The I Esdras quote and commentary is technically on p. 216. And here's another gem, on p. 314 (§27): "Woman symbolizes the soul engaged in ascetic practice; through union with it the intellect begets the virtues."
Why would I be a misandrist? Please enlighten me as to how you get that idea.
It might be because painting the woman as symbol of the highest virtue is constricting. It forces a corset of expectation on women that makes it easy to control them, because they would be seen as deviant if they were to break out of that image. To call the highest virtue love is only adding to that. And of course, this is directly related with the text being written by men.
This *is* misogynistic. I don't care how it would gel with other ideas of Christianity or not, I'm giving my gut reaction to it.
When you dedicate certain virtues to men and women, you are prescribing what virtues they belong to, and therefore you are also determining what virtues they are not. lordhellebore already gave the reason why; I say that coming from an Asian background the idealized concept of 'women as love' has been used against women many, many times. Does it ever strike you odd that the more a society idealizes concepts like motherhood and various roles of women, the more likely it is to have domestic violence cases?
When you contextualize it with the passage that it was commenting on, it's even worse, because the passage doesn't strike me as being about love, so much as it is being about sex: namely, a woman's power is determined by how she is capable of driving a man mad after her.
hmm, yes I could not agree with you more, love causes many evil things in society and people:) And we have so much of it that we don't know what to do with it. LOL I thought that I had heard it all, first of all concepts do not cause anything, people may use them as excuses for cause; two, domestic violence cases have nothing to do with love dear:) I did not conceptualize anything, what is obvious is what comes more naturally to each of the sexes, and learning from one another. The negativity of this Christian group never fails:) and of all the things to be discussing such a supreme realization such as love. We are talking about love right? Not shit!:) lol you guys are hilarious. Virtues do not belong to anyone more or less specifically and everyone is an individual regardless of sexual organs. :) One misses the point and subtlety when one is pre determined to. oh well, choose to hate instead what can I tell you.
No, I never said that *love* causes many evil things in society and people. I'm saying that *linking women specifically to the virtue of love* would be evil
( ... )
Now that I think about it, I think a lot of abrasiveness in this thread comes from the fact that this is an Eastern Orthodox thing, and you'd have to have some kind of Eastern Orthodox mindset (or some understanding of it) to really appreciate this passage.
Most of us don't come from this background.
I'm not saying that this writer is right or wrong, just that the extent you would read an offense into this passage depends on how much background you have of Eastern Orthodox mysticism and the theories that run through it.
Edit: To the OP, my apologies if I sounded offensive. If I knew more about Eastern Orthodoxy, I'd probably be able to argue my points in a way that would make it seem less abrasive to you, but I don't.
Yes, only eastern greek orthodox mysticism talks about love and women. Come to think of it I am pretty sure it was a typo in the book. I will contact the publisher tomorrow this is unacceptable!
You were not offensive at all neither were you abrasive. You think that you can argue this out and that the only reason you can't is because you don't know more about eastern orthodoxy? ah huh ok:)
No, but the way we interpret this passage would be different. If you came a Protestant background, you would have no reason to defend this passage. You would just easily say that this is an outdated idea of women written by a monk a long time ago; good for his time, but not necessarilly universally true.
Oh I see, so there is an expiration day to love and or women being associated with love? I had no idea that virtues change with the times. I would leave the Universe out of this one:) There is no room for any interpretations the message is very clear and I guarantee you it passes all tests of time:) The poor monk is probably turning in his grave, lol I am sorry but it's very funny. For there to be a defense there must be an attack? What would cause such a thing?:) If anything these times call for more compassion not less, and as is obvious, especially from women.
Comments 90
Reply
Very nice. I have 314 pg marked but did not share it:)
Very cool.
Reply
Reply
Reply
(The comment has been removed)
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Is it because it's written by men?
Or is it because you might be a misandry?
Reply
It might be because painting the woman as symbol of the highest virtue is constricting. It forces a corset of expectation on women that makes it easy to control them, because they would be seen as deviant if they were to break out of that image. To call the highest virtue love is only adding to that. And of course, this is directly related with the text being written by men.
Reply
I do not know that you are or that
you are not a misandry.
Hmmn, ok, I see where you are coming from
and can relate with you.
A misogynistic is afraid of women perhaps they are afraid
of love.. who knows, perhaps if we embrace them
some of it might rub off :)
It's sad though.
Reply
When you dedicate certain virtues to men and women, you are prescribing what virtues they belong to, and therefore you are also determining what virtues they are not. lordhellebore already gave the reason why; I say that coming from an Asian background the idealized concept of 'women as love' has been used against women many, many times. Does it ever strike you odd that the more a society idealizes concepts like motherhood and various roles of women, the more likely it is to have domestic violence cases?
When you contextualize it with the passage that it was commenting on, it's even worse, because the passage doesn't strike me as being about love, so much as it is being about sex: namely, a woman's power is determined by how she is capable of driving a man mad after her.
Reply
And we have so much of it that we don't know what to do with it.
LOL I thought that I had heard it all, first of all concepts do not cause anything,
people may use them as excuses for cause; two, domestic violence cases have nothing to do with love dear:)
I did not conceptualize anything, what is obvious is what comes more naturally to each of the sexes, and learning from one another.
The negativity of this Christian group never fails:) and of all the things to be discussing
such a supreme realization such as love. We are talking about love right? Not shit!:) lol
you guys are hilarious.
Virtues do not belong to anyone more or less specifically and everyone is an individual regardless of sexual organs. :) One misses the point and subtlety when one is pre determined to.
oh well, choose to hate instead what can I tell you.
Reply
Reply
Reply
Most of us don't come from this background.
I'm not saying that this writer is right or wrong, just that the extent you would read an offense into this passage depends on how much background you have of Eastern Orthodox mysticism and the theories that run through it.
Edit:
To the OP, my apologies if I sounded offensive. If I knew more about Eastern Orthodoxy, I'd probably be able to argue my points in a way that would make it seem less abrasive to you, but I don't.
Reply
Come to think of it I am pretty
sure it was a typo in the book.
I will contact the publisher tomorrow
this is unacceptable!
You were not offensive at all neither were you abrasive.
You think that you can argue this out and that the only
reason you can't is because you don't know more about eastern
orthodoxy? ah huh ok:)
Reply
Reply
I had no idea that virtues change with the times. I would leave the Universe out of this one:)
There is no room for any interpretations the message is very clear and I guarantee you it passes all tests of time:) The poor monk is probably turning in his grave, lol I am sorry but it's very funny.
For there to be a defense there must be an attack? What would cause such a thing?:)
If anything these times call for more compassion not less, and as is obvious, especially from women.
Reply
Leave a comment