Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Religious Fundies don't like men either

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
CTLawGuy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-11-05 08:21 PM
Original message
Religious Fundies don't like men either
It's obvious that fundies don't like empowered, free women... but they don't like empowered, free men either.

Men naturally (on a primal level) want to sleep with as many women as they can. Our cultural and religious institution of marriage hamstrings that by committing a man to one woman for the rest of his life.

Fundies are against birth control, the absence of which makes it hard for men to be promiscuous without fathering children.

Fundies are dead set against pornography, and most men LOVE pornography (though many may not admit it).

Fundies tell men they must support their wives financially (at the same time they tell women they are not allowed to support themselves financially).

Fundies are opposed to masturbation (or at least have been). Any man who says he doesn't masturbate is a liar. (remember most fundies are hypocrites).


What fundies are against is freedom. They are opposed to people (men and women) making choices for themselves. They work to confine people into restrictive roles that they believe are ordained by God for whatever reason. And they do not tolerate those who stray from those roles.

I know about this first hand. I grew up with a close friend who was a fundie. His life was extremely restricted and sheltered. it's not like because he was a boy, he was completely free to do whatever he wanted and they would approve. he was told that premartial sex was wrong (and what else do teenage boys want to do?)

Religious fundamentalism is not a war between genders. It is a war between those who love freedom and those who hate it.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
DanCa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-11-05 08:31 PM
Response to Original message
1. Extremism
In anything is a horrible thing. There are plenty of good and decent Christians out there. Hell I voted for one (John Kerry) in the last election. However as Rev Al sharpton says the christian right arent the right christians. What we as a party have to do is start letting the msm know that there are plenty of good men and women of faith on the left as well as there on the right.
Unfortunately its going to take an awful lot to get through that brain washing. Hopefuly there will be enough of a country left by when they finally wake up.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CTLawGuy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-12-05 06:53 AM
Response to Reply #1
6. thats a great quote from Al Sharpton
"the christian right aren't the right christians"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rudeboy666 Donating Member (959 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-11-05 08:33 PM
Response to Original message
2. yes and no
Remember that there are numerous non-religious reasons for promoting fidelity, respect, self-control, etc....

We as a society (or community) might have an interest in promoting certain actions (and preventing others) for the good of the whole.

The restriction of individual freedom is not limited to the religious.



Granted, the whole notion of individual freedom initially sounds good (and it is!).

However, once you realize that all men(and women) live in societies where all of our actions have potential effects(both good and bad),the notion of unfettered freedom is not a viable proposition.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CTLawGuy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-11-05 08:37 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. Im not arguing for unfettered freedom
I am responding to those who say fundamentalism is a mechanism by when men conspire to oppress women.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Inland Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-11-05 08:45 PM
Response to Original message
4. Strictly hierarchical, unfree social pattern.
Still better for men: beta males might be tied down by fundie social mores and tithing to the alpha males, but at least they get to lord over the women in their own house. It's the equivalent of the office boy kicking the cat, but it's still a lot better than being the woman.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CTLawGuy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-11-05 09:06 PM
Response to Reply #4
5. "the office boy kicking the cat"
thanks for the great mental picture :(

you could turn that around and say men get the short end of the stick by being forced to work to support another adult human being finanically.

He toils 12 hours a day in the mines, while she stays home.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sun May 05th 2024, 08:28 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC