I like BarlowGirl. :-D But I like their music; I'm not really up on anything else. I don't read. What's this phenomenon?
... I just wrote a long spiel that on reflection was off-topic (it was about the not-dating thing), so let me skip back onto the topic:
I don't get the impression from their music that they're blaming themselves or girls in general for tempting men. As far as the modesty/clothes thing goes, I as a Christian man appreciate whatever hand anybody wants to give me against temptation. The modern age is seen by many Christians to show a slackening of morals, particularly where modesty is concerned. Wanting to be modest, to return to the standards of yore, isn't necesarily about blaming oneself for tempting somebody else; it's making a personal decision that one wants to be modest. Most of what I hear doesn't have much to do with men at all. How do you think they (or these cults) are blaming themselves?
I've not had all that much contact with Baptists. The one church I used to go to regularly, and the one where some of my good friends go, have normal and healthy attitudes towards women. As far as the women being submissive thing, it sounds horrible on the surface, but I read a pretty good explanation of it in C.S. Lewis's Mere Christianity (a great read), though you would hate that chapter, I think, because he, too, had some pretty old-fashioned views of women, but not unreasonable for the time, I don't guess (it was written in the 1940s). What he said was this: the reason the Bible writes that women should be submissive is because there can't be two heads to a home. The husband and wife are equal, but when they come into conflict, one of them must have the final say, else World War III. Which makes sense to me. Why it's the man and not the woman I suppose is cultural and something to argue about, but relationships do work better when one person is willing to bow out in a disagreement. "Submissive" doesn't (and shouldn't) mean "subservient," and I've never gotten the impression that anyone believes that in any Baptist church I've ever been in.
I think there's a lot of misunderstanding of Scripture and other writings, both by people outside the Church and people in it.
I read a little on their website a few years back about "What is a Barlow Girl" and what I got out of it was this. Girls should save themselves for marriage (not a bad idea, if you ask me). They should court, not date, and basically should throw out the womens rights movement all together.
Girls should not dress provocatively. They should show respect for themselves (I agree), and not put themselves on display (I also agree. What I disagree with is this next part). Not only should they not display themselves out of respect for themselves, but it's because women are at fault for men's temptations.
So, what it boils down to, is basically that men can't control themselves, and for that reason, women have to cover themselves and court as to not tempt men.
If they had left it at "court not date to have a stronger relationship, and cover yourself out of respect for yourself" that's fine. But, they brought that whole "women are the root of all evil and temptation" back into it, and I think it sends the wrong message. It's not over the top, but I think they could have left it out.
I actually tried reading Mere Christianity once, but couldn't get into it.
I'm not the most progressive woman out there - I still believe in a lot of old fashioned things (like I want to stay at home with kids, if I ever have any, and that there is a "head of the household" but not in a submissive way, and marriage, and saving your V-card for marriage), but I do not think that saying that girls are the reason for the fall of man is the way to accomplish returning the moral standards of yore. It's not "yore" anymore, and those standards went away for a reason.
I don't know enough about the courtship thing to say what I think of it. But I personally am not into the "dating game" at all. For one thing, I always lose (I can say that to you), but for another, I know I have a tendency to let my hormones run away with me. And I know young people do, too. I think some degree of dating, especially at my age, is necessary, just for the sake of getting to know somebody, but I don't want to spend a lot of time in parked cars or in girls' bedrooms. That's gotten me into trouble before. And I don't think "picking up" dates is ever a good idea.
Again, I haven't really gotten these impressions you're talking about from their music, but I'll take your word for it. I've never actually been on their website. :-p I do think saying women are the root of all evil and temptation it totally over the top and wrong. My attitude is, yeah, women tempt men. But I can even be be tempted by the Barlow Girls. :-p The fault is mine, and my mad, mad hormones. And I know men can tempt women just as much as women can tempt men; though I do think it's true that men are more visually stimulated (correct me if I'm wrong). I appreciate modest girls because it does make it easier on the temptation, but truth be told, I also think modesty is really hot. :-p
... I just wrote a long spiel that on reflection was off-topic (it was about the not-dating thing), so let me skip back onto the topic:
I don't get the impression from their music that they're blaming themselves or girls in general for tempting men. As far as the modesty/clothes thing goes, I as a Christian man appreciate whatever hand anybody wants to give me against temptation. The modern age is seen by many Christians to show a slackening of morals, particularly where modesty is concerned. Wanting to be modest, to return to the standards of yore, isn't necesarily about blaming oneself for tempting somebody else; it's making a personal decision that one wants to be modest. Most of what I hear doesn't have much to do with men at all. How do you think they (or these cults) are blaming themselves?
I've not had all that much contact with Baptists. The one church I used to go to regularly, and the one where some of my good friends go, have normal and healthy attitudes towards women. As far as the women being submissive thing, it sounds horrible on the surface, but I read a pretty good explanation of it in C.S. Lewis's Mere Christianity (a great read), though you would hate that chapter, I think, because he, too, had some pretty old-fashioned views of women, but not unreasonable for the time, I don't guess (it was written in the 1940s). What he said was this: the reason the Bible writes that women should be submissive is because there can't be two heads to a home. The husband and wife are equal, but when they come into conflict, one of them must have the final say, else World War III. Which makes sense to me. Why it's the man and not the woman I suppose is cultural and something to argue about, but relationships do work better when one person is willing to bow out in a disagreement. "Submissive" doesn't (and shouldn't) mean "subservient," and I've never gotten the impression that anyone believes that in any Baptist church I've ever been in.
I think there's a lot of misunderstanding of Scripture and other writings, both by people outside the Church and people in it.
Reply
Girls should save themselves for marriage (not a bad idea, if you ask me). They should court, not date, and basically should throw out the womens rights movement all together.
Girls should not dress provocatively. They should show respect for themselves (I agree), and not put themselves on display (I also agree. What I disagree with is this next part). Not only should they not display themselves out of respect for themselves, but it's because women are at fault for men's temptations.
So, what it boils down to, is basically that men can't control themselves, and for that reason, women have to cover themselves and court as to not tempt men.
If they had left it at "court not date to have a stronger relationship, and cover yourself out of respect for yourself" that's fine. But, they brought that whole "women are the root of all evil and temptation" back into it, and I think it sends the wrong message. It's not over the top, but I think they could have left it out.
I actually tried reading Mere Christianity once, but couldn't get into it.
I'm not the most progressive woman out there - I still believe in a lot of old fashioned things (like I want to stay at home with kids, if I ever have any, and that there is a "head of the household" but not in a submissive way, and marriage, and saving your V-card for marriage), but I do not think that saying that girls are the reason for the fall of man is the way to accomplish returning the moral standards of yore. It's not "yore" anymore, and those standards went away for a reason.
Reply
Again, I haven't really gotten these impressions you're talking about from their music, but I'll take your word for it. I've never actually been on their website. :-p I do think saying women are the root of all evil and temptation it totally over the top and wrong. My attitude is, yeah, women tempt men. But I can even be be tempted by the Barlow Girls. :-p The fault is mine, and my mad, mad hormones. And I know men can tempt women just as much as women can tempt men; though I do think it's true that men are more visually stimulated (correct me if I'm wrong). I appreciate modest girls because it does make it easier on the temptation, but truth be told, I also think modesty is really hot. :-p
Reply
Leave a comment