 |
| Example of Neuter Gender Differences |
How is that possible - to neuter gender differences? It isn't as far as I know.
By the time we are a young child we tend to realize the differences, and everyone acknowledges them for the rest of our lives. There is no way to 'neuter' this.
I have to admit some complementarian views do make me giggle when they speak about egalitarians views of the human race. I realize it makes others upset, but to me its so ridiculous I find it rather humorous.
You see, when people are truly committed and consistent egalitarians, they have to defend their denial of essential differences. In doing so, they will advocate a education system in the home, church, and society which neutralizes any assumption of differences between the sexes. In doing so, men will not be trained to be “men” since there is really no such thing. Women will not be encouraged to be “women” since there is no such thing. The assumption of differences becomes a way to oppress society and marginalize, in their estimation, one sex for the benefit of the other. Once we neutralize these differences, we will have neutered society and the family due to a denial of God’s design in favor of some misguided attempt to promote a form of equality that is neither possible nor beneficial to either sex.First of all I don't know WHERE they get the idea that egalitarians deny essential differences. Its like the picture I found today, and added the text about being 'genderless'. Yep! Egalitarians deny gender differences, because we see people walking the earth as genderless blobs. I mean seriously? How completely silly to even go there.
Now this theory mentioned above would make sense if egalitarians denied the obvious difference - genatila. If that was possible for some I think everyone would admit maybe its time to be admitted in a center for mental health!
We can admit for the most part men will be larger and physically stronger than women - one example. Can we find exceptions for the rule? Sure. Does that mean egalitarians deny essential differences? No, but that it is used as the lead in for the complementarian's stand on how egalitarians seem to look at the human race as genderless blobs. Do I seriously think they believe that? WELL if they seriously do they also need a trip to the mental health center as well.
Side note: No. I don't believe they buy this dribble either. I honestly just think they like to hear themselves talk, and admire the amen's they get from their small peanut gallery. Why else would they do it? Their statements aren't even rational or reasonable.
Heated Debates
One of the most heated topics between the two groups is women in ministry. The Complementarian's stand is that this is not biblical for women, because it maybe seen in some circumstances (not all) as being an authority over men (there are other reasons as well).
The Egalitarians feel gender should not be a roadblock to the ministry that God called you to if he has gifted you with individual traits to do ministry to his glory.
Instead of acknowledging the difference of opinion that should be quite obvious to most we get some complementarian's viewing the world as:
In doing so, men will not be trained to be “men” since there is really no such thing. Women will not be encouraged to be “women” since there is no such thing. The assumption of differences becomes a way to oppress society and marginalize, in their estimation, one sex for the benefit of the other.Now how do you get from point A to point B? WELL that is where I find the humor in all this. Let's take the most extreme example - a woman pastor of a church. IF - according to this complementarian theory - you have woman pastor than that must be a church of genderless blobs. No one can be raised or trained as the gender they were born into, because that would be seen as a source of 'ahem' oppression. Yes, I'm giggling again!
Once we neutralize these differences, we will have neutered society and the family due to a denial of God’s design in favor of some misguided attempt to promote a form of equality that is neither possible nor beneficial to either sex.Sigh. Seriously? If you don't like the word 'equality' than use 'mutuality' instead.
OH I get it NOW! Equality means neutering the genital difference! Equality means you can't say Jim is a boy, and Jane is a girl. Jim and Jane can't be raised as a boy or a girl because that wouldn't make them equal. We are to look at them as genderless blobs.
THIS is the silliness I do have to giggle at. I mean WHO wouldn't?
If you have to use your complementarian stand to this extreme to make your points? Please don't say 'others' are misguided. Unless they are living in a funny farm they don't believe nor live this definition that is foolish at best.
What it honestly tells me? I think most complementarian's do see and understand the true differences of views, but the you have a handful that tend to go over the line with this foolish banter about genderless blobs. They feel they are so good at pointing this out that they must be right that egalitarians don't appreciate God's designs for the genders.
What I don't think these complementarian's that push this junk see? Not only are egalitarians laughing at this nonsense, but so are other complementarians. I mean if you look at just the surface? Its so stupid you have to giggle - what else can you do?
Individual Traits Versus Gender Roles
Egalitarians are speaking about individual traits of the person. If a person has been gifted by God then this gift should be used for his glory. It is to be used FOR GOD'S purpose, and not for the purpose of 'usurping' the other gender. Its not about 'him' or 'her' its about GOD!
Its purpose is not to take authority over, and all the rest of the reasons you hear about. When I hear this types of excuses to cut down someone? The first thing I think about is pride. They make it about authority or usurping, because they seem to think its about taking something away from THEM (men). Thankfully, most men aren't that narcissist.
I have to be honest here and say the only ones that seem overly paranoid about this is the ones that accuses groups of people of making society into genderless blobs - or neutering the genders. They blah blah blah about how we can't bring up boys to be men, and girls into women if you don't see life in 'gender roles'. I'm sure most of us can take a walk around the block, and find neighbors that are defying their theory right at this second.
Why they never stop to think about that fact? I'm sure part of it is because they would be to busy wanting to find marriages in trouble to apply their theory to instead. You notice the diversion there? They have no answers, and so they never answer it. If they can't allow others to show 'exceptions' to their rules? If they have to make fun of those that do? It strips them of the opportunity to do that as well.
When you read this dribble? Stand back and ask yourself a question. Is this rational? Once you look at it that way you can giggle along with me.
Additional Silly Stuff
 |
| Merry Go Round Thinking |
It can't be possible IF neutering genders was an ACTUAL reality. Its not even possible if you are crazy enough to believe in a world with genderless blobs. You can't TRY to be a 'gender' if there is no gender difference! It nixes their above theory doesn't it? Why would you try to be the 'other' gender if you don't acknowledge gender? The merry go round they place on their theories should make rational people dizzy! It just doesn't make any sense.
Do Egalitarians believe the genders 'complement' each other? Yes. Do you raise your children to appreciate the gender differences? Yes. There are other similar aspects of faith that both groups agree upon.
One difference I personally see is that one group (comps) focuses on roles of gender, and find ways of improving yourself within those roles. The other group (egal) may also encourages you to become the best women or man of God as well, but also encourages you to use the individual traits that God has given you to use for his Kingdom.
The key offense seems to be that if God gifted you with something that is seen by human culture as 'outside' the role? You need to be seen as selfish, and not appreciating God's design for gender differences. If you look beyond the parroted, and to often repeated banters? They make these gifts that God gave you for his Glory as some perceived threat to gender. They make it more about THEM than about GOD!
Ask yourself a question for moment! WHO is being selfish and not appreciating God's design? Do we seriously need to ask another human if our gifts are 'gender specific' enough to use or not use? Where does God and the Holy Spirit play into that?
Complementarians will deny a gender entrance into certain areas to use the gifts God has given them due to their view of scripture - and gender/roles. The Egalitarian group views scripture differently in that aspect, and thinks we all should use the gifts where God is directing us. There should be no roadblock just due to gender. Its not about US, but GOD! Sadly, I believe most Christians can acknowledge that fact but can't seem to apply it to others.
Radical Complementarians tend to divert this issue, and it make it about THEM and the gender roles.
We will have troubled men and women groping to find their way and feeling pressured to repress their instincts and giftedness. We will no longer be able to train up men and women in the “way” they should go since there is no “way” they should go. Women can act masculine and men can be feminine. Men can retreat in the face of responsibility because, in truth, they don’t have any “responsibility” other than the one that they choose. This is to say nothing of the implications this has on the issues of homosexuality and gay marriage.Since Egalitarians don't push the neutered gender deal this 'repressing' their instincts and gifts is not accurate either. When you are asked to 'repress' your instincts and gifts due to pressures from Doctrine telling you that you are selfish, and not appreciating God's design if you color outside their gender lines according to their views? They are the ones deciding on the way you should go, and not appreciating how God has granted individuals with gifts to use for HIS purpose.
The ways you read certain comp teachings is that if you have a women that is teaching a adult Sunday School class for example? SHE is trying to be 'masculine' due to her 'wanting' to have authority over a man. The only reason she is seen as masculine is that she broke out of the rules of the roles. It can't be because she has a gift in that area. It can't be that God wished her to share that gift for his glory, and for others to benefit from the gift that was given. Nope, always a evil motive attached instead. Talk about negative nellies!
If you have to be so literal about these things I guess you could see masculine. I just see a Sunday School teacher myself. If the teacher is a 'she' then I see feminine. Masculine doesn't even enter my mind, because I don't take things so literally. If the Sunday School teacher was male? I would see Masculine. This concept isn't hard to grasp, and I truly never understood why they insist on making it so complicated when its not.
I guess because I don't take things so literally I wouldn't be capable of raising children 'in the way they should go' either right? That's nonsense.
Insults towards MEN as WELL!
Men can retreat in the face of responsibility because, in truth, they don’t have any “responsibility” other than the one that they choose. This is to say nothing of the implications this has on the issues of homosexuality and gay marriage.
The insulting assumption towards men in the above comment? Gifts from God are not chosen by US - the humans - they are given to us by God. Men and Women both feel responsibility towards their families, and work towards very similar goals in life as comps.
On the other hand? Anyone can choose to not to live up to their responsibilities in life, and the faith circle they follow has nothing to do with it. They have a sense of 'self importance' or narcissist views, and we have all seen those that think the world revolves around THEM! Selfish natures, irresponsibility, etc are all found in the world in every corner. To use this as a tool to make this about 'us versus them' is pretty much worthless. Most are able to see reality for themselves.
I assume this author is hinting at the fact that Egalitarians don't push this 'someone has to be the boss', or be the 'authority' of the household. No. Egalitarians don't need the terms that show men need to have 'power over' to be responsible for his family. Imagine that? YES you can be responsible without needing the label.
Does that mean there is no authority figures or concepts within the Egalitarians world? I have heard that thrown out there as well. This also isn't anywhere near a rational concept, and to me is nothing more then a childish game of words. Its not even worth defending to be honest.
It just baffles the mind to think that others don't think it is possible to be in a partnership. Since they like to use 'military terms' to explain this 'someone has to be in charge' deal? I will use a partnership as in a 'corporation' as a visual. Do they think partnerships within businesses are 'neutering' things as well?
If we were to be as literal as some can be I guess they are saying women can't be responsible due to the role or gender alone. They don't have authority, headship, etc right? I think we can all agree that is nonsense. Some people will take responsibility seriously and others won't. It has nothing to do with gender. Its up to the individual to make that choice for their life.
Homosexuality has been around since time began. Attempting to melt the lack 'male responsibility role' and homosexuality together? It makes you wonder how many other myths about homosexuality they buy into as well! I mean seriously....WOW!
My Conclusion
I have to say I don't understand WHY they bring up these 'la la land' theories, because I know they don't believe them. The author of the quotes I used claimed that is because egalitarians are more complementarian than they want to admit.
(Giggles) from one genderless blob to another? I so don't think so! Hmm. Maybe he is more egalitarian than he wants to admit?! Since I think PEOPLE can grasp 'rational thinking'? When when he drops the irrational banter he has learned so far, and deal with things in a more realistic manner THEN maybe I can do something beside giggle.
If he seriously wants to stand on his views? I have to ask him if he listens to the poor mentally challenged person on the corner that speaks to aliens via the tin foil on his head! No offense, but its about the same thing, and makes about the same amount of sense.
If you enjoyed this post and wish to be informed whenever a new post is published, then make sure you subscribe to my regular Email Updates.
Subscribe Now!Thanks For Making This Possible! Kindly Bookmark and Share it:
0 comments:
Post a Comment