Religion and women.

Discussion in 'Religion' started by Xelasnave.1947, Jan 12, 2021.

  1. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    35,782
    For this last one, you asked what was wrong with it, Jan, which means you can't see any problem with it. I'm not sure whether anybody else told you what the problem was, so I'll tell you, just so you know.

    The problem is your sexism: the idea that you value women primarily, if not almost exclusively, for their potential to produce "progeny". I assume that makes younger women of childbearing age valuable as property to you and your kind. You haven't told us what your view is on the value of a woman following menopause, if there is any.

    As a sexist man, you prefer your "property" to be as "pure" as possible. Thus, a woman's property value to you, as a male, increases if she is "pure". It is clear that you consider non-virgin women to be "adulterated" or "impure", which is most likely something your religion taught you. Biologically, your concern - and those of other sexist men like you - is that non-virgin women could potentially be pregnant with another man's child, thus reducing their property value to you as host for your own "progeny".

    It is only moderately interesting that you regard other men, who "steal" your woman's "purity", as themselves "impure". I guess you want to be the Alpha Male, and you expect the Beta males to maintain their own "purity" in order to maximise the value of your women to you.

    So, there you go, Jan. That's what's wrong with your outdated patriarchal religious view that women are your property, approximately.

    Does that help you to understand? Or do you need further education on why these things are wrong?
     
    Last edited: Jan 31, 2021
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    35,782
    Here's what Jan's religion teaches him. I wonder if this is official ISKCON ("Hare Krishna") teaching, or whether Jan is out on a limb on this.
    For Jan, man and woman coming together is just about creating progeny. The woman is to be subservient to Jan, who will "head" the household. Her role is to provide Jan with children. Her emotionality is an unfortunate side effect that he will have to put up with, but he can overlook that as long as she obeys his commands. After all, his God says he must love her, if she is his wife. But she'd better be a virgin; the more fertile the better!

    It's a completely different culture! Welcome to Jan's religion, everyone!*

    *Women past childbearing age need not apply.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    35,782
    God forbid you should ever marry, Jan. You're not married, are you?
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    35,782
    Oh dear. (Where to start?)
    The longer this thread goes on, the more obvious is becomes that you're entirely unequipped to have a sensible discussion of sex or marriage.

    Is there a vow of celibacy for Hare Krishnas? Maybe a lack of experience is one of the problems. If not, it must be something else.
    Gee, thanks for clarifying that, Jan. The poor man should have kept his penis in his pants. Now he's stuck with a soiled woman as a wife, and he'll have messed up progeny. The poor rapist guy. I really feel for him. And he had to pay for her, too!
     
  8. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    35,782
    *sigh*
    Rape is primarily about power, Jan, not sex. The kick is in having power over the victim in the most intimate way.
    By the way, most rape is perpetrated by men against women, in case you're still confused. (How old are you?)
    News flash! In biblical times, married women never had sex outside of marriage!

    Thanks for letting us know, Jan. You're certainly a font of knowledge.
    You seem to have a quite prurient interest in the small details of various rape scenarios you're inventing. It's quite worrying.

    Typically forced penetration offences committed by women against men don't usually involved literal guns being held to literal heads. But you've already been given that information.
    Do you, though?

    It would be fine to rape a virgin, as long as you coughed up the fifty sheckels and married her afterwards, wouldn't it?

    Also, haven't you been arguing that it's impossible for a woman to rape a man?

    Do you even know what rape is?
    It reduces their property value. The dowry will be smaller.
    You shouldn't tell lies like that, Jan.

    The bible doesn't approve of rape. On the contrary, it specifies punishments for rape: like having to marry your victim, to pay her father a dowry and so on. That's the man's punishment. The woman victim's punishment is that she has to marry her rapist. Seems fair, doesn't it? It's her own fault she didn't keep herself pure.
     
    Last edited: Jan 31, 2021
  9. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    35,782
    Where in the bible does it mention that the woman consented, in regards to that biblical law?
     
  10. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    35,782
    No. The idea that the man is "naturally" the head of the household is a patriarchal view, as is the idea that the woman ought to be subservient to the man, as is the view that the woman's main value in the family structure is her biological role in "providing progeny".

    You keep asserting that, without attempting to provide any evidence at all.

    Argumentem ad populum, then?
     
    Last edited: Jan 31, 2021
  11. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    35,782
    The truth is often tiresome for the immoral.
     
  12. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    35,782
    Let's examine the ISKCON (Hare Krishna) religion next.

    Here's something I found on the web in answer to a query about a husband's duty to his wife. This is a "scriptural" quote:

    "It is the duty of the husband to liquidate his debt to his wife. The wife gives her sincere service to the husband, and he becomes indebted to her because one cannot accept service from his subordinate without giving him something in exchange. The spiritual master cannot accept service from a disciple without awarding him spiritual instruction. That is the reciprocation of love and duty."

    - Srimad-Bhagavatam, 3.23.52, Purport
    Note that the wife is subordinate to the husband. Is this standard teaching in ISKCON?

    From the same web source, here's some more advice (this one doesn't quote a specific "scripture"):

    The duties of the wife are such that she is to make the husband happy according to his desire. Cooking, keeping the house clean and orderly, the children happy, etc. are the duties of a good wife.
    Most concerning, though, was a response on the same Krishna advice page that I saw to the question "My husband is very strict and dominating, we're not getting along, and this makes me very depressed. What should I do?". Here's the response, in full:

    It is difficult for me to offer material suggestions as I know very little about your relationship and I am sure it is very, very complex. But the Lord Krishna works in strange ways sometimes to teach us various lessons. Sometimes if we can just change our vision then the material circumstances don't appear as bleak as before.

    Generally we consider things that make our lives uncomfortable or troublesome undesirable and they make us depressed. But after a time we may see things differently.

    Often Krishna's mercy is not easily recognizable. He takes away our pride, lust, greed, and anger - often by putting us into humbling and enlightening situations - but we won't learn those lessons unless we are open to them and consider carefully that actually that there are no undesirable things, only lessons to be learned. Really it is our vision that is coloring what makes us happy and unhappy.

    Generally, what is materially uncomfortable makes us unhappy. For example, for a child, going to school makes him unhappy until he grows and matures. For a woman, childbirth makes her unhappy until she is holding her newborn in her arms - so many examples are there. The material world is always full of suffering ( dukhalayam) and it is temporary ( ashasvatam) and that will always be the case, but if we see His hand in everything and understand that He only wants our welfare then we'll accept everything as His mercy and we'll always be happy.
    Not a word about how the husband could be less strict and dominating, or anything like that. No recognition at all that maybe it's his fault, in fact. No, apparently the real problem is that woman with the abusive husband hasn't considered the possibility that Lord Krishna might just be teaching her a needed lesson about changing her attitude.
     
  13. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    35,782
    More interesting answers from ISKCON:

    Question:
    Does Krishna consciousness forbid marriage and sex?

    Our Answer:
    No, marriage is all right. But sex outside of marriage binds one to this material world and so is counterproductive from the spiritual point of view. The point is that sex for other purposes than producing God conscious children makes us more materialistic and slows our spiritual progress.

    Simply put, if you get married and engage in sex for fun instead of producing a child, that act will make you more materialistic. It will cause you to identify yourself more with your body and more as an independent enjoyer rather than servant of God, the supreme enjoyer.

    The pure consciousness of the soul is to please God. So sex for producing children that are taught God consciousness is a spiritual experience, otherwise sex is material. As mentioned above, sex for producing children is OK. Sex for recreation is an impediment to spiritual progress.



    Question:

    How is it possible to control sex desire?

    Our Answer:
    Krishna explains in the Bhagavad-gita that lust arises from contemplating the objects of the senses. Therefore try to avoid thinking about or seeing the opposite sex as far as possible. And the secret—according to Krishna—is to get a higher taste from spiritual activities.

    Practice makes improvement. Try to engage the mind in practical service, as well as hearing and chanting about Krishna. The more we do that, our mind will have less time to contemplate the objects of the senses.

    Don't purposely go places or do things that you know will agitate your mind sexually. And don't despair or become depressed; it takes time to train up the lusty mind.

    Meditating on the beautiful form of Krishna, beginning with His lotus feet, helps free the mind from lust. It may seem hard to believe, but if you try it, you will see it works.

    We also should eat prasadam, vegetarian food that is offered to Krishna. In these ways we can spiritualize our mind by engaging it in Krishna's service.

    We shouldn't be impatient. Sex desire is something we've been involved with for many lifetimes. It's not like it will disappear suddenly. But it becomes easier to tolerate as we absorb our mind in a positive spiritual way.

    We can read sections from the scripture that describe how entangling sex desire is. These include the Forest of Enjoyment chapter of the Fifth Canto, Lord Kapila's teachings about adverse fruitive activities in the Third Canto, the Aila Gita from the Eleventh Canto, etc. These convince us intellectually of the value of controlling sex desire.

    There are also foods that can be avoided: Don't eat too many grains or yogurt at night. Don't eat lots of rich foods like cashew nuts. This causes nocturnal emissions. Don't talk about mundane male/female relationships or associate with people who do.
     
  14. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    35,782
    This one's interesting on what should happen with marriages etc.:

    Parents should understand that adolescents have only three choices in sexual morality: celibacy, marriage, or immorality. Because of the danger in a society where boys and girls mix freely, marriage should be encouraged.

    We sometimes mistakenly think that an “arranged” marriage means that the parents force a twelve-year-old girl to marry a thirty-year-old man—and they meet for the first time at the wedding. Prabhupada gives us a different picture. He tells us of a gradual process, usually spanning several years. The parents look for a suitable partner for their child, taking into account that the boy and girl should be equal in character, qualities, social position, and renunciation.

    The parents judge the match through their own observations, by asking others, and through astrology. The wishes of the boy and girl are also important. Once the families and the boy and girl agree, a period of occasional, supervised association begins. It’s as if the parents introduce their child to a suitable mate and then chaperone formal “dates” to prepare the children for marriage. When the children are old enough to marry, the girl may still spend long regular visits at her parents’ home so she may gradually get used to being a wife. An extended family makes this easier by helping the new couple in their duties and relationship.

    This time-tested process can be easily followed today. The girl engaged to a suitable boy doesn’t have to advertise herself to find a man. And the boy knows he can’t marry until he becomes responsible. He is therefore motivated to mature into a conscientious man of good character.

    Built on the early training in renunciation, their marriage will be dedicated to Krishna, fulfilling our hope for their future.
    Three choices, eh? Celibacy, marriage or immorality. All non-marital sex is immoral.
     
  15. iceaura Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    30,848
    And the children, as well - it is by presumption natural to the point of routine or inevitability that a child will not like school at first:
    The schoolchild is a "him", of course.

    And the opposite of most people's experience in my culture, at least my generation - the younger the child the more they enjoyed school, and they tended to became unhappy at school as a consequence of having grown and matured while caged in a glorified Skinner box five or six days a week.
    Those guys may be overlooking some stuff there.

    The whole scene would be less obviously ugly if there were some mention of the unhappy husband learning lessons from Krishna, and adjusting his attitudes accordingly, while under the strict supervision of his arranged wife's parents.
    Reef by reef the net closes until objection itself, complaint itself, unhappiness itself, is sinful - except in the role of husband, where it appears to have been identified as Krishna's means of teaching lessons to the poor in faith.
     
  16. Jan Ardena OM!!! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,919
    @bilvon

    Where did I say women aren’t allowed to fight?
     
  17. Jan Ardena OM!!! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,919
    All I asked is that you tell me where I have been prejudiced, or discrimination against women or girls.
    Pick one of the quotes you posted and break it down.
     
  18. Jan Ardena OM!!! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,919
    Lol!!!

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!


    An atheist trying to comprehend God
     
  19. Jan Ardena OM!!! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,919
    Oh dear! Another one trying to force a negative narrative. I know where this goes. You can’t have your way in the discussion, so you start with the what could become very serious accusations.
    I urge you to stick to the points made in the discussion, discuss it, and not let our emotions rule our intelligence. This is a good example of why men should not be emotional.

    Do you want to make a truce, so we can get back to discussing the points I make? I’m up for it.
     
  20. Jan Ardena OM!!! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,919
    No we see the results of progeny that is not based on the one I mentioned (which is obviously the best one) on the streets of Chicago, Indiana, NYC, Atlanta, Philadelphia, and a whole host of other places, on a weekly basis.
    Unfortunately the start of this disaster was put in place by people who have no regard for human beings, by taking the men out of the homes, and giving money to women to bring up kids on their own, some sixty years ago.
     
  21. Jan Ardena OM!!! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,919
    You shouldn’t need evidence outside of your own understanding.
    Your own common sense, experience, intelligence, and observations should be adequate to become informed.
    For most people it kicks in naturally when they have children.
     
  22. Jan Ardena OM!!! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,919
    It’s not an argument.
    It has now become an opinion because there are other ideas. It is a natural understanding that we are already equipped with, unless we choose to deny it.
     
  23. billvon Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    19,453
    Keeping them from fighting when they want to is discrimination, no different than keeping them out of CEO jobs. Saying that a man should be the head of a family, and the woman should be relegated to childrearing, is discrimination, no different than saying that women are not competent enough to lead and parent at the same time.

    Odd how everyone here except you can see that. Are you blinded by your religious beliefs?
     

Share This Page