Monday, August 21, 2006

Feminism roars its angry head

I was sent an email yesterday making fun of a 1955 article in which the sole point was how a woman should greet her man after a hard days work. The first thing that irritated me is that the person who sent the email is not a friend. She is a person with whom I have minimal involvement on a project with, yet she feels free to clutter my inbox with at least ten worthless forwards a day. Point two, her response to the article was offensive. I therefore responded with the below statement.

Not sure what you found funny about the article unless it is that there are still woman today, including myself, who feel called by God to fulfill their roles as wives and mothers by doing some of the very things the article mentioned. I think if less woman found this funny and put some of those tips into action we might have less divorce in the church.

Her response to my response is below in black. For the sake of education my comments will be in red. This is how a typical feminist responds when challenged on their behavior and beliefs. Totally illogical, and lacking true biblical knowledge. The dangerous part of this is that what she has said is for the most part believed by the majority of woman in our churches who have been sucked in by the feminist agenda. Again my response in red.

What I found "funny", and more than a bit offensive in the article was the statement, among others, that "what we women had to say was not important"It is interesting that she chose to put this in quotes. There was no such such quote in the article. What it says is (Listen to him. You may have dozens of important things to tell him but the moment of his arrival is not the time. Let him talk first. Remember his topics of conversation are more important than yours.)The idea that someone other than ourselves is more important than us flies in the face of our self absorbed culture but it is a biblical idea. Jesus himself set us that example. and the children should basically be seen and not heard It also did not say this. It said (Prepare the children. Wash hands, face, comb hair, change clothers if necessary. They are little treasures and he would like to see them playing the part. Minimize all noise. At the time of his arrival eliminate all noise of the washer, dryer, or vacuum. Try to encourage the children to be quiet. Our culture is child centered. Children are not the most important people in the home. They are part of the home and I see nothing wrong with expecting them to behave appropriateness in it. One of the highest compliments I have ever received was from a visiting single male friend of my husbands. He told me that my home was peaceful. That compliment came because my children know how to behave and were not running out of control during his visit. and that, after a hard day at the office, the woman was to shut-up and wait on him hand and foot. The word shut up is not in the article. And what exactly is wrong with serving my spouse. He spent all day serving me in a job that he may or may not even like. Why would my serving him when gets home be a bad thing? What did the person writing the article think the woman was doing all day.....Eating bonbons and watching soaps? Staying at home especially with young children can be tiring and demanding but I have been a working wife as well as stay at home wife and staying at home is a holiday in comparison. The woman's movement made woman feel like they had to justify their time at home. Staying at home is a great luxury and it always me freedoms all day long that working woman can only dream about. I use those freedoms to benefit my family and our lifestyle. I don't need to justify it to anyone. Why did the husband's work day end at his door step and yet the wife was expected to see to all his comforts when she was, no doubt, just as exhausted taking care of the house, kids and everything else? Her day certainly didn't end at 5:00 p.m. !No, its true a mommies job is never done but in all fairness, the husband comes home from work and then has to be husband and father. His work job might be done but he has a job at home as well. The article implied that the husband's work was more exhausting and worthwhile than hers. It did not imply any such thing. The article was focused on the woman and the woman's role. It does not attempt to deal with the husbands role.I don't need to tell you that raising kids to be responsible citizens and caring for a home is just as much a worthwhile endeavor and just as exhausting as providing for the family's financial needs. The article did not say otherwise.

I have no problem taking care of my husband's needs and I do many of the "things" the article mentioned too. He works full time and I take care of the home. But, my husband also loves me enough to lighten my load and goes out of his way to care for me when he comes home. We work together to make the evening nice for both of us. This makes for a balanced and caring relationship. Typical feminist error in logic. The assumption is being made that the scriptures are conditional. I only have to do this for my spouse as long as he does for me. The Bible says that husbands are to love their wives as Christ loved the church. YES Christ loved the church so much that He gave His life for her. YES There is not a woman on the planet that would not submit and do everything in her power to make her husband's life easier if he treats her the way that Christ commanded husbands treat their wives. Untrue, woman are sinners just like men. We could be married to Jesus himself and we would still sin. In fact, despite the indwelling of the holy spirit I am unable to always be the wife that I am commanded to be. The balance of that is that my husband can never earn my submission. I have to voluntarily give it to him inspite of his sin not because he is perfect. The sad fact is that many men, particularly Christian men, forget that part of the scripture while insisting their wives be submissive and slave-like. Feminist point number two. Tying together the word submission and slave like. Inflammatory wording clearly showing a lack of biblical understand of submission as well as slavery. I overheard one "Christian" fellow tell his captive (young) female audience that he believed God made women simply to wait upon men! He obviously never read in Genesis that God made woman as a helpmate and companion (not a slave) for man. After hearing that, I was begging for a creamed pie to throw in his face! Error in logic number three. One bad apple does not invalidate scripture. When we stop looking at Christ and we instead look to the human around us we will always see a perversion of the gospel. That is why our focus should be on Christ.

You are correct that if women stove to act less selfishly and put their husbands needs above their own, there might be less divorce. But, wouldn't you agree that would be true for either sex? The point of the initial article was the woman's role. The mans role was irrelevant in the article and also in this dialog. I also submit for your consideration that it is the man, whose God-given responsibility it is, as head of the home, to set the standard by first being Christlike in his love for his wife. Ladies, Believe you me, I have searched scripture for the exemption clause. I have looked and looked and it is not there. No where does it say that unless the husband is perfect the wife does not have to submit. It also does not say that the husband has to love his wife first before she can love him. Unless the wife is a shrew, it is the basic nature of women to respond with a true desire to provide care and comfort when she feels cared for, and protected, herself. Bible one o one. What is our basic nature? We are all SINNERS, we all SIN, we all FALL SHORT OF THE GLORY OF GOD. I don't know about you but there are times when my husband is doing everything right and for no reason I will find fault.