Degrading Women

[Eyesopen]

John, I do realize that the post in question was written in 2005 and written during the heat of an argument. And I do want to give you the benefit of the doubt so I am asking you just as Exie is, "do you really believe that?" I would add "still?"

[Bramble]

I don't think Christian couples who follow the husband as head doctrine are degrading the woman. I think there are many couples with loving and working relationships who believe the head of the household doctrine.

I think degrading is in a whole different category.

The degradation I saw in TWI came mainly in extra beliefs that were spoken--that women got possessed easier, that women would lead their men away from the truth, that women, being more emotional, could not be trusted and needed a husband to rule over them.

And in the nineties, women had about as much maturity as a 12 year old. I had to ask my husband if I could babysit--a short couple hours one week day morning when he was at work. He looked at me like I was crazy!

Edited July 8, 2007 by Bramble

[waysider]

To those who never saw it:

I never saw it either.

I saw blackened eyes, bruises, verbal tirades and even a broken arm.

I saw a twig leader get convicted of child molestation and sent to prison.

And this was all back in the "good old days".

I still remember many of the names of those involved but wouldn't dream of divulging them.

And yet, I didn't see it.

I thought it was isolated and specific to our geographic area.

There was no internet.

We knew little about what went on in day-to-day life at HQ or in other areas.

Besides, it happens across the spectrum of society.

I never put two and two close enough together to realize that what I was seeing was part of a bigger picture. The Way twisted scriptures and promoted a way of life that fostered and nurtured this type of behavior in people who may have had an inclination toward it before their TWI involvement. Then, they used scripture to justify it and fear to keep it under wraps.

But still, I didn't really see it for what it was.

Good old"whats his name" in the OT never "saw" death.

Still, it happened all around him.

I don't even know if the teaching of that account was accurate but I think we all remember the point that was stressed when it was taught.

I didn't see it either.

Shame on me.

[Jeaniam]

I didn't see any physical or sexual abuse of women in the areas where I was. As far as I'm aware, women were treated with courtesy in the areas where I was. There did seem to be more and more rules about the roles of men and women that seemed silly. I remember one situation in which John and I were having our house exterminated and needed a place to sleep for the night. I thought of the BC's house (because they were going on vacation) and I went to the BC's wife and asked her if we could borrow it. She agreed and we slept there for two nights. The BC didn't have a problem with us staying there but he 'reproved' me for not going to John with my request so that John could go to the BC and ask the question and the BC could decide. Oh, please. I thought the shortest distance between two points was a straight line.

[excathedra]

um jean, do you think your husband really believes 90% or whatev domestic abuse is initiated by the woman ?

okay i'm sorry

i'll let him speak for himself

[Jeaniam]

um jean, do you think your husband really believes 90% or whatev domestic abuse is initiated by the woman ?

okay i'm sorry

i'll let him speak for himself

John has never struck me, no matter how loud I've gotten on occasion; and I have a tendency to be a screamer, so I think my answer to that question has to be 'No'. I think he exaggerated to get his point across. Beyond that I'll let him speak for himself.

Edited July 8, 2007 by Jeaniam

[GrouchoMarxJr]

I didn't see any physical or sexual abuse of women in the areas where I was. As far as I'm aware, women were treated with courtesy in the areas where I was.

During my 13 years with twi, I traveled to numerous states and experienced numerous twi leaders...Women were ALWAYS treated like second class citizens...If there seemed to be any "courtesy" extended, it was always under the guise of "keep your mouth shut and do what your husband tells you to do"...some twi leaders were nicer in how they said it...that's the only difference.

I believe that there are still many ex twi women (some of them post here), who still believe in their "Gog given" subservient role...no thanks, I'm not interested in women who bow down to me...did it ever occur to anyone that Paul's "letters" were his own opinions based on his cultural prejudices?...

OH!...but Groucho, Dr. Wormwood assured us that every verse in the bible is God's will!...Hogwash!...Paul of Tarsus was a pyschotic Christian killer who bought into the strict thinking of the pharisees (before he converted)...and all this was 2000 years ago! He wrote these letters to people who had a TOTALLY different culture and way of thinking than we do today....and you're going to hang your hat on THAT?

[Ham]

I personally believe that 90% of so called domestic violence cases are initiated by the woman.

I was at a meeting sometime in 1976.

I saw honest, loving women offer (God forbid) loving, caring, suggestions.

Three men at a meeting, one was the limb leader.. at his cue shouted, "woman, shut the f*** up"

incredulous, the women say, "what did you just say.." or something to that effect..

on cue, they say again, "woman, shut the f** up" and all three flicked burning cigarettes in the wives hair..

It went on cue so EXACTLY, I would say that these bastards rehearsed previously how to "handle" their women.

one of the couples were "graduates" of the Fellow Laborer's program. And advanced class grads.

one of the guys was a flunky off of the wow program, a new advanced class grad, with new wife.

the third was (I think) a fifth corps grad, along with wife.

I really think that if I were not in the room, things would have gotten even uglier.

These women did not exactly initiate the abuse.

It was one of those "surreal" moments in der vey..

Ah.. take me back to the "good old days.."

The limb guy was trained and ordained by the vicster himself..

[Ham]

The guy who ran the fellow laborer program was a nasty, overbearing SOB.. I was not one who saw that particualar side of the individual..

his wife offered REASONABLE, GODLY, RATIONAL suggestions..

"If you don't like it, why don't you just go home to mommy.." was his reply. I would say that was probably the mildest, tamest thing he had to say to her..

he said he told her this in a PUBLIC MEETING. Made her out as immature, couldn't handle the pressure..

only reason he said it- I believe a number of people noticed that she was gone..

Gets pretty bad when you have to smear your own wife in public..

This was in 1975.

Yep.. a "prophet" is a tough man to live with..

[Ham]

"so, why didn't you just get up and walk off if it was so bad.."

I would have, but I had nowhere to go..

the women didn't either, except the one who went home to mom..

[Ham]

Three men at a meeting, one was the limb leader

Oh, this was a planning meeting of sorts. Supposedly informal.. low key..

he said he told her this in a PUBLIC MEETING. Made her out as immature, couldn't handle the pressure..

This was a public meeting. SOB doing damge control and spin after the wife "copped out".

[Ham]

I idid give enough information that if you were one of the "men" at the meeting, you'd know it was about you..

Don't worry.. I won't reveal names, I'm not THAT underhanded..

Sometimes I wish I was..

[waysider]

And people wonder why we (FL) had to make "junk food runs" to The Wayside Truck Stop under cover of darkness to secretly compare our concerns. <_<

[Ham]

The limb guy was trained and ordained by the vicster himself..

This is the same guy.. who counselled (i.e. screamed at) a single LADY, who lodged a complaint about some filthy guy in fellowship not keeping his hands off of her, to "just loosen up and get laid"..

All I can say.. if a person wants to swallow the magic pill, and wake up back to twi land.. they just might find themselves waking up to a nightmare..

[templelady]

Don't misunderstand me there were some husbands who stood up for their wives and it was tacitly understood that any man who went after those wives verbally or otherwise would rue the results.

But that was the exception rather than the rule.

Most men just sat there mute while their wives were reamed or worse yet joined in.

And then of course there was what went on behind closed doors.

Bottom line--women had uses, sex, cooking, sex, cleaning, sex, raising kids, sex, bringing in a paycheck, sex, laundry .........

It's that absent Christ mentaility--how can you expect someone to follow the footsteps of someone who is absent much easier and more practical to follow the dictates of the MOG and his underlings.

[Jeaniam]

During my 13 years with twi, I traveled to numerous states and experienced numerous twi leaders...Women were ALWAYS treated like second class citizens...If there seemed to be any "courtesy" extended, it was always under the guise of "keep your mouth shut and do what your husband tells you to do"...some twi leaders were nicer in how they said it...that's the only difference.

I believe that there are still many ex twi women (some of them post here), who still believe in their "Gog given" subservient role...no thanks, I'm not interested in women who bow down to me...did it ever occur to anyone that Paul's "letters" were his own opinions based on his cultural prejudices?...

OH!...but Groucho, Dr. Wormwood assured us that every verse in the bible is God's will!...Hogwash!...Paul of Tarsus was a pyschotic Christian killer who bought into the strict thinking of the pharisees (before he converted)...and all this was 2000 years ago! He wrote these letters to people who had a TOTALLY different culture and way of thinking than we do today....and you're going to hang your hat on THAT?

In the areas where I was (admittedly not as numerous as you) I never saw any bruises, black eyes, broken bones, etc. In the 90's more and more frequently women (even single women) were treated like second class citizens, but in the early days many men treated their wives (and single women) with courtesy. Once again I don't want these men, many of whom are still good friends of mine to be lumped in with the ones who were jerks.

[J0nny Ling0]

Edited to for me to fuggedaboudit. It was long ago...

Edited July 9, 2007 by Jonny Lingo

[johniam]

quote: John, I do realize that the post in question was written in 2005 and written during the heat of an argument. And I do want to give you the benefit of the doubt so I am asking you just as Exie is, "do you really believe that?" I would add "still?"

Well, truth...I didn't ASK all of them. Maybe 90% is a bit high. I think there's this public perception that all domestic disputes are the man's fault; that men are guilty until proven innocent, and they're NEVER proven innocent because it happened behind closed doors and we gotta keep these uppity men in their place and...you get the idea.

In 1 Peter it says that a wife's "good conversation" (behavior) can cover for the husband if he's off. This happens a lot, thank God. But this implies that a wife can help a situation go south as well. I think this happens a lot, too. I just want a level playing field.

Also, full disclosure is not a biblical concept. People have a right to privacy in their lives.

[johniam]

quote: ...did it ever occur to anyone that Paul's "letters" were his own opinions based on his cultural prejudices?...

OH!...but Groucho, Dr. Wormwood assured us that every verse in the bible is God's will!...Hogwash!...Paul of Tarsus was a pyschotic Christian killer who bought into the strict thinking of the pharisees (before he converted)...and all this was 2000 years ago! He wrote these letters to people who had a TOTALLY different culture and way of thinking than we do today....and you're going to hang your hat on THAT?

Yes. So now you believe that Christ died in vain? There's no divine nature to be partaker of? Everybody's only as good as their worst mistake? No thanks.

[J0nny Ling0]

assured us that every verse in the bible is God's will!...Hogwash!

Wow.

[Ham]

F-ck, this is gettin me pi s sed off all over again. Mr. Ham, I gotta go...

sorry friend.. :)

I'm not exactly angry any more..

but I think those early experiences did have an effect on me.

I could see what this did to these women.. it was kind of like.. I could see right in their souls.. weird. I watched their dream of happiness, just evaporate.. one couple basically newlywed at the time.

I was a 19 year old kid.. supposedly these were the "cool guys" to be able to hang around with, live with.

my "alter ego" here can outspoken at times, but in real life, I tend to let people run over me. After seeing enough carnage, I'd rather be hurt than see somebody else suffer it.

I've been known to drive people up the wall with "niceness".

But once, in recent years, I did tell a group of people that they were as stinking dysfunctional as I am. I have an advantage here, at least I know what I am dealing with, in myself.

So.. here I am, back doing what I should have been doing when I was nineteen.

It has taken YEARS for me to just be what I am.. and not jump through hoops to try to get people to love me.

I can only imagine what abuse does, when practiced in the presence of a young child, even verbal abuse, name calling..

it really does effect more people than just "you".

[Eyesopen]

Well, truth...I didn't ASK all of them. Maybe 90% is a bit high. I think there's this public perception that all domestic disputes are the man's fault; that men are guilty until proven innocent, and they're NEVER proven innocent because it happened behind closed doors and we gotta keep these uppity men in their place and...you get the idea.

In 1 Peter it says that a wife's "good conversation" (behavior) can cover for the husband if he's off. This happens a lot, thank God. But this implies that a wife can help a situation go south as well. I think this happens a lot, too. I just want a level playing field.

Also, full disclosure is not a biblical concept. People have a right to privacy in their lives.

In my experience domestic abuse cases run about 60/30/10. 60% of the time the man starts it, 30% of the time the woman starts it and 10% of the time it's a mutual slug fest. Now mind you this is only my experience in law enforcement for 17 years and in one County in one State. Statistics in other areas or country wide may be different. But I do agree with you that to be guilty until proven innocent is wrong (Well unless of course a person was actually caught in the act). What happens behind closed doors is a mystery most of the time, however a preponderance of the evidence often sheds light on an otherwise dark situation.

All of us would like a level playing field in all areas of our lives. Unfortunately for us we are stuck in this world until Christ returns or we die, whichever comes first. Because of that we have to deal with the injustices that are here while not becoming part of the problem. A difficult balance to be sure.

As far as a 'right to privacy' I agree as long as what a person or persons are doing do not in anyway endanger the well being of each other or others outside of the major parties. As Mr. Ham has said "it really does effect more people than just "you"." Again speaking from a very personal point of view and experience....he is absolutely right! I am not infering that you are abusive just following the train of thought. And thank you for answering me.

[Watered Garden]

Mr. Hammeroni,

Were you in FL of OHIO?

Holy crap!

WG

[johniam]

quote: Now mind you this is only my experience in law enforcement for 17 years and in one County in one State.

Are you an officer, or a dispatcher?

quote: In my experience domestic abuse cases run about 60/30/10. 60% of the time the man starts it, 30% of the time the woman starts it and 10% of the time it's a mutual slug fest.

Just to be clear about something: when I said the woman initiates it, I meant verbally, not physically.

Edited July 9, 2007 by johniam

[Ham]

Maybe it's not fair, but I think it is balanced.

I think that the person in a given partnership who has more power (i.e. physically stronger) rightfully bears greater responsiblity, and should exercise more restraint.

Usually it is the man.

Why not be the first one to agree.

be the one not to raise the voice above normal conversational level.. If somebody is SCREAMING at you, it is pretty obvious that they don't particularly want to hear what you are saying at the moment.

NEVER threaten, scream, or call names..

NEVER strike out with harsh words, in anger..

I really think the tongue can be controlled, unless someone is missing that part of the brain that enables the muscles to hold the mouth shut..

ESPECIALLY- NEVER strike physically. There is no excuse.. I wouldn't strike a woman.. even if she was striking me. I'd walk off. 99% of the time, exiting is a valid option.

If a man can't stop himself from striking a woman, he has no business even being around women.

Or even verbally abusing a woman. Whether he's "baited" into doing it, or not..

I think if you have to resort to extreme measures to get someones attention, something's wrong..

If you find the other person constantly bickering, yelling, picking at INSIGNIFICANT matters..

Maybe you're in a relationship with the wrong person.

I have the highest contempt for the guys I saw shout down the wives, saying to "shut the f*** up"..

Makes me wonder what happened to all the love. Sadistic bastards sacrificed their own wives to the god called twi.

Edited July 9, 2007 by Mr. Hammeroni