Gender roles and traditions

[Smilesgalore]

We're making that assumption based on the fact that you're demonstrating them.

Case in point: you assume that a woman is giving up power in a patriarchal framework. What power that she truly possesses is she giving up? Second assumption: that being in a position of power over another person inevitably leads to an increase in abuse; where is your evidence for this.

You say you're just here to learn, but your questions are generally loaded with assumed bias. Now two of us have pointed out that lesbian relationships are the most physically abusive domestic relationships, but you gloss right over that, only addressing it by claiming the following:

Please indulge me while I mention some credentials: I started the gay/lesbian support groups at two universities where I worked decades ago and was advisor to the pre-existing ones at every other university where I was employed. These claims about male/female hierarchies have been ballyhooed for generations, but your assertion that such a hierarchy being non-existent actually demonstrates that so-called hierarchical 'power' isn't the issue, and it certainly isn't the case that it's a dynamic in which men abuse women because they have power over them. Remember these two inconvenient facts: women far and away initiate most of the physical violence within male-female domestic pairings (and it is only the highly-practiced restraint exhibited by men that prevents these skirmishes from escalating into fatalities); and lesbian relationships are those that are the most likely to involve domestic violence. Your assumption is that the supposed power a man has over a woman if she submits (is respectfully cooperative) leads to increased levels of physical violence, but the evidence is that this is NOT the case. Instead, what the two facts I just mentioned have in common is that females are more prone to physical violence than are males. Men are violent with other men with whom they're not intimately involved, but they are neither prone to physical violence with female domestic partners nor male domestic partners.

Furthermore, and I WILL make an assumption here, you are more interested in being right than having a discussion with a student wishing to discover your worldview. From what I have learned thus far this is no way to lead someone to faith. I won’t be returning because every question I have will likely be met with negative pushback. I guess I will stick with my assumptions and whatever my professor tells me about patriarchy and polygyny. It is a shame because I was hoping to broaden my understanding.

 

[steve]

this is a very diverse group

This cannot be underscored strongly enough.
@Smilesgalore, we are not monolithic in who we are and how we approach different issues. We can be a very rough-and-tumble group with each other as we wrestle about even the meaning of words.
We are probably more plainspoken than most groups that are open to the public. As proof, let me offer @The Revolting Man’s laughing response to my post of Messicostal when describing my belief system. I wasn’t bothered in the slightest and didn’t feel rejected at all. Even though it involves some of my deepest beliefs.

Some of us can be very abrasive at times, but we are honest about what we think.
This is the most diverse bunch that have a few core beliefs that I have ever had the pleasure of interacting with.
You are probably right in deciding that this pool might not be a safe place to swim, but I dare say that it is a great place to throw a question in now and then and see what survives.

 

[Keith Martin]

No, actually, I was not making assumptions. I asked the same questions in the Muslim group I am in. I have received nothing but negative feedback from you . If I had been making assumptions I would have stated “due to the abuse..” or something like that. You have not painted a very bright picture of patriarchy for someone who is just asking questions.

I am interested and I wonder what happens if the man is abusive?

We've seen this movie before. Veiled straw man attacks.

Naw, asking what happens if the man is abusive isn't biased covert-agenda prose. Couldn't possibly be, right? Because you're going to ask us and the Muslims what happens if the woman is abusive?

What, by the way, has stopped you from asking what the rationales are for men leading women? (and please note that I didn't write, "What are the rationales for men exercising power over women?"

We may be field research for you, but you should remember that in these interviews we are going to take the meaning of interview literally: looking at each other; so . . . while we're answering your questions like good little guinea pigs, please answer this for us: can you provide us any evidence for any culture that has ever thrived that was predominantly matriarchal -- not just one in which the figurehead at the top was female but one in which females created the general structure, provided the management, bore the brunt of blowback from negative ramifications, and protected the men and children from threats and other dangers?

 

[FollowingHim]

@Smilesgalore, people have been answering your question, but looking at it more broadly than you were viewing it from. The additional comments made are answers to your question, just not answers within the framework you were anticipating.

You must remember that patriarchy is very commonly accused of being abusive - and from our perception this is an enormous misconception, and a very serious one for us personally. It affects how people view us as individuals and our own marriages. It is therefore an emotional matter and people will respond strongly to debunk it, because we would not want anybody to think of our marriages as abusive.

To summarise the various answers to your question, which I will summarise as "if the woman is giving up power to the man, would he not frequently abuse that, and what would happen then", basically three points have been made.

1. The likelihood of abuse is not at all increased by a patriarchal arrangement. In fact, they are less likely to be abusive. This has been demonstrated by the comparison to truly egalitarian relationships (lesbianism) which are statistically more likely to be abusive, and by the statistical fact that women initiate most domestic violence (so a power transfer to the man is actually to the one less likely to initiate abuse). These two points show that the concern, to begin with, is unfounded. This is a very valid response to the question, but a response you are rejecting and taking negatively because it is out of scope of how you are looking at it.
2. The Bible and all Christian churches take a very strong position against abuse, and prioritise teaching men and women to act correctly towards each other. This further reduces the likelihood of abuse.
3. In the event of abuse happening anyway (as it does in some examples of every form of relationship), the Bible and church structures provide a range of tools for dealing with abuse, which are in addition to the final recourse of secular courts.

 

[The Revolting Man]

@Smilesgalore, people have been answering your question, but looking at it more broadly than you were viewing it from. The additional comments made are answers to your question, just not answers within the framework you were anticipating.

You must remember that patriarchy is very commonly accused of being abusive - and from our perception this is an enormous misconception, and a very serious one for us personally. It affects how people view us as individuals and our own marriages. It is therefore an emotional matter and people will respond strongly to debunk it, because we would not want anybody to think of our marriages as abusive.

To summarise the various answers to your question, which I will summarise as "if the woman is giving up power to the man, would he not frequently abuse that, and what would happen then", basically three points have been made.

1. The likelihood of abuse is not at all increased by a patriarchal arrangement. In fact, they are less likely to be abusive. This has been demonstrated by the comparison to truly egalitarian relationships (lesbianism) which are statistically more likely to be abusive, and by the statistical fact that women initiate most domestic violence (so a power transfer to the man is actually to the one less likely to initiate abuse). These two points show that the concern, to begin with, is unfounded. This is a very valid response to the question, but a response you are rejecting and taking negatively because it is out of scope of how you are looking at it.
2. The Bible and all Christian churches take a very strong position against abuse, and prioritise teaching men and women to act correctly towards each other. This further reduces the likelihood of abuse.
3. In the event of abuse happening anyway (as it does in some examples of every form of relationship), the Bible and church structures provide a range of tools for dealing with abuse, which are in addition to the final recourse of secular courts.

This is one of the best posts we’ve ever had!

 

[primrose]

From what I have learned thus far this is no way to lead someone to faith.

I can relate to that takeaway. Before I found my church, I stepped into another one (same faith) and was feeling tentative about it to begin with. Well, I had this interaction with this person there during that visit that I felt was really off putting. I left first chance I had and it took me literally several years before I was willing to give my now home church a chance. Yes, I knew that one person shouldn’t represent the whole faith community at large but, in that visit, I didn’t care. Thankfully, I did give my now church a chance because I love where I’m at and have made great friends. Though, now I recognize, I won’t see eye to see with every Christian or be friends with them nor do I have to.

I won’t be returning because every question I have will likely be met with negative pushback. I guess I will stick with my assumptions and whatever my professor tells me about patriarchy and polygyny. It is a shame because I was hoping to broaden my understanding.

I respect and understand that decision too; though sad to see you go. I don’t typically chime in on here, so I wanted to tell you before you leave, I enjoyed getting to know about you and engaging in conversation. I like how to-the-point and inquisitive you are. Additionally I think you’ve gone above what any professor would expect you to delve into for a summer course. I pray you enjoy the course and whether in class, on campus in general or in the varied religious groups you interact with, your understanding and insights are cultivated and broadened no matter what.

 

[LDremoved]

Just a thought. Could it just be that women are less likely to report domestic abuse in a heterosexual relationship because the threat is higher? I don't think it's any secret that men kill far more women per year in domestic violence situations than lesbians kill each other.

 

[The Revolting Man]

Just a thought. Could it just be that women are less likely to report domestic abuse in a heterosexual relationship because the threat is higher? I don't think it's any secret that men kill far more women per year in domestic violence situations than lesbians kill each other.

I’d be interested to see the statistics on that. I don’t doubt that the rate is higher but how much higher?

 

[LDremoved]

I’d be interested to see the statistics on that. I don’t doubt that the rate is higher but how much higher?

I tried to find the statistics but couldn't, i'm like a 90 year old grandma on google. Surely they have to factor in some of these issues when gathering information though, right? Also it's kind of alarming that same sex relationships have more domestic violence issues considering that like 5% of the US population consider themselves gay/lesbian. I need to research more how statistics work exactly, have too many questions.