatever that might be, and in so doing to give them more power over their own lives. It was also meant to give men more options in terms of their own careers and their roles as fathers, and it has done that as well.
Anyone who wants to roll that back should go back and look at where we came from, or look at women (and men) in societies where they don't have choice. Personally, I don't want to go back to the way things were before feminism as it has been a win-win for both men and women in my view.
All great points. Feminism was originally totally necessary. But today feminism has morphed into something else entirely, and has consequently acquired a bad name. Today's so-called feminists should focus on helping women who still suffer in poor countries and under oppressive regimes rather than worry about "manspreading" and "masculine toxicity" in the west.
But they won't do this because of their extreme leftist politics. Questioning, as an example, fundamentalist Islam's policies towards women or the treatments of women and girls in poor nations would be considered "racist" or "islamophobic", so these new feminists cannot avoid looking foolish, hypocritical and irrelevant.
I have to admit that I don't understand feminism today and what its priorities are. To add to your point, I would think the feminist agenda would include human trafficking of women and children at the US border and in the Ukraine, the high percentage and numbers of women and children killed in Gaza, and female genital mutilation in northern Africa. Perhaps there is some focus on these critical issues, but I've not noticed it. Although manspreading can be annoying, it can be addressed in person right there on the bus or subway through some direct and respectful communication. But the enslavement and loss of many lives is a big and urgent problem, and addressing it would have profound consequences.
Very true....there are so many grave and urgent issues concerning women and girls throughout the world.
But again the woke feminists/marxists cannot touch these issues anymore than they dare address the issue of girls losing scholarships in sports and getting injured because forced to compete against so called "trans females" (biological males), not to mention having to share bathrooms, locker rooms and showers with them (and having to do the same in prisons, and being exposed to rape by these "trans females", most of whom are biologically intact).
We hear nothing from today's fake feminists, who are nothing but militant marxists, on these issues.
As far as manspreading, yes, that's an individual problem to be addressed individually...just like "womanspreading" - has anyone ever shared a clothes closet or a bathroom with a woman? :))
Womanspreading -- love it!!!
I agree that work is supposed to be work, but even though the whole family was toiling in the field, I don’t think they longed for the end of the day the way the modern worker longs for the end of the week. I am a pastured poultry farmer and I don’t own a tractor. All of my management is done by hand, transferring feed, moving chickens, cutting weeds, processing chickens. I work in 95 degree heat and freezing weather It is a 70-80 week job from March-December. But it isn’t the tedious work of answering emails and looking at a spreadsheet while your soul gets sucked out through your eyeballs. Modernity is the worst of everything. It robs of us useful work. It robs us of sunshine. It robs us of productive exercise. It robs us of autonomy, independence. Modernity punishes those who choose to use their bodies for productive use for their neighbors and rewards the thieves, grifters and psychopaths. We are at peak unhappiness because our ecology is off. Humans need massive amounts of sunshine, sweat, temperature changes and quality nutrition and sleep. We don’t need automobiles, climate controlled environments, LED lit offices or childcare. Run away as fast as you can from modernity, it is killing you and your lineage.
"Modernity is the worst of everything. It robs of us useful work. It robs us of sunshine. It robs us of productive exercise. It robs us of autonomy, independence. Modernity punishes those who choose to use their bodies for productive use for their neighbors and rewards the thieves, grifters and psychopaths. We are at peak unhappiness because our ecology is off. Humans need massive amounts of sunshine, sweat, temperature changes and quality nutrition and sleep. We don’t need automobiles, climate controlled environments, LED lit offices or childcare. Run away as fast as you can from modernity, it is killing you and your lineage."
I couldn't agree more....1000%!
And here is another point, going beyond what you stated: Native American men had no qualms whatsoever about being the providers, because many provided by hunting, which is now considered to be a recreational activity for men. They did not want to work like the white men and did not like that kind of work, because they felt free and independent by hunting, and it was for them a sport as well. Men naturally like to be physical, adventurous, to challenge themselves and face a certain amount of danger. At least normal men. Who wants to work in an office, sit all day and look at walls and a screen? No human being was ever created for this!
As I wrote, no one if hardwired to work...to provide, perhaps, but not to work. How many people win the lottery and keep working, unless they really love what they do, in which case it is not work but a calling?
Your example of native Americans (a fake term) shows a counterpoint to your original post. Women and men haven’t in fact been working in the fields for all of humanity. There are many cultures that have separate roles for men and women. Most historical examples I have seen/read have historical women in charge of the home (water, firewood, cooking) while men are responsible for hunting or farming.
I would love to see some documentation of your assertion that men and women worked side by side and equally 1000+ years ago.
Sorry but I have no interest in quibbling over this or any other matter. Life is too short. You are free to believe whatever you want as long as it works for you.
Lots here.
Men die younger because they don’t whine? Evidence please.
Men are programmed not to whine? Evidence of who the programmer is please.
The author said nothing about a man “wanting” to work and provide. More that they were better dispositioned to do it and when fully empowered to do it, possibly gain additional motivation.
Also disagree man isn’t disposed to provide. If a man has a baby with a woman, hopefully he loves her. That weakness and vulnerability in the mother of his child should - and time shows - does generate the will to work in a man. Something similar occurs when providing for a family. Is it easy? Nope. Is it desired? Sometimes not. Is it a genuine desire to serve and bless others at the expense of self ? Yep.
You might say the distinction between wanting to work and being capable and willing is meaningless. But I think humans have a long enough track record of doing this exact formula that it’s evidence of something intrinsic and inherent.
Just my .02.
Fascinating conversation which resonates on many levels. For what it is worth, I would do the dishes (and do) every day if it spared me the agony of grocery shopping and errands.
Things I find entertaining:
1. All mammal species have “gender roles.”
2. Women believing evolutionary gender roles selected for over millions of years (yes, the primates from which we descended had/have gender roles), suddenly can be ignored/rejected because a few women decided a century ago that they didn’t like them. LOL.