by blondie 68 Replies latest jw friends
Hi blondie
Fair enough, I wasn't going to post anymore and do not intend to after this one. I didn't realise your comments thread only allowed for people that agreed with your opinions! Let the readers judge for themselves from the official link I posted and the heavily edited wt you did, the actual truth of the points.
If like Mrs jones they prefer to believe in hearsay that is their choice rather than official checkable policy.
This is the last off topic comment I'm making on this thread:
Debtor, it is not heresay if the experiences are personal, meaning if the experiences related to the board happened to the person doing the relating.
I see you have a tendancy to paint all who don't agree with you with the broad stroke of "liar". Your conjecture, nothing more.
debater, I'll repeat if you to have an extensive "debate" that so often turns into an argument, take it to a separate thread. Feel free to even put a link to this thread. I just don't want 50 posts of back and forth, constant repeats of the same information. So start a separate thread.
JUSTNFROMBETHEL,
Regarding that remark: 'Brothers - tap that resource'. I am sure that many people in the audience laughed when they heard this, but I assure you that I would not have been one of them. I do not find this in the least bit funny.
This attitude by the brothers that sisters (especially single ones) were there to be 'bothered' or exploited was a source of irritation to me and in and of itself is the reason that I would not continue in the religion. I could write a book about it.
Regardless of the fact that I found out about the lies and deception of the religion, the appalling attitude towards women was at the top of the list of my reasons why I feel this religion is downright dangerous to single women. Maybe if they have family there to speak up on their behalf they will not be pestered, but people like me were on our own. I had to speak up for myself and frankly I just got plain tired of having to run from users or being put in a position to have to tell some ignoramus something they didn't want to hear.
Glad it's over.
LongHairGal - For the record, nobody was laughing at the idea that women are exploited. I may have missed something, but my comment was simply referring to how out of touch the older speaker was. He used an expression that he thought would mean one thing, while many younger ones in the audience, women included, found humor in its secondary urban meaning.
As for the WT article and the org's underlying (perhaps sometimes even outright) demotion of women, that is something I personally have never been on board with. But I've also seen that in businesses, organizations, and full-on-full cultures that have nothing to do with WT or JWs. Many times it's much worse than it is in the JW org. Not that it's an excuse, and no doubt some women have found themselves victims of men in congregations that take advantage of WT direction to mistreat them. I find that unacceptable and I'm glad that a new generation of women are turning up like my wife and my sistsers and my daughters who would never stand for that. Not in the congregation, not in the culture, not at school, and not at work.
But instead what you have are those who can laugh at old man speakers who are out of touch with modern terminology. They were not laughing with him, but at him. When people laugh at someone and realize that person is out of touch with reality on one matter, don't you think they might begin to wonder if they're out of touch with a lot of other matters too? How that's a bad thing I don't know. But the bottom line is that if I have to sit through three days of a convention and listen to some old man who thinks Christian women should be like Mrs. Cleaver - there will be some things that I have to laugh at, just to keep my sanity. I'm not going to apologize for it either. It was funny. It helps me endure what I have to endure right now if I can find things in the org to laugh at.
Great job Blondie! I always enjoy your threads on comments you will not hear at the WT study. The way the org views women is disgusting and I don't understand how so many women sat through studies like this and just didn't get up and walk out! Sometimes I think to myself I can maybe go back and suffer through a meeting and then I see the stupid articles like this and just know I could not sit through that kind of trash and certainly not expose my daughter to that kind of mentality, which is just plain ignorant. The governing body insist on putting the sisters in this little box as another posted said to be like June Clever......sick. They don't acknowledge that many women actually work (ooooh the scandal) and why they don't want marriage viewed as a partnership is beyond me.....I have come to the conclusion that the society actually hates women and loves to oppress us as much as they can. Signs of very low intelligence levesl and frail egos. DEBATOR Blondie qouted references from the society showing how they view women and expect them to act....those were not her "opinions".......FACT DEBATOR ARTICLES ON RAPE FROM THE SOCIETY IN THE PAST SAID WOMEN WERE TO BLAME FOR RAPE AND ALSO THEY SHOULD SHOW "RESPECT" FOR THEIR RAPISTS....WTF!!!!!! THAT SHOWS THEY DO NOT VIEW WOMEN AS HUMANS AND CERTAINLY NOT AS JESUS DID! They give the argument that because of sin women are to be "dominated" and act like that is okay....however on the other hand they say that just because we as humans are "imperfect" and "sinful" that we should try to overcome sinful tendencies.....so if women being "oppressed" and "dominated" is a result of sin shouldn't they promote the fighting of that tendency as well? Shouldn't they advocate having the opposite mindset of that and treating women as equals as Adam and Eve were treated in the beginning being BOTH MADE IN HIS IMAGE????? Yet no they don't as they LOVE to harp on the fact that it was prophesied women would be dominated and give permission to continue in that unhealthy way........I find it odd that they can admit that racism is wrong (FINALLY) and say God is not partial yet they LOVE to oppress and mistreat women........No excuse for it. IT IS DISGUSTING!!!!! Of course your endowed with the almighty penis in that chauvanistic organization so what would you know???? Penis equals strength and brains and vagina equals frailty and the inability to make decisions......So I politely ask you to shut your mouth on this topic and do us all a big favor! THANKS! Oh and Debator I typed all of this with a headcovering showing the utmost respect for your sacred position!!!!
HI JUSTINFROMBETHEL,
I am glad they weren't rolling on the floor laughing and it is true that 'older' speakers would say something like this. Nevertheless, the problem of the religion thinking they are going to exploit women is a reality. This guy just vocalized what many of them are really thinking. Maybe a younger speaker would not have actually said that because it is politically incorrect, but the mentality of exploitation in the religion is certainly there and isn't going away any time soon.
I am also aware of the attitude of exploiting women in certain cultures or organizations as well as in business. At least in business, I can bring a lawsuit. But, I certainly won't tolerate this in a religion and this only adds icing to the cake of the long list of what is wrong with the JW religion.
MEANGIRL,
Your post is right on! They certainly do hate women and this is NOT my problem.
Thanks LHG - I believe you and I probably see things somewhat similarly. However, for the record, at least in recent years, I would say the idea that the Watchtower "exploits" women is a bit extreme. When I think of the word "exploit" - it brings to my mind things like sex trafficking.
I'm not saying there are not inidiviual men in JW congregations that use WT direction as an exuse to mistreat women - however I have been in many congregations over many decades and never seen one case of a woman "exploited". Treated less than equal to men? Yes. Falsely and negatively stereotyped? Yes. But again those that follow fundamentalist religions which take the bible literally all pretty much do the same. I remember growing up with a neighbor friend of mine who's family was pentecostal and all his sisters were not allowed to cut their hair or wear make up. I remember going in service and running into some fundi woman who was criticizing JW sisters because they "braided their hair" and wore jewelry and make up.
Again I don't mean to sound like I'm in total disagreement with you, becuase I believe it's nuts for anyone to allow a 2000 year old book to enforce gender rules of that time today. But lets just say an alien was sent to earth to live as a woman but had to choose a religion which to be born and raised in. From the choice of muslim, hindu (caste system?), various christian fundis, catholic (no birth control), mormons, or JWs - the fact is one could do a lot worse than JWs.
But your point is well made - religion, including JWs, is another control mechanism that often give men justification for treating women as less than equal. I just personally have never seen any cases of "exploitation", nor do I find any official policies that promote "exploitation" of women. I asked my extremely independent wife if she had ever seen or read about policies in the WT that would classify as "exploitation". She couldn't recall anything that could be defined as exploitation. Subtle chauvinism, yes, but exploitation like one might find in muslim religions, not at all.
The good news is that we've finally come to realize that it's ok not to see things exactly like men in the WT's writing and teaching dept demand. You, my wife, my sisters, and I probably all have different experiences and observations on all kinds of matters. And while we certainly agree that a WT article promoting a 2000 year old sexist concept of women submission is more than just outdated, it is part of a whole slew of religions used to divide and control humanity - both men and women.
Also just so I'm not being naive - you do know what the expression "tap that..." means to young ones today - right? I realize now that many on this forum may not be up to date with the latest urban dictionary expressions. Sorry if I assumed too much.
Hi AGAIN JUSTINFROMBETHEL,
(You mention a wife and sisters so I see you are a man (I wasn't sure).
Not to be argumentative, but I think it would be better if I explain in detail just what I am talking about. I am a single working woman. I was raised RC and became a JW as a young adult. When I use the word "exploit", I am not using it in the sense that the newspapers use it when referring to 'sex trafficking' in women. I am using it in a general sense. It can refer to both men and women. I am talking about wasting somebody's time and physical and mental resources. Of course, this isn't done by holding a gun to anybody's head but is done slowly and carefully by the false promises of the religion and appealing to people's sense of guilt or whatever.
To get down to business: A woman has a small window of time to either get married or get educated and get a career. The only exceptions to the rule are if the woman comes from a rich family and they will support her. The religion, however, would gladly waste her time and anybody else's time for that matter. Many congregations have quite a few single women over 40 who are in pitiful circumstances. Will the religion support them? Please. They sit in the hall and in many circumstances are TARGETED by every user imaginable. I can attest to this from personal experience as I have had to run from users (who are usually older MARRIED women - I might add , which is why I have zero camraderie for them). I got tired of this.
Again, it is certainly not the exploitation you mention in other religions or cultures which is actual forceful ownership of women and just doing what they want to them as a property. Thankfully, the JW religion doesn't actually have physical ownership of women.
My use of the word exploit is from Webster's Dictionary: exploit - 1 a: to turn to economic account < ~ a mine > b: to take advantage of : UTILIZE 2: to make use of meanly or unjustly for one's own advantage < ~ his friends >.
I hope this explains what I mean.
