HFN, I just love you.Originally Posted by HuskyFreeNorthwest
Sent from my MB865 using Tapatalk 2
HFN, I just love you.
Sent from my MB865 using Tapatalk 2
Da-da Da Da dahhh-ahhh! Screw the Y!
Don't get persnickety needlessly. Wait until there's at least a clear intent to offend, por favor. Motherhood is not a biological construct. It is biological fact. Your belief in a 'divine construct' is nothing more than a social construct, a socio-cultural reification of religious culture. A mother's biological role can be replaced by a man. Perhaps not by a father, but certainly a man can mother a child biologically. http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature...&v=DiXp_See_Bs (NSFW)
Your mention of a woman's role being critical speaks of societal development. The consequences of that knowledge you possess are that you put mom on a pedestal, you feel that there should be heightened respect to them for performing their societal or biological roles (or both). Again, social constructs. I reject that contract. Fatherhood is a very difficult role. No more difficult nor less than that of a mother. I will not rise to respect my mother more than my father because that's comparing apples to oranges, and disrespects the very real sacrifices my father, our fathers, made for each of us. By your metric, the priesthood is almost penance for not being a woman, trying to earn our cultural salvation through works rather than the grace of having a XX chromosomes and working milk glands.
"This culture doesn't sell modesty. It sells "I am more modest than you" modesty." -- Two Utes
Who says I'm being persnickety? Don't take offense to my pretentiousness and I won't take offense to yours. Deal?
You have decided that my respect of women is a disrespect of men when it isn't. How you derived that priesthood is penance is puzzling but I get the sense you are just arguing for arguing a sake. I commend you for that. I don't view the priesthood in the limited role that you seem to so maybe that is the disconnect.
Also perhaps we should define motherhood to get on the same page. To me having a baby isn't the only criteria to motherhood, but the rearing, nurturing, protection, education etc are all part of motherhood. Women and men who have children and abandon them aren't those children's parents in the sense I'm speaking.
You've also decided that social constructs have no merit, but haven't proven why that is the case. Sometimes there is good reason for a social construct.
But I've become bored of the conversation because I'm a man and can't concentrate on anything for more than 15 minutes.
No I'm just kidding,(not on being bored with this, but on being able to concentrate on... whatever it is we are talking about) but I don't think you are going to convince me otherwise because I have that whole religious belief stuff that you can define as you wish.
I will note that your or my rejection of realities doesn't change those realities as much as we might want.
Everything and anything in the human societal experience is a "social construct." You throw it around like it means something more than it does. And lets' be clear. Your posturing in this thread is also a social construct born of academic reasoning, relying upon unduly oblique language in an attempt to render this discussion more meaningful or significant phylosophically.
Huh? Are you really being that dismissive, or are you just messing with us by parodying academic jargon?
"It is only with the heart that one can see rightly; what is essential is invisible to the eye."
--Antoine de Saint-Exupery
"Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold."
--Yeats
“True, we [lawyers] build no bridges. We raise no towers. We construct no engines. We paint no pictures - unless as amateurs for our own principal amusement. There is little of all that we do which the eye of man can see. But we smooth out difficulties; we relieve stress; we correct mistakes; we take up other men's burdens and by our efforts we make possible the peaceful life of men in a peaceful state.”
--John W. Davis, founder of Davis Polk & Wardwell
Don't out me, dammit. I'm having fun.
"This culture doesn't sell modesty. It sells "I am more modest than you" modesty." -- Two Utes
Sadist.
"It is only with the heart that one can see rightly; what is essential is invisible to the eye."
--Antoine de Saint-Exupery
"Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold."
--Yeats
“True, we [lawyers] build no bridges. We raise no towers. We construct no engines. We paint no pictures - unless as amateurs for our own principal amusement. There is little of all that we do which the eye of man can see. But we smooth out difficulties; we relieve stress; we correct mistakes; we take up other men's burdens and by our efforts we make possible the peaceful life of men in a peaceful state.”
--John W. Davis, founder of Davis Polk & Wardwell
We exist in narratives, so we have to interpret the world through societal constructs, otherwise there's no need for language or thought, only reaction and instinct. Communication evolves from the need to go without oneself. You can be clear all you like, but framing what I say as posturing and unduly oblique is just Janus being priggish.
"This culture doesn't sell modesty. It sells "I am more modest than you" modesty." -- Two Utes
Hey now, I put some boobs in that linked video. That should at least get your attention for a while longer. I didn't say that social constructs have no merit. I'm saying that the LDS social construct around motherhood is misguided, juvenile, and potentially pathological. Some social constructs are great "Life, liberty, pursuit of happiness." As far as rejecting realities, I can only reject ones that are not ones I share
"This culture doesn't sell modesty. It sells "I am more modest than you" modesty." -- Two Utes
Oh, brother. image.jpg
"It is only with the heart that one can see rightly; what is essential is invisible to the eye."
--Antoine de Saint-Exupery
"Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold."
--Yeats
“True, we [lawyers] build no bridges. We raise no towers. We construct no engines. We paint no pictures - unless as amateurs for our own principal amusement. There is little of all that we do which the eye of man can see. But we smooth out difficulties; we relieve stress; we correct mistakes; we take up other men's burdens and by our efforts we make possible the peaceful life of men in a peaceful state.”
--John W. Davis, founder of Davis Polk & Wardwell
Your semiotics are unclear. Are you lamenting the lack of nonsense?
"This culture doesn't sell modesty. It sells "I am more modest than you" modesty." -- Two Utes
Is there someone I can call who will lead you by the hand back to your room and give you your meds?
"It is only with the heart that one can see rightly; what is essential is invisible to the eye."
--Antoine de Saint-Exupery
"Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold."
--Yeats
“True, we [lawyers] build no bridges. We raise no towers. We construct no engines. We paint no pictures - unless as amateurs for our own principal amusement. There is little of all that we do which the eye of man can see. But we smooth out difficulties; we relieve stress; we correct mistakes; we take up other men's burdens and by our efforts we make possible the peaceful life of men in a peaceful state.”
--John W. Davis, founder of Davis Polk & Wardwell
202.608.6145. Ask for Jim
"This culture doesn't sell modesty. It sells "I am more modest than you" modesty." -- Two Utes
It's a social construct that has produced (ahem) many of the great things in society today. I can appreciate a man who can post boobs and decry juvenile practices all on the same thread with a straight face.
For the record, neither of the women I have sang praises for have scrapbooked or done toll-painting ever in their lives, but I still find great value in them. Strange.
This discussion has fascinating, enlightening and humorous all sat the same time.
What hasn't been discussed is the underpinning drive behind this issue: power. Who has is, who wants it, and why one group seeks to control it, while the other covets it.
People always talk about the power of the priesthood, the power of the priesthood. One group wants to know what that power is all about, feeling they deserve to have that power just as much as the other group. While the group with the power doesn't feel like there is a real need to give any of it away.
In all honestly, all we are really discussing is a title. When a man is ordained, he is given a title: Elder. The only power that title has is what the group confers upon it. The amount of deference/reverence given that title is societally driven, and the degree of deference given that title directly reflects the degree of that power. The more deference we give to a title, the more power we allow to that title to have over our lives. For example, if a neighbor says that a woman should only wear one set of earrings, we would give little weight to that comment. But, if it is said over the pulpit by one of the 15, then it becomes a standard that all women are judged by that society.
Ultimately, this is all about power, or at least the perception of power.
But what of the ineffable in human experience? Language (communication) by default is inadequate to explain a great many things. Using it to obfuscate meaning only exacerbates the problem. The only priggish gate keeper here are your words, if your intent is understanding.
It takes more than that to get on my counselor short list, I need a cookie sample and bikini picture.HFN, I just love you.
Sent from my MB865 using Tapatalk 2
Shoot, I've gotta start thinking like a bishop, modest one piece picture.
I wasn't offended. I just didn't follow the analogy you tried to make. Thanks for clarifying. And having not been overly endowed with the virtue of patience, waiting for a package is a trial let alone something as important as the priesthood.
"Well-behaved women seldom make history." - Laurel Thatcher Ulrich
If she gives you one, will you pass a copy on to me?
“The world is so exquisite with so much love and moral depth, that there is no reason to deceive ourselves with pretty stories for which there's little good evidence. Far better it seems to me, in our vulnerability, is to look death in the eye and to be grateful every day for the brief but magnificent opportunity that life provides.”
― Carl Sagan
Wouldn't this be better suited for Mormon stories...zing!
“It only ends once. Anything that happens before that is just progress.”
Well, because he thought it was good sport. Because some men aren't looking for anything logical, like money. They can't be bought, bullied, reasoned, or negotiated with. Some men just want to watch the world burn.
"This culture doesn't sell modesty. It sells "I am more modest than you" modesty." -- Two Utes
The ineffable, the sublime, they are thorns in our side. Communion is what we call our attempts to resonate with the Divine. We're talking about deep stuff here. Jarid brought up power, which invites a serious discussion about cultural hegemony in the Church, which the Brethren enjoy in spades. But, by your standards, bringing Gramsci into this discussion is will only serve to muddy it. I disagree.
"This culture doesn't sell modesty. It sells "I am more modest than you" modesty." -- Two Utes
"This culture doesn't sell modesty. It sells "I am more modest than you" modesty." -- Two Utes
Well, to them, I really am speaking a foreign language, instead of big words in their native one. But, I'm not teaching here. I consider people here my equals; I know many of yall and you trend brilliant, so I don't dumb things down.
"This culture doesn't sell modesty. It sells "I am more modest than you" modesty." -- Two Utes
Except for those who are pathological and juvenile.
Be vewy, vewy careful in wesponding to wuap. He is a wascal.
"It is only with the heart that one can see rightly; what is essential is invisible to the eye."
--Antoine de Saint-Exupery
"Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold."
--Yeats
“True, we [lawyers] build no bridges. We raise no towers. We construct no engines. We paint no pictures - unless as amateurs for our own principal amusement. There is little of all that we do which the eye of man can see. But we smooth out difficulties; we relieve stress; we correct mistakes; we take up other men's burdens and by our efforts we make possible the peaceful life of men in a peaceful state.”
--John W. Davis, founder of Davis Polk & Wardwell
Whether or not one agrees with the proposition, the out-of-hand dismissal of (some) women's concerns over this issue is condescending and paternalistic. An attitude that women who (respectfully) advocate for change or voice dissent are wasting their time doesn't speak well of LDS males.
There's really no doctrinal reason in the LDS scriptures that precludes women from priesthood. Sure, it's unconventional in today's Christian world, but it's not anti-doctrinal. In highly misogynistic ancient times, many pagan religions had female priestesses (for female deities), and an earlier post points out that New Testament times featured deaconesses.
There is some suggestion in LDS temple-worship of female subordination to males, but this (IMO) is hardly a deal-breaker for eventual ordination of females - especially in a religion that claims ongoing revelation.
σοφῷ ἀνδρὶ Ἑλλὰς πάντα.
-- Flavius Philostratus, Life of Apollonius 1.35.2.
I feel a podcast coming on.
“The world is so exquisite with so much love and moral depth, that there is no reason to deceive ourselves with pretty stories for which there's little good evidence. Far better it seems to me, in our vulnerability, is to look death in the eye and to be grateful every day for the brief but magnificent opportunity that life provides.”
― Carl Sagan
(insert cash register sound here)
“It only ends once. Anything that happens before that is just progress.”
Well, because he thought it was good sport. Because some men aren't looking for anything logical, like money. They can't be bought, bullied, reasoned, or negotiated with. Some men just want to watch the world burn.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote