Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

A virus of misogyny

Options
  • 11-03-2018 2:56pm
    #1
    Safehands
    Registered Users Posts: 1,360 ✭✭✭


    Former president Mary McAleese has told a conference in Rome that the Catholic church has become a "primary global carrier of the toxic virus of misogyny".

    Is she right or is the church merely a patriarchal organisation the same as many other older world religions?


«13

Comments

  • Options
    #2
    Avatar MIA
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,750 ✭✭✭Avatar MIA


    Safehands wrote: »
    Former president Mary McAleese has told a conference in Rome that the Catholic church has become a "primary global carrier of the toxic virus of misogyny".

    Is she right or is the church merely a patriarchal organisation the same as many other older world religions?

    A little bit of column A, and a little bit of Column B.

    Don't think they are mutually exclusive.


  • Options
    #3
    Safehands
    Registered Users Posts: 1,360 ✭✭✭Safehands


    Avatar MIA wrote: »
    A little bit of column A, and a little bit of Column B.

    Don't think they are mutually exclusive.

    Interesting. I think they are.


  • Options
    #4
    Avatar MIA
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,750 ✭✭✭Avatar MIA


    Safehands wrote: »
    Interesting. I think they are.

    It's clearly Patriarchal. Is it perpetuating misogyny ? It'd be hard to think of any organisation in the western world that fears and disdains women more.


  • Options
    #5
    super_furry
    Registered Users Posts: 27,321 ✭✭✭✭super_furry


    It's hard to see a valid argument against what she says to be honest.


  • Options
    #6
    Safehands
    Registered Users Posts: 1,360 ✭✭✭Safehands


    Avatar MIA wrote: »
    It's clearly Patriarchal. Is it perpetuating misogyny ? It'd be hard to think of any organisation in the western world that fears and disdains women more.

    Well, Islam, Judaism and Hinduism are all Patriarchal. Some could be more accurately discribed as misogynistic than the RC church.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #7
    Avatar MIA
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,750 ✭✭✭Avatar MIA


    Safehands wrote: »
    Well, Islam, Judaism and Hinduism are all Patriarchal. Some could be more accurately discribed as misogynistic than the RC church.

    So, you're arguing the degree of misogyny?


  • Options
    #8
    Safehands
    Registered Users Posts: 1,360 ✭✭✭Safehands


    Avatar MIA wrote: »
    So, you're arguing the degree of misogyny?

    No actually, unless there is no difference between misogyny and patriarchy.
    I think that there is no argument against having women priests and married priests. I think it will happen, but it will be slow.
    Does the fact that women can't be ordained make the organisation mysogynistic? Remember, that word refers to a dislike or a fear of women. I don't think the church dislikes them or is fearful of them. Their tradition is simply old fashioned and out of date, but not misogynistic.


  • Options
    #9
    beauf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,651 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    Avatar MIA wrote: »
    It's clearly Patriarchal. Is it perpetuating misogyny ? It'd be hard to think of any organisation in the western world that fears and disdains women more.

    I would have thought there were lot of organisations that exclude women and disdain far more. Why is this discussion limited to the western world. The Catholic church is worldwide.


  • Options
    #10
    Avatar MIA
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,750 ✭✭✭Avatar MIA


    Safehands wrote: »
    No actually, unless there is no difference between misogyny and patriarchy.

    Not sure of your argument, are you saying if an organisation is patriarchal it cannot be misogynistic.


  • Options
    #11
    Avatar MIA
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,750 ✭✭✭Avatar MIA


    beauf wrote: »
    I would have thought there were lot of organisations that exclude women and disdain far more. Why is this discussion limited to the western world. The Catholic church is worldwide.

    Again, are you arguing over degree of misogyny? I've no problem with expanding the list of religious organisations that are misogynistic.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #12
    beauf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,651 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    Safehands wrote: »
    No actually, unless there is no difference between misogyny and patriarchy.
    I think that there is no argument against having women priests and married priests. I think it will happen, but it will be slow.
    Does the fact that women can't be ordained make the organisation mysogynistic? Remember, that word refers to a dislike or a fear of women. I don't think the church dislikes them or is fearful of them. Their tradition is simply old fashioned and out of date, but not misogynistic.


    I wonder how nuns and sisters, or lay people fit into this discussion? Epecially compared to other religions, or organisations. I'm thinking of men only clubs and organisations.


  • Options
    #13
    Safehands
    Registered Users Posts: 1,360 ✭✭✭Safehands


    Avatar MIA wrote: »
    Not sure of your argument, are you saying if an organisation is patriarchal it cannot be misogynistic.

    Absolutely not.
    But I don't believe that patriarchal organisations are automaticlly misogynistic. Some are, but not all.


  • Options
    #14
    beauf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,651 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    Avatar MIA wrote: »
    Again, are you arguing over degree of misogyny? I've no problem with expanding the list of religious organisations that are misogynistic.

    No you are. You're saying its the worst one. I'm wondering how that is true when you have golf clubs (as an example) that don't allow women, I'm sure there are religions that are similar. Whereas the Church does have female members.


  • Options
    #15
    Tenigate
    Closed Accounts Posts: 849 ✭✭✭Tenigate


    Interesting opinion piece from the daily wire.
    https://www.dailywire.com/news/28045/former-irish-president-catholic-church-empire-paul-bois
    McAleese's complaint, which is the same as every other feminist "Catholic," is that women do not have enough power in the Church because women cannot be made priests, which leads to doctrines barring abortion and contraception.

    I think one thing the Church does well is recognise and celebrates the differences between men and women. To open up male roles for the sake of inclusivity, and all that entails (gender quotas, transgenderism) would be the end of the Church. Mary should stick to politics.


  • Options
    #16
    beauf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,651 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    Safehands wrote: »
    Former president Mary McAleese has told a conference in Rome that the Catholic church has become a "primary global carrier of the toxic virus of misogyny".

    Is she right or is the church merely a patriarchal organisation the same as many other older world religions?

    How would the modern church compare to the church of say medieval times?

    It has progressed since then. But in overall terms, its stuck in the stone age. She is right in broad terms.


  • Options
    #17
    Avatar MIA
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,750 ✭✭✭Avatar MIA


    beauf wrote: »
    No you are.

    Have we descended to the level of, 'I'm not, you are?' to be followed up with the the classic, 'I know you are, but what am I'.

    The level of debate here is not encouraging.


  • Options
    #18
    beauf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,651 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    Avatar MIA wrote: »
    Have we descended to the level of, 'I'm not, you are?' to be followed up with the the classic, 'I know you are, but what am I'.

    The level of debate here is not encouraging.

    Actually I've answered your question and asked others in response. However you've chosen to ignore that, and want make it panto when some suggested your premise is flawed to begin with. The level of debate is as it always is when the church is mentioned.


  • Options
    #19
    beauf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,651 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    Tenigate wrote: »
    Interesting opinion piece from the daily wire.
    https://www.dailywire.com/news/28045/former-irish-president-catholic-church-empire-paul-bois

    I think one thing the Church does well is recognise and celebrates the differences between men and women. To open up male roles for the sake of inclusivity, and all that entails (gender quotas, transgenderism) would be the end of the Church. Mary should stick to politics.

    I think many would suggest inclusivity is the only way the church might survive. It seems the hierarchy has decided to go the opposite direction.


  • Options
    #20
    Avatar MIA
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,750 ✭✭✭Avatar MIA


    beauf wrote: »
    Actually I've answered your question and asked others in response. However you've chosen to ignore that, and want make it panto when some suggested your premise is flawed to begin with. The level of debate is as it always is when the church is mentioned.

    You answered - but it didn't make sense.

    Then you went on to compare (but not deny the misogyny of) the Roman Catholic Church with over a Billion claimed adherents to a poxy Golf Club.

    So what if there are some Golf Clubs that are misogynistic - what has that got to do with anything regarding the claims the RC is misogynistic, and if you're saying that's in somehow a counter to my points then, have you any more windmills?


  • Options
    #21
    looksee
    Registered Users Posts: 28,080 ✭✭✭✭looksee


    merely a patriarchal organisation

    Why do you say 'merely' a patriarchal organisation, as though this is just a societal quirk?

    Patriarchy reserves all power for men. In this case the power is over the maintenance of a belief-based organisation so it is arguable that if women do not want to be subject to this patriarchy they just leave the church and the men to get on with it. However these belief systems are so deeply ingrained in both the structure and the laws of society that they are not easy to ignore or get away from.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #22
    beauf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,651 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    Avatar MIA wrote: »
    You answered - but it didn't make sense.

    Then you went on to compare (but not deny the misogyny of) the Roman Catholic Church with over a Billion claimed adherents to a poxy Golf Club.

    So what if there are some Golf Clubs that are misogynistic - what has that got to do with anything regarding the claims the RC is misogynistic, and if you're saying that's in somehow a counter to my points then, have you any more windmills?

    Pout all you want. I just pointed the flaw in your comment.


  • Options
    #23
    Avatar MIA
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,750 ✭✭✭Avatar MIA


    beauf wrote: »
    Pout all you want. I just pointed the flaw in your comment.

    That all male Golf clubs are more misogynistic than the RC church... right, good man. Great contribution.


  • Options
    #24
    beauf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,651 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    Safehands wrote: »
    Former president Mary McAleese has told a conference in Rome that the Catholic church has become a "primary global carrier of the toxic virus of misogyny".

    Is she right or is the church merely a patriarchal organisation the same as many other older world religions?


    ...the church is a misogynistic organisation the same as many other older world religions...and not the worst of them. The most influential in Western Culture, but not everywhere in the world...

    I think you are trying to make a distinction, where its largely irrelevant in terms of overall impact.


  • Options
    #25
    Safehands
    Registered Users Posts: 1,360 ✭✭✭Safehands


    Tenigate wrote: »
    I think one thing the Church does well is recognise and celebrates the differences between men and women. To open up male roles for the sake of inclusivity, and all that entails (gender quotas, transgenderism) would be the end of the Church. Mary should stick to politics.

    One thing her rant has done, is vindicate the church's decision not to let her speak in the Vatican. Why should any organisation allow someone come into their home to castigate them? Could anyone imagine a gay pride march allowing someone with strong anti-gay feelings to speak at one of their rallies?


  • Options
    #26
    beauf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,651 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    I don't think speaking at the Vatican, has anything like the influence that the Vatican thinks it has.


  • Options
    #27
    Safehands
    Registered Users Posts: 1,360 ✭✭✭Safehands


    beauf wrote: »
    I don't think speaking at the Vatican, has anything like the influence that the Vatican thinks it has.

    Probably not. Nevertheless Mrs McAleese is quite a powerful woman. If she were to say what she said this week, within the walls of the Vatican, it would probably have quite an impact.

    Also, I can't help wondering was the timing of her rant significant. Yes I know it was international women's day but it was also the day that the referendum details were announced. That type of anti-church publicity would do no harm at all to the pro-abortion lobby. Hit them for six before they can get going.

    Just putting it out there! My skeptical mind working overtime.


  • Options
    #28
    beauf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,651 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    Not letting her speak probably says more than any speech could have...


  • Options
    #29
    Bob_Marley
    Closed Accounts Posts: 626 ✭✭✭Bob_Marley


    beauf wrote: »
    I think many would suggest inclusivity is the only way the church might survive. It seems the hierarchy has decided to go the opposite direction.

    The so called " inclusitivity " experiment didn't work very well for the Anglican Church in England, where their membership has now totally collapsed and continues to do so, whereas world wide, the number of Catholics continues to increase.


  • Options
    #30
    Avatar MIA
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,750 ✭✭✭Avatar MIA


    Bob_Marley wrote: »
    The so called " inclusitivity " experiment didn't work very well for the Anglican Church in England, where their membership has now totally collapsed and continues to do so, whereas world wide, the number of Catholics continues to increase.

    Worldwide Catholicism is on the increase in poor countries and in decline in more prosperous countries. Islam is growing worldwide, possibly because they are relatively poor even in the Western countries.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #31
    ezra_
    Registered Users Posts: 1,373 ✭✭✭ezra_


    Tenigate wrote: »
    I think one thing the Church does well is recognise and celebrates the differences between men and women. To open up male roles for the sake of inclusivity, and all that entails (gender quotas, transgenderism) would be the end of the Church.

    A few years back, I wouldn't have understood your post.

    However, having returned (of sorts) to the fold of religion, I found myself drawn to Anglicanism as opposed to the RC.

    I felt a hypocrite if I returned to mass, as my issues with the RC were with the RC as an institution, not with God and I found that the Anglican church was more aligned with my personal beliefs.

    However, having had this discussion with quite a few 'Catholics' (belief in God but issues with the institution and who would only attend a couple of masses per year), the general response is 'well I can't attend a morning service because... Protestants'.


Advertisement