VoyForums
[ Show ]
Support VoyForums
[ Shrink ]
VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2, [3], 4 ]

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 16:27:59 05/15/02 Wed
Author: Perceptor II
Subject: Clarifications and other comments
In reply to: Icon 's message, "Welll" on 00:21:04 05/15/02 Wed

>The clear duty for real men goes beyond "live and let
>live". We are mandated to protect widows, orphans, the
>alien and all those who lack sustaining relationships.

As are women, and indeed, all other humans...

Agreed. However, these devotions are specifically written to address adult (presumably Christian) men.

>As long as men and boys fail to be protective, they will
>fall prey to the typical male sexual fantasy that sells
>[pornographic] magazines and films...

That can be interpreted in a very condescending fashion (Though I'm sure that's not how you meant it).

First of all, I didn't write the above quote. I simply reprinted it here and asked what others thought. Secondly, you need to consider the context. The immediately preceding sentence says, "We [men] are mandated to protect widows, orphans, the alien and all those who lack sustaining relationships." So the author is talking about men "failing" to be protective of widows, orphans, aliens and all those who lack sustaining relationships, not women.

The majority of women I know are more than capable of taking care of themselves and don't need me to protect them.

The majority of women I know are likewise able to take care of themselves. You're preaching to the choir.

Sexuality is a natural component of humanity as an animal.

I would argue that we humans are "higher" than animals, but I agree that sexuality is a natural, healthy, necessary part of our existence. I would also argue that sexuality extends far beyond the act of intercourse, that physical activity is only one component of human sexuality.

I'm not condoning the abuse or degradation of others for sexual purposes of course, but it's a fine line between restraint and purient censorship.

I have to go a bit farther there. I condemn the abuse or degradation of others for the purpose of sexual gratification. I do acknowledge, however, that pornography will always exist, and I don't see the role of government as preventing us from its harmful effects.

As an example, if a woman wishes to display her body to a photographer as the most efficient and profitable way she has to earn money to feed her children, who are we to judge?

This is one reason why people (not just men) need to reach out and help those in need.

>The only real solution is to teach boys that the source of
>their power is in the nurturing and protecting image of
>God created within them. When we express our essential
>nature, then substitutes, like pornographic fantasies,
>lose their appeal.

Pronographic fantasies are not by definition wrong. They can be abused, but then, so can toy collecting.

Pornographic fantasies are wrong by definition. Pornographic fantasies are lust, which involves the desire to possess another person for sexual gratification. It's not the sexual gratification that is wrong, it's the desire to possess.

Limiting the gender definition to males is disingenuous and demeaning to women. God is to be found in all of us, regardless of whether we're male or female.

I would agree, but I fail to see how that was done here, given the context.

Let's have more concern about "real people" not "real men".

When a patriarchal society, and especially those who claim to represent Christ, puts differing expectations upon the two genders that are totally wrong, it has to be combatted head on. This involves taking the set of myths about each gender's supposedly "proper" behavior. You've got to tell men that "real men" do not dominate over their wives and children and women that "real women" are not weak and submissive servants and trophies to their husbands. When each gender has its own myths that need to be torn down, yes, you have to address each gender separately from time to time.

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:

[ Contact Forum Admin ]

Forum timezone: GMT+0
VF Version: 3.00b, ConfDB:
Before posting please read our privacy policy.
VoyForums(tm) is a Free Service from Voyager Info-Systems.
Copyright © 1998-2019 Voyager Info-Systems. All Rights Reserved.