JW Women Self-0Loathing - Get a Back Bone

by Band on the Run 98 Replies latest jw friends

  • rebel8

    I personally reacted to the situation in a way that would seemingly meet your approval. I realized inside myself that the misogyny was morally and factually wrong, and stood up to it no matter what the personal cost (which included physical abuse, verbal abuse, sanction and social ostracizing--pretty big consequences--some may feel it was a dumb choice that only provided bad outcomes and no good).

    However, I recognize that others may not make the same choice, may not realize they aren't inferior, may not want to experience the consequences, etc.

    I remember a poster here who still felt she wanted the jw-style male headship in her marriage because men were better at leading and women were better at following (and a marriage is better off if the partners aren't equal). I disagreed with her, but to each, his own.

  • blondie

    An ex-JW and author, Barbara Grizutti Harrison reported:

    In 1941, at a convention in St. Louis, Missouri, J. F. Rutherford, Russell's successor, combining evangelistic fervor with vaudevillean flair, said that a woman was nothing more than (as Kipling had put it) "a rag and a bone and a hank of hair." (The women in the convention audience, I am told, applauded fervently.)
    In 1941, the JW’s believed that the end of the world would come in a matter of months. In view of the closeness of the Millennium, Judge Rutherford advised JW’s not to get married, saying, "Why, then, should a man who has the prospect before him of being of the great multitude now tie himself up to a stack of bones and hank of hair?"

    Also found at

    September 15, 1941 WT , page 287

  • No Room For George
    No Room For George

    .............and the women applauded fervently. Wow. LOL.

    Hey Blondie, could it be said that at the time when the Judge spoke this, was the beginnning of anti-marriage sentiments coming from the top down? What I mean is, there's always been articles and talks that attempted to make matrimony appear to be less desireable than pioneering, or less than other subservient behavior on behalf of the WT. Now on one hand, I can understand that sentiment of someone who believes he's going to heaven and rule for a thousand years, and afterwards be greater than the angels having immortality. This is different, as what you posted though, leaves me to think that Rutherford was speaking about those with an earthly hope as he called those men the, "multitudes." So I'm guessing he was discouraging marriage to the males who would comprise the Other Sheep. If that's the case, they've been discouraging marriage in order to serve the organization for far longer than I had originally thought. When did the light on the Other Sheep being those with an earthly hope kick in?

  • blondie

    Remember that Rutherford had been living apart from his wife for many years under the guise of his illness and the need for warmer climes in California while at the same time his wife was only living a few miles from Beth Sarim where Rutherford lived in California. He obviously felt he had an unhappy marriage and did not have a normal physical relationship with his wife and by some well-documented evidence on this board, was enjoying those physical arrangements with at least one other woman not his wife. All the religious stuff was just a ruse or backdrop. Russell did not discourage marriage but he did discourage sex between married couples. I have been told that when Knorr finally married and opened the doors for Bethelites to marry, that his own marriage was without consummation and his widow quickly married a guy who was not afraid or adverse to that with a wife. And then we have the perennial bachelor Fred Franz. Millton Henschel though seemed to be an ordinary guy but remember he too was a Bethelite and had to wait to marry until the Bethel rules changed. Of course, he could leave Bethel and marry but lose all the perks he had from being Knorr's secretary.

    In the areas I have lived as a jw, most of the rank and file ignored this. I know of one family that had seven children, pioneered half a state, and their sons grew up to be congregation servants/POs in every major city in the state. All these children had children, some going to Bethel, the international building work, gilead, regular pioneers, circuit work. The WTS would have been at a great loss with the lack of these willing slaves to do their work.

    The WTS should thank God that jw marry and have children or the "increase" would be small indeed. They would be just like the Shakers who were celibate and there were only 4 Shakers alive in 2006.

  • No Room For George
    No Room For George

    Wow Blondie!!! Thanks for your insight. Wow man, I'm floored right about now. This religion has been crazier for a much longer time than I thought.

  • PaintedToeNail

    Joe Namath aside, I doubt any man would give up a suit jacket and tie for the torture of wearing pantyhose. Once you lower them to use the pot, legs get a mind of their own and never pull up straight. The stinking seam is crooked on your behind and the leg is twisted at the thigh.

  • millions now living are dead
    millions now living are dead

    Would it make the ladies feel better if you ran mic's, gave talks, went on sheparding call,etc. Then you could experience what the men experience. Complete emasculation by some old farts back in New York.

    Here's how I see it. Any cult worth its salt always follows some basic principles. It gives the MASCULINE aspect of the group something to DO and the FEMININE aspect of the group something to LOVE. So, for instance, some people get into the cult for MASCULINE reasons, such as DIRECTION, STRUCTURE, and a sense of MISSION. Some come in for FEMININE reasons such as COMMUNITY, FALLING IN LOVE WITH SOMEONE, MAKING FRIENDS, etc. Just examples. When someone tries to leave, it's usually the FEMININE aspect of the cult that makes it extremely difficult. Leaving family, friends, lovers, and enitire social structures is the hardest thing to do in my opinion. The biggest fallout from the MASCULINE after leaving is feeling like there is no PURPOSE or STRUCTURE to your life. The Watchtower or any cults primary goal is to disarm a persons MASCULINE essence in order to place their MISSION in it's place (sell watchtowers, yay!!) They have to keep the MASCULINE busy and in a state of URGENCY. When they do this, they then have access to the FEMININE because the MASCULINE did not protect it. The FEMININE is the juice of life. The radiance of life. It's pure rocket fuel. The Watchtower feeds on this stuff.

    When it comes to relationships, if the woman is playing the feminine role and the man is playing the masculine role, and they are both in the Borg, then the man has already let the woman down. He has failed to protect her as well as himself. He is living an inauthentic life, living out the mission of a religious corporation. He has first failed himself and then his woman. The woman senses this and must eventually activate her masculinity and protect her own authentic self. She will go through different phases of anger, resentment, ect, which is good. Why settle for a man who isn't authentically a MAN. The danger is that she will lose her femininity and basically just embody the masculine principle out of fear of being "weak", not realizing the true power of the feminine. She will then attract passive and weak men and ask, "Where are all the good men?"

    As far as men go, the MASCULINE tends to be MISSION oriented. When a man discovers his true MISSION and PURPOSE, he is no longer intimidated or needy of women. Nobody can tell him what his MISSION is. It can't be found in a 192 page book. It must be discovered internally. Only then is he able to have a relationship with a woman. Older and wiser cultures knew this. This was the basis for all male initiations. Most were done at puberty before any romantic feelings were stirred in the child. He had to be seperated from his mother and all that she embodied (comfort, love, beauty), and forced to discover that within himself. Within this discovery lied his mission as well as his masculinity. He then could return and have a realionship with a woman if he chose to.

    The MASCULINE's job is to set the FEMININE free. As this plays out in relationships, if a man holds space for the woman to express herself, the good and the bad, then her true FEMININITY comes out. If he hasn't come to understand his own emotions and hold space for them, he will not be able to handle hers. Most men bury themselves in someone elses mission to avoid their own emotions and their lovers emotions.

    All this stuff can be switched around if a woman has a dominant MASCULINE essence and a man has a dominant FEMININE essence or for gay couples.


  • Lady Lee
    Lady Lee

    Molestation: Never taken seriously. Must have two witnesses to the SAME account

    We have had plenty of men on this board disclose how thye were sexually abused within the cong.

    I totally agree that they dismiss the importance of women. We count as little as anyone once their usefulness is over. Ok maybe less

    But this is an organization that casts away anyone who has lost their usefulness regardless of how much time thye have put in during their lives. This is an equal opportunity abuser

  • AGuest

    May you all have peace! There is a reason that Paul's teachings are accepted by most JW women (and many other women "of faith"): (1) they WANT to take the puerile position so as to not be RESPONSIBLE for their own actions... and thus, (2) are convinced (by others or in and of themselves) that the words to Eve regarding domination by HER husband... applied to ALL women, and so (3) Paul's words make sense.

    If they would look at the women in the Bible they hold so dear (Sarah, Naomi, Hannah, Deborah, Esther, Abigail, Mary the Magdalene, Phoebe, Lydia, Priscilla, and others)... they would see that such thinking is not only in error, but a major means for misleading women "of faith." Should a woman honor her husband? Of course, she should... just as he should honor her! Should she respect and be respectful of him? Always. Just as he should respect and be respectful of her. Being an non-thinking, unopinioned, doormat, however, is not honoring OR respecting one's husband... or one's wife... at all. A COMPLEMENT makes up the deficit in another... and we all have deficits of one sort or another.

    The WTBTS, however, like many other religions, have created a system where a woman is not to think, but to defer thinking to her husband. At least, as to the "important" things (sure, she can choose what to cook for dinner, what color curtains to hang, and which knee-length dress to wear to which meeting... but not much more than that). And, for the most part, "she" likes it that way... because it relieves HER of her responsibilities... particularly when it comes to God and Christ.

    It really is no different from the men, though, who follow the WTBTS as to their service to God. All of these believe that, in the end, they wil be able to say "My husband... the WTBTS... GB... Devil... made me do it."

    Ain't gonna fly, though. Paul's admonishments to wives were based on two things: the laws of Rome at the time... HIS understanding as to the place of women pursuant to the Jewish system during THAT time (which was very different from when women were appointed as judges!) due to his education as a Pharisee. The first was necessary: women were not allowed to speak in public settings... and doing so could cause great persecution for the christians involved at that time. The second, however, was wrong... which Paul later came to understand as shown by HIS direction to the men as to receiving women MINISTERIAL SERVANTS (such as Phoebe - Romans 16:1, 2), later on.

    Folks must remember, although the letters to the Corinthians appear in the Bible canon AFTER that to the Romans, they were written FIRST. Paul's change in paradigms, however, came AFTER his direct dealings with the Corinthians, indeed as a RESULT of the devastation he almost caused there.

    As for the men, it is ambition... disguised as "reaching out" or "service to Jehovah" that makes them so malleable. True, Paul's admonitions are once again used to create this ambition, but if anyone undertook to study about what was going on back then, those who preached were APPOINTED to do so, by Christ through holy spirit (and thus, were ALL anointed)... while those who "reached out" did so as to overseeing... the DISTRIBUTION... of food, clothing, money, etc.,... to the widows and orphans. Not like the WTBTS even has such a "ministry" today, though. Nope, all that money goes right to... well, we all know where it DOESN'T go.

    I hope this helps and, again, peace to you all!

    A slave of Christ,


  • No Room For George
    No Room For George

    Shelby, Shelby, Shelby............woman shut up.

Share this