Are JW women repressed in the org?

by Tina 67 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  Flowerpetal

  Wendy>>Flowerpetal,
  Sister I realize some woman are scared of power, as it seems to be in your case.

  FP>>Scared of power?? No Wendy, I'm not scared of it. I don't understand how you can come to that conclusion just because I said I think power is seductive. I just prefer not to have it the way some women want it. Isn't that my choice? I think I am powerful in my own way. If I can be a good influence on my kids, and teach them my values and also how to treat others, and they listen to me, that's power. It works on hubby too. In fact I posted some days ago, that real power comes from the hand that rocks the cradle. I'm sure you are familiar with that expression. Mothers can do a lot to influence their children, esp boys.

  Wendy>> But others are not, they have a voice that needs to be heard. There are so many woman who are intelligent, charasmatic, and envangalistic. Why are they repressed? Why can't we hear a talk from them on Sunday morning? I have heard plenty of talks that would put me to sleep, but a sister gets up for her 5 minute demonstration, and I am all ears. There is a diffeerence between men and woman, I think we all agree on this. And it is really easier for some to hide behind the coat tails of their husband.

  FP>>And I don't do that either.

  Wendy>>But something you must remember, not all woman want to do this. I for one have a voice that I want heard. I don't want to be dismissed because of the ability to wear a dress.
  If you are happy with this, then so be it. But don't deny it isn't there...it is and I bet in thousands of references written by the wtbts in black and white.

  FP>>Wendy I feel I have a voice that wants to be heard too. But I want to focus it in other areas, such as writing, or even encouraging other people other than JWs to be the best they can be, and being able to influence young minds before they get cynical. That is where I think I have power to do good. My friend and I are talking about collaborating on something to accomplish this. Maybe on the net; maybe in some books.
• 

  mommy

  FP,
  The folowing are quotes you made on the other thread and this one:

  I'm sorry if you thought I was being flippant. I just don't like the idea of women allowing themselves be browbeaten by a man. If that was going on in a cong. I attended, I would leave it and let them know my reasons for leaving. In the congs I have been in, I was never given the feeling that I was being suppressed or repressed. I would not want to be an elder, a ministerial servant, a school servant, or lead in prayer with both genders present. But that's me. Giving Sunday talks requires one being an elder or ministeral servant and since I stated I don't care to be an elder or ms, there you have it. But I can still be an evangelist--and that's fine with me.

  
  Ok If you indeed wanted to be an elder, would they allow this? Don't make another offhanded remark about what works for you...think about this....would they let you? We both know the answer to this.
  

  Now if it's power you all are talking about, within the congregations, and you think women should have some, more "power to you." I am just not interested. Power is seductive and I want no part of it.

  
  Ok this is a fair statement as well. But again I ask you...If indeed you did want power would they allow it? You may be content to stand behind your husband, but what about those that don't want to? Again I ask you to really think about this queston...if you asked for power, would it be given to you?

  You see Fp there is a BIG, huge, humongous difference in having a choice, and having a limited choice. Can you not see this?
  wendy
• 

  mommy

  Fp,
  Would you mind in looking up how to use Forum Codes in your message? It is right under the box you make your post in.
  See how much easier a read this makes? Thanks in advance
  wendy
• 

  ianao

  ianao:

  I am not in that thought process.

  Sure you aren't. That's why you felt the need to post on this thread regarding this particular topic right? That's why you are so "sure there are others who are not being categorized or generalized by the above comments", right? Is that why you "guess Florida is really on another planet"?

  What's sad is, you can't even see what the tower is doing to your brain. But then again, that's the beauty of brainwashing: Six million JWs all at once saying "I am an individual, my thoughts are my own", ignoring their unified delusion under the auspices of agape.

  I don't judge anyone. I observe and relay.
• 

  Flowerpetal

  Wendy>>Ok If you indeed wanted to be an elder, would they allow this? Don't make another offhanded remark about what works for you...think about this....would they let you? We both know the answer to this.

  FP>>No they wouldn't and would give the scriptural reasons for stating why. And yes it would be from the apostle Paul. Are you suggesting that everyone should disregard what Paul stated? Not that I don't have issues with him, but this is not one that I have. Yet I don't see brothers in my cong running around reading scriptures to sisters about being subordinate.

  Now if it's power you all are talking about, within the congregations, and you think women should have some, more "power to you." I am just not interested. Power is seductive and I want no part of it.

  
  Wendy>>Ok this is a fair statement as well. But again I ask you...If indeed you did want power would they allow it? You may be content to stand behind your husband, but what about those that don't want to? Again I ask you to really think about this queston...if you asked for power, would it be given to you?

  FP>>Wendy, really should power be the thing that drives a church or org in the first place? Maybe the word should be authority. Again, if they go by scripture, by Paul, women don't have the authority to be elders or ministerial servants. Yet he does charge them to counsel younger sisters and wives so they don't go gadding about interfering in other people's affairs nor gossipping. But because this is the arrangement that is set up in the org, and other churches as well, does that mean I must leave it in search of worshippers who do allow women to be pastors, etc? I don't think so.

  Wendy>>You see Fp there is a BIG, huge, humongous difference in having a choice, and having a limited choice. Can you not see this?

  FP>>Yes I understand what you are saying. But I also don't have a desire to have authority like that. Some women do and I shouldn't be judged because I don't want to OR because I don't feel suppression, repression or oppression from the brothers in my cong. They do not so to speak "Lord" it over others; sisters included. It would be terribly difficult for the society, or other churches, to admit that Paul's words in this area are not for people today, and reject them but yet accept other things he said as inspired.
• 

  Flowerpetal

  OK Wendy, Thanks. Wasn't sure what Forum Codes were all about.
• 

  Flowerpetal

  Well Ianao, actually this conversation started last week with Tina and me. It all started with I reply made about volunteerism and it has come to suppression of women among JWs.

  And either Prisca or Tina asked me what planet my cong was on and so I told them the Planet of Florida.

  If you want to think the Tower has done something to my brain fine. I would like to suggest to you, if you haven't done so already, to read a book called Virus of the Mind by Richard Brodie. Very interesting ideas he puts forth.
• 

  ianao

  Flowerpetal:

  It would be terribly difficult for the society, or other churches, to admit that Paul's words in this area are not for people today, and reject them but yet accept other things he said as inspired.

  Interesting.
• 

  Francois

  Face the facts. Jehovah's Witnesses practice a modernized (but not too much) version of the tribal religion of a nomadic, illiterate, desert people, worshipping the same tribal god, and using a book consisting mainly of the secular history of these people, elevated to the status of a divine revelation.

  In these primitive societies, women were considered chattel. Note that Abraham was referred to as his wife's husbandly OWNER. She wasn't much different than his tent, his staff, or his ass. In these primitive societies, a woman's shadow was considered evil. Menses were considered unclean. They were required to cover themselves, especially their faces. We could go on and on with this.

  Today, JWs practice a form of neo-Judahism, complete with the suppression and repression of women. It's no small wonder that Paul held women in such low esteem; he had been a pharisee, after all. And apparently he was not married. When he wrote his infamous letters, he included his own personal outlook and viewpoint about women and it has been via these letters and his personal opinions that the devaluing and marginalization of women has been perpetuated and perpetrated against women to this very day - especially in anti-intellectual, retrogressive little cults like the Jay-Dubs.

  A word here about the rationalization that "all scripture is inspired of god...". Think about it. What constituted "scripture" in the days in which this letter was written to Timothy? It damned sure wasn't Matthew through Revelation. They didn't exist. And these letters to various congregations certainly were not part of the canon at that time. Thus "scripture" at the time meant the Hebrew scriptures, and nothing but the Hebrew scriptures. So much for that little piece of sophistry.

  Do the Jay-Dubs repress women? That question isn't worth the intellectual energy required to confirm it.

  Francoise
• 

  rollercoaster

  It seems at though the women in the Org., are in a lower class. They are repressed. When I was in the Org., I would watch the sisters with worldly husbands. These sisters would miss meetings and go out of town on vacation with their husband to keep peace in the family. Of course the vacation would usually be someplace nice and where the Kingdom Hall might be a little to far away. The sisters would be of the upper class, and would have to go to slightly political functions with thier husband to keep him happy, and the holidays were a matter of conscience for the sister, so she would go with her husband to keep him happy. All the time, smiling and "winning him over without a word". The sisters in the lower class were "shepherded" by the elders with words of warning to stay with their abusive worldy husband, and rely on Jehovah. Just pray to Jehovah and be patient. Of course in the mean time, the lower class sister would be beat, ridiculed, and even raped by her husband. The lower class sister was more likely to stand firm about the holidays and sit alone on the celebrated day. "ALONE" not even the bros., and sisters would invite this one over and keep her company. The lower class sister would refuse to even discuss politics with her husband. This would all usually infuriate the worldly abusive husband and he would beat and abuse her further. Of course, again, the bros., would encourage her to stay and win him over without a word.
  In my opinion, the wealthy sister keeping her husband happy was well balanced, and over time could justify all of her fence sitting. The sister of a lower class would either end up mentally ill, ridden with guilt, possibly dead, or leave the husband, leave the Org., (usually df'd) find a real place in life, gain self esteem and realize they had been repressed.
  If the lower class sister managed to stay in the Org., after leaving the abusive spouse, she would receive no help financially from the bros., and sisters and continue the path of mental illness, and poverty.
  Women that stand up and speak their minds in the Org., are considered rebellious and shouldn't be associated with. Thus, I am no longer one of the meek, humble sisters and have no association.
  Repression is the biggest tool used on women in the Org. The brain washing is amazing. Be a good wife by kissing his a** and you will be the model sister.

  RC