Why Feminism is Bad

[Traveler]

25 minutes ago, Mike said:

Well, everybody gets treated unfairly to varying degrees and at varying times. But to the point women really have been treated unfairly for generations; and complaints of unfair treatment were valid complaints. So, there was no victim-playing. There were real victims. 

 

My mother said I was the most difficult of all her children (8) to raise.  My goal as a teenager was to launch something into outer space.  Mostly I created very spectacular explosions.   Three time the FBI, this is beyond and in addition to the local police, stopped by to check out what I had done and make sure it was me.

I have been expelled from school a few times (when I was caught - and including BYU).  Which was a problem for my very respected father and mother.  I could say nerds are more unfairly treated than women.  Many times, I was blamed for things even when it was not me and I had ironclad alibis – talk about prejudice.   But then when I finished college I had very nice hand delivered offers from Defense Department corps.

 

The Traveler

Edited August 3, 2017 by Traveler

[Mike]

49 minutes ago, Vort said:

Today's 20-year-old women have not been treated badly for generations. Today's 20-year-old men have not treated generations of women badly. The whole concept of reparations (=retaliation) is rotten to its stinking core. Feminism thrives on this.

I'll give you that today's 20 year-olds haven't been treated badly for generations, but then I don't think that really makes a lot of sense to start with. 

[Mike]

49 minutes ago, Traveler said:

My mother said I was the most difficult of all her children (8) to raise.  My goal as a teenager was to launch something into outer space.  Mostly I created very spectacular explosions.   Three time the FBI, this is beyond and in addition to the local police, stopped by to check out what I had done and make sure it was me.

I have been expelled from school a few times (when I was caught - and including BYU).  Which was a problem for my very respected father and mother.  I could say nerds are more unfairly treated than women.  Many times, I was blamed for things even when it was not me and I had ironclad alibis – talk about prejudice.   But then when I finished college I had very nice hand delivered offers from Defense Department corps.

 

The Traveler

Hahaha, your childhood reminds me of one of our (I think) contemporaries. His name is Robert Kirby.

 

[Rob Osborn]

8 hours ago, Mike said:

Yes, I believe that's perfectly true. Elder Larsen also opined as much in the piece I read. And of course, the saving ordinances performed in the temple are done to that end. I'm wondering about those who don't attain to the highest degree, and those who inherit lesser kingdoms. And of course to wonder is all I can do unless I'm unaware of it having been revealed. 

Well, my own opinion again is that in the end all of the saved will be in the Celestial kingdom and at that point all of the saved will have come to realize the reality that salvation requires marriage.

[Mike]

4 hours ago, Rob Osborn said:

Well, my own opinion again is that in the end all of the saved will be in the Celestial kingdom and at that point all of the saved will have come to realize the reality that salvation requires marriage.

Not sure what you're saying here. The Celestial Kingdom will not be populated exclusively with beings who entered in to the covenant of eternal marriage.  Are you saying the opposite?

[Fether]

45 minutes ago, Mike said:

Not sure what you're saying here. The Celestial Kingdom will not be populated exclusively with beings who entered in to the covenant of eternal marriage.  Are you saying the opposite?

The highest degree will require marriage. And depending on how you are defining salvation, this is true. Salvation from damnation is only possible through the everlasting covenant

Edited August 4, 2017 by Fether

[zil]

To those like @Mike and @Fether who don't seem to be aware of @Rob Osborn's different beliefs regarding the Celestial, Terrestrial, and Telestial kingdoms, please click his name and go looking for posts he's made.  Essentially, he doesn't believe these are differing degrees of glory to which folks are permanently assigned after resurrection, but stages one goes through and that everyone will eventually end up either in Perdition (outer darkness, hell, whatever you want to call it) or the Celestial Kingdom.

But, IMO, it would be better for you to go read elsewhere and post there than to hijack this thread and hash through his beliefs all over again in this thread.

[Dillon]

Please tell me how women are being treated unfairly?  Before you mention not being paid as much as a man, that has been proven false. Before you claim women do not get promoted like men, that has been proven false. Feminism thrives on women being oppressed and victims. Without this there are no marches, there is no Feminist movement. A woman today cannot even think for herself because since birth she is taught that she is oppressed.

[Sunday21]

Perhaps we should do something to help women who live in oppressive regimes? Another Underground Railroad?

[anatess2]

13 minutes ago, Sunday21 said:

Perhaps we should do something to help women who live in oppressive regimes? Another Underground Railroad?

Perhaps.

But, just as women in oppresive regimes are pleading the western feminists to help them fight against the burqa, western feminists are trying to tell everybody the burqa is feminist and are trying to normalize it.  And... countries like Canada are giving aid to women and children in oppressive regimes by... helping them get abortions.  Yep.  Canada pulled Canadian aid out of a women's health clinic in... was it Mosul?, because they don't perform abortions.  Islam, like the LDS, discourages abortion except for specific cases.

Edited August 4, 2017 by anatess2

[Guest LiterateParakeet]

29 minutes ago, Sunday21 said:

Perhaps we should do something to help women who live in oppressive regimes? Another Underground Railroad?

Like The Handmaid's Tale?

[Rob Osborn]

5 hours ago, Mike said:

Not sure what you're saying here. The Celestial Kingdom will not be populated exclusively with beings who entered in to the covenant of eternal marriage.  Are you saying the opposite?

My opinion is that everyone is eventually married who are saved. Our creation and purpose is to become like God. 

[anatess2]

17 minutes ago, Rob Osborn said:

My opinion is that everyone is eventually married who are saved. Our creation and purpose is to become like God. 

That's good that it's an opinion.  There's a difference between Salvation and Exaltation.  If marriage was necessary for salvation, the restored gospel will clearly indicate that Jesus has a wife in the same manner that it clearly indicates that Jesus is baptized.

[Mike]

3 hours ago, Dillon said:

Please tell me how women are being treated unfairly?  Before you mention not being paid as much as a man, that has been proven false. Before you claim women do not get promoted like men, that has been proven false. Feminism thrives on women being oppressed and victims. Without this there are no marches, there is no Feminist movement. A woman today cannot even think for herself because since birth she is taught that she is oppressed.

Here in the United States progress has been made, of course.  And my own position is not that every woman in the United States is treated unfairly, nor that no man has ever been treated unfairly either. But I disagree with your claims about what has been proven because my own experience indicates that despite our progress from the past inequities still exist more often that you seem willing to admit.  

[Mike]

4 hours ago, zil said:

To those like @Mike and @Fether who don't seem to be aware of @Rob Osborn's different beliefs regarding the Celestial, Terrestrial, and Telestial kingdoms, please click his name and go looking for posts he's made.  Essentially, he doesn't believe these are differing degrees of glory to which folks are permanently assigned after resurrection, but stages one goes through and that everyone will eventually end up either in Perdition (outer darkness, hell, whatever you want to call it) or the Celestial Kingdom.

But, IMO, it would be better for you to go read elsewhere and post there than to hijack this thread and hash through his beliefs all over again in this thread.

Good advice on the one hand. But given all the silly joking around that I observe on more threads than not, I don't see why anything like a tangent should be advisable to take elsewhere. Most silliness, tangents, etc. die a natural death anyway from diminished discussion without the need to worry about thread hijacking, in my own opinion anyway. I've been advised myself that if I didn't like a particular way a thread was going that I should essentially not let it bother me. Certainly this thread (like most) already looks graphically like the roots of a plant sprouting off in a variety of directions.

 

[zil]

1 minute ago, Mike said:

I don't see why anything like a tangent should be advisable to take elsewhere

99.9% of the time, I would agree with you.  But I wanted to save those of us who have been here long enough to see Rob's ideas hashed and rehashed with zero changes made on either side from going through it again - I expect many who've been through those discussions would agree with me, possibly even Rob.  If there were a chance of swaying one side or the other in their thinking, starting again might be fine, but trust me, this is brick wall territory - doctrine on the one hand and "that's false doctrine" on the other - no one is budging.

But if you want to get him to lay it all out for you again, those who are tired of it can ignore the rest of the thread (it's not like it's got much going for it as it is).

[Rob Osborn]

2 hours ago, anatess2 said:

That's good that it's an opinion.  There's a difference between Salvation and Exaltation.  If marriage was necessary for salvation, the restored gospel will clearly indicate that Jesus has a wife in the same manner that it clearly indicates that Jesus is baptized.

Yeah, its my opinion. Line upon line though.

[anatess2]

32 minutes ago, Rob Osborn said:

Yeah, its my opinion. Line upon line though.

Right.  Line upon line.  Why bother restoring eternal marriage if you're not gonna restore it's preceding line of teaching that it fulfills all righteousness (if such teaching is true)?

Edited August 4, 2017 by anatess2

[Rob Osborn]

26 minutes ago, anatess2 said:

Right.  Line upon line.  Why bother restoring eternal marriage if you're not gonna restore it's preceding line of teaching that it fulfills all righteousness (if such teaching is true)?

Were down here on this lone and dreary world that really doesnt have very much of the truth. When Christ comes and all truth becomes known it may pleasently surprise us what all is really entailed to be saved.

[anatess2]

On 8/4/2017 at 2:52 PM, Rob Osborn said:

Were down here on this lone and dreary world that really doesnt have very much of the truth. When Christ comes and all truth becomes known it may pleasently surprise us what all is really entailed to be saved.

Of course yes.  It's in the article of faith.  But remember, eternal marriage was restored in the latter days.  It wouldn't make sense to restore eternal marriage and not restore its foundational principle. 

[Rob Osborn]

29 minutes ago, anatess2 said:

Of course yes.  It's in the article of faith.  But remember, eternal marriage was restored in the latter days.  It wouldn't make sense to restore eternal marriage and not restore its foundational principle. 

Please go on.

[anatess2]

22 hours ago, Rob Osborn said:

Please go on.

Not on a Feminism thread.  But you can always open a new one.

[Guest]

Eleven pages later and we still don't have a widely accepted definition of feminism.  "Therefore it is wrong to say it is bad.  How dare you condemn it."

Does it occur to anyone that by that same logic one can conclude: "Therefore it is wrong to say it is good. How dare you support it."  

[Fether]

8 minutes ago, Carborendum said:

Eleven pages later and we still don't have a widely accepted definition of feminism. 

As is politics

 

what we agree on:

- Discrimination is bad

- Actions/thoughts based on a personal agendas are bad

- All men and women are equal in rights

 

what we don't agree on:

- How much inequality there actually is between men and women

- What feminism stands for

Edited August 8, 2017 by Fether

[anatess2]

37 minutes ago, Fether said:

As is politics

 

what we agree on:

- Discrimination is bad

- Actions/thoughts based on a personal agendas are bad

- All men and women are equal in rights

 

what we don't agree on:

- How much inequality there actually is between men and women

- What feminism stands for

Actually, not all discrimination is bad.  For example:  Merit-based discrimination is very good for business.  A sex-based example:  Sex-based discrimination in Military drafts is good.

Not all actions/thoughts based on a personal agenda is bad.  The Church revolves around this one.

All men and women are equal in rights - in the USA, yes.