⋆.ೃ࿔࿐ྂfaith & fantasy⋆.ೃ࿔࿐ྂ discussion
note: This topic has been closed to new comments.
✯Archives✯
>
⭒First Thoughts⭒
message 13551:
by
[deleted user]
(new)
Jul 13, 2023 07:37PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=muKYZ...
reply
|
flag
@Stephen, I've been having similar thought the past couple months, especially since reading Mulieris Dignitatem. Like, I have encountered these more 'trad' groups, in fact, I'm friends with this one guy, and while he's very nice, it can get the slightest bit exasperating on occasion, lol. But at the same time, with the huge rush of feminism from the 70's, I think a lot about when it becomes too much. so many empowerment groups (whether it be political, or the clothing business, or the media with movies) are telling us over (and over and over and over) that girls can do anything guys can do, but I am still a firm believer in having activities\interests that are specifically for one gender. But like you said, that's a conversation for a different topic, plus imma need more time to organize my thoughts before stating all of this in a succinct way, lolalso, now I really need to know what girly songs you like, lol. Do you like Adele? you kinda strike me as the type to like Adele, lol
Cato (Greek of Hunger Games? who will get here first? lol)
Best Song in the first one (I know the whole dance, XD)
Mary-Therese wrote: "@Stephen, I've been having similar thought the past couple months, especially since reading Mulieris Dignitatem. Like, I have encountered these more 'trad' groups, in fact, I'm friends with this on..."
I can imagine 😅 Trads mean well, as they're reacting against the breakdown of the family/ the insanity of liberal ideology (which can't even define what a woman is anymore). However, the solution isn't to turn back the clock and return to the 50s.
Perhaps it's not the most orthodox statement to make, but I wouldn't want a submissive wife, like many trads want. That would just be... boring, in my opinion 😅 Jordan Peterson, in one of his lectures made an intriguing remark on failed marriages. He said that there are, broadly speaking, two types of marriages that will end in divorce. One in which the couple fights all the time (that's obvious), but the other type is the couples who never fight, when one person always acquiesces to the other person. Firstly, only a narcissist would want to be in that kind of relationship, but it raises a unique question: is fighting actually necessary in a healthy relationship? Jordan Peterson thinks so, but his "yes" needs some qualifiers. This "fighting" is never abusive and is predicated on mutual respect/love (by love I mean "willing the good of the other as other"). It sounds strange to say, but if you can argue with your partner (and I'd say this includes friends as well) it shows you not only respect their free will/agency to act independently of you, but you're also comfortable voicing your own free will when it's in opposition to your partner or friend. It shows you take what they say or think seriously, but because it's in opposition to what you think or perceive to be the truth, you fight back in what I like to think of as a "heated search for the truth." So, I think Jordan Peterson is right when he says you should marry someone you can "contend" with, not someone who submits to your will. As a man I can say I want a woman who will call me out on my bs when I need it 😅
A via media is the solution. On one hand we should accept and promote legitimate advances in womens' rights, such as the right to vote, own land, have a career, go to university, and so on. On the other hand, like you said, we also need to know that men and women aren't the same. The male and female brain is different, but the differences are complementary, not divisive (ideally at least). Precisely what those differences are is what I'm trying to figure out; I should read Edith Stein's On the Feminine Genius :)
I would love to hear what you think these differences are. Before I converted to Catholicism, I was quite liberal (pro-abortion, pro lgbt+), so I've been, more or less, figuring this stuff out on my own.
I can imagine 😅 Trads mean well, as they're reacting against the breakdown of the family/ the insanity of liberal ideology (which can't even define what a woman is anymore). However, the solution isn't to turn back the clock and return to the 50s.
Perhaps it's not the most orthodox statement to make, but I wouldn't want a submissive wife, like many trads want. That would just be... boring, in my opinion 😅 Jordan Peterson, in one of his lectures made an intriguing remark on failed marriages. He said that there are, broadly speaking, two types of marriages that will end in divorce. One in which the couple fights all the time (that's obvious), but the other type is the couples who never fight, when one person always acquiesces to the other person. Firstly, only a narcissist would want to be in that kind of relationship, but it raises a unique question: is fighting actually necessary in a healthy relationship? Jordan Peterson thinks so, but his "yes" needs some qualifiers. This "fighting" is never abusive and is predicated on mutual respect/love (by love I mean "willing the good of the other as other"). It sounds strange to say, but if you can argue with your partner (and I'd say this includes friends as well) it shows you not only respect their free will/agency to act independently of you, but you're also comfortable voicing your own free will when it's in opposition to your partner or friend. It shows you take what they say or think seriously, but because it's in opposition to what you think or perceive to be the truth, you fight back in what I like to think of as a "heated search for the truth." So, I think Jordan Peterson is right when he says you should marry someone you can "contend" with, not someone who submits to your will. As a man I can say I want a woman who will call me out on my bs when I need it 😅
A via media is the solution. On one hand we should accept and promote legitimate advances in womens' rights, such as the right to vote, own land, have a career, go to university, and so on. On the other hand, like you said, we also need to know that men and women aren't the same. The male and female brain is different, but the differences are complementary, not divisive (ideally at least). Precisely what those differences are is what I'm trying to figure out; I should read Edith Stein's On the Feminine Genius :)
I would love to hear what you think these differences are. Before I converted to Catholicism, I was quite liberal (pro-abortion, pro lgbt+), so I've been, more or less, figuring this stuff out on my own.
First thought:
In vino est veritas
In vino est veritas
"Some people are afraid to be corny. Not me. I live life on the cob, baby!"
Mod
hey mambo! mambo Italiano
I use to listen to that song all the time...lol... (literally my first thought XD)
@Stephen, aw, man. My parents LOVE Jordan Peterson, so when you mentioned him I actually got really excited, lol. I think those are all really good points. Love doesn't mean agreeing with every little thing, but as you said, willing the good of the other, or wanting what's best for them. I know I very much need someone I know and trust to tell me when I am not being my best self, so I appreciate when my mom calls me out when I am losing myself or not actively pursuing virtue, even if it makes me furious at the time (I am rather inclined to think I am in the perfect right in any given situation), lol.
I think I'd have to get back to you (probably over massages, as I see we are beginning to take over this thread, lol) on my thoughts on precisely the difference between Men and Women's brains, but like I said before, I am fascinated by this topic, and there is so much to discuss.
(Also, I've been wanting to read Edith Stein as well. My younger sisters middle name is Benedicta after her, lol. maybe we'll buddy read the Feminine Genius after we all get through War and Peace, lol)
one last thing on a related note, I was just recently listening to Fr. Mike Schmidtz's podcast (The Fr. Mike Schmidtz Catholic Podcast) on Spotify), and a couple if weeks ago he released an episode titled 'Do Wives have to be Submissive' and it really clarified that passage of St. Paul's for me. it's only about 6 minutes long, so I definitely recommend checking it out!
I swear that family was Catholic. 😂
Nearly. The father was Atheist, but said if he ever were to be religious, then he'd be Catholic, because the Catholics are 'the most sensible of the lot' (first thought. and that actually is in like the third chapter of the book. I'm not being self-congratulatory, lol)
Mary-Therese wrote: "@Stephen, aw, man. My parents LOVE Jordan Peterson, so when you mentioned him I actually got really excited, lol.
I think those are all really good points. Love doesn't mean agreeing with every l..."
Yeah, sure. Feel free to message me your thoughts :) Thanks to Jordan Peterson, I was introduced to Carl Jung's theories on the masculine and feminine spirit (the animus/anima), which he believed both genders possess, though one spirit is predominate in us (the dominate one is usually determined by our gender).
Jordan Peterson is fascinating, though not all of his views are orthodox; I'm mostly thinking of one of his ideas he borrows from Jung, namely, the integration of the shadow. But, like you said, we should take this conversation to messages, lest we derail the this thread (wouldn't be the first time for me 😅)
I checked my library to see if they have any of her works and they have one anthology called Edith Stein: Essential Writings (Modern Spiritual Masters Series). I've put myself on a book buying ban for an entire year, so I'm now limited to the books I own or what I can get from my library.
I think those are all really good points. Love doesn't mean agreeing with every l..."
Yeah, sure. Feel free to message me your thoughts :) Thanks to Jordan Peterson, I was introduced to Carl Jung's theories on the masculine and feminine spirit (the animus/anima), which he believed both genders possess, though one spirit is predominate in us (the dominate one is usually determined by our gender).
Jordan Peterson is fascinating, though not all of his views are orthodox; I'm mostly thinking of one of his ideas he borrows from Jung, namely, the integration of the shadow. But, like you said, we should take this conversation to messages, lest we derail the this thread (wouldn't be the first time for me 😅)
I checked my library to see if they have any of her works and they have one anthology called Edith Stein: Essential Writings (Modern Spiritual Masters Series). I've put myself on a book buying ban for an entire year, so I'm now limited to the books I own or what I can get from my library.
Mary-Therese wrote: "Nearly. The father was Atheist, but said if he ever were to be religious, then he'd be Catholic, because the Catholics are 'the most sensible of the lot' (first thought. and that actually is in lik..."
G.K. Chesterton once said the Apostles Creed is the source of all sanity, so he's not wrong 😂
G.K. Chesterton once said the Apostles Creed is the source of all sanity, so he's not wrong 😂
Mod
Do Catholics and protestants have different versions of the Apostle's Creed? I ask because protestants believe that creed too.
Mary-Therese wrote: "Cheaper By The Dozen"Lots of kids
(Yall this aint the theological discussions thread)
Catholic (first thought to lots of kids.)
This topic has been frozen by the moderator. No new comments can be posted.
⋆.ೃ࿔࿐ྂfaith & fantasy⋆.ೃ࿔࿐ྂ
Books mentioned in this topic
Unearth the Tides (other topics)Dance of Thieves (other topics)
One of Us Is Lying (other topics)
The Sweetest Sound (other topics)
Quiet: The Power of Introverts in a World That Can't Stop Talking (other topics)
More...
