The Christian high schools that presumably would be hiring them might not care about the lack of accreditation. Students taught by those teachers would be primed to attend a distinguished college like Hyles-Anderson.
I can’t believe you don’t see the inherent contradiction in your two statements here.
Yes, men have all the power by decree but that doesn’t mean women are treated as inferior!
Seriously. You need to hang out with some nuns. I once worked for some nuns. They will tell you all about the Catholic Church’s patriarchal bullshit.
I think you can be a Christian man and not subscribe to those beliefs personally, but it’s 1000% baked into the doctrine and the kinds of men and women going to schools like this absolutely have internalized those traditional beliefs, or they wouldn’t be going to this school.
As for rates of abuse, I think you’d have to isolate certain subsets of Christianity to get good data, because there are a ton of Christian churches that reject patriarchy. So in no way would I say Christians are any more likely to be abusive. I would say Christians who have internalized patriarchal teachings are more likely to be abusive to women. I mean that’s just common sense. If you believe women are inferior, you’ll treat them worse than you treat men.
Just about every society in the history of mankind has been a patriarchy, to the extent that a valid argument could be made that it’s cooked into our DNA, and will likely never change. To say it’s “abusive” to women is something I can’t get on board with.
Patriarchy is by definition a form of oppression. The less power someone has, the more likely they are to be abused. This is obvious, right? Look at children. Girls are slightly more likely to be sexually abused than boys, but not by much. That’s because girls and boys as children are both about equal in their lack of power. This is also why mothers are just about as physically abusive toward their children as fathers. Whenever someone has power over another person, they are more likely to abuse that person. This isn’t some special characteristic of men, it’s human nature.
When you have a whole society in which one gender holds the majority of the power, the other gender is going to suffer.
How do you not see the glaring contradiction between your two sentences?
Well that’s not true because when women participate in political life their countries tend to have better outcomes for women. It can change and has, for the better. The idea that women should just suck it up because men ostensibly have an evolurionary instinct to oppress women is laughable.
And the gender which holds the majority of the power is less likely to recognize the inherent potential for suffering - they (a portion, not all) just consider it the natural order of things.
I just wouldn’t have thought that would be a controversial statement.
Welcome to Hyles-Anderson College!
There is no contradiction. The Church teaches that men and women have distinct roles to play within the Church, but neither as a group is elevated or inherently “better” than the other, and certainly not that women, as a group, should listen to men, simply by the fact of their sex. Yes, the leadership structure of the Church is patriarchal in so far as it is men, but the position of the sexes and the Church’s teaching on how they relate to each other within the laity of the Church is definitely not.
My niece is a nun. In speaking with her, let’s just say your experience is not universal.
I can tell you, as someone who was a member of a conservative Protestant college group for four years, and a member of a Fundamentalist church for four years: such denominations very strongly believe in the concept that “a wife shall submit to her husband in all things.” They certainly can and do also argue “but this doesn’t mean that women and men are unequal,” but in practice, it really does mean exactly that. They absolutely believe that men and women were created by God for very different purposes – and not just at church, but in every aspect of their lives.
In practice, it means that the husband is the decision-maker in the family (hypothetically, he should be consulting with his wife, but that often doesn’t happen much), and the breadwinner; preferentially, the wife shouldn’t be working outside the home, and her focus should be on maintaining the household and rearing children (hence, the “tradwife” curriculum at the fundie university in this thread).
Not always and everywhere. When I played Hysterium in my school’s production of A Funny Thing Happened On The Way To The Forum, it was the Home Ec class that fitted and tailored my Philia costume for the fake funeral.
Female bonsai.
It’s child abuse, is what it is.
Don’t be so quick to judge. kaylasmom was blind from birth (Retinitis Of Prematurity), and the visual centers of her brain never developed, so even if an eye transplant (or something analagous) had ever become available, it wouldn’t have given her sight. The kitten experiments quite possibly established that.
The Church? Where does the Church begin? Who “created” the world? For “HE” so loved it?
Yeah I think it’s THE patriarch. God.
Not convinced he’s anything but someone’s imaginary friend.
As soon as we put aside the religiosity, especially this fake MAGA version. (I still see Trump holding that Bible upside down, screaming crap from his awful pie hole). As soon as we get out from under the arbitrary rules we’ll be a happier people.
sure I recognize that there are certain denominations of Christianity who either officially or unofficially espouse that, not to mention certain other religions like Islam. I was speaking from the Catholic perspective where the leadership structure is certainly patriarchal, but not with respect to its laity.
The Catholic church abuses its lay women just fine. It routinely treats women as mere vessels for child-bearing whose lives are subordinate to fetuses. It routinely allows women to die in order to fulfill what Catholics believe is women’s biological purpose: to procreate. There’s a reason my husband, who was raised Catholic, was vehemently opposed to me giving birth at a Catholic hospital. Because he knew my life would not be prioritized if anything went wrong.
Anyway, I doubt many at this school are Catholic. It’s more evangelical in its culture. I have direct experience with evangelicals, having been one myself between approximately the ages of 11 and 17.
The messaging that women should submit to men is very strong in this culture, and it is instilled in young girls at an early age. Women are not only to submit to men but held responsible for keeping men sexually pure.
Fortunately for me I had a fairly egalitarian mother. She became a mechanical engineer in the 80s. You try to tell her there are certain things women shouldn’t do, oh boy.
Thus I didn’t fully absorb the messaging I was exposed to in church and Christian media. I did at least partly. At one point I was obsessed with abstinence and sexual purity. But it never occurred to me to put a man ahead of my career. At that age it’s hard to know what “submit to your husband” even means because you aren’t married and have no reference point, so it’s easy to go along with a vague instruction to trust your husband to make the right decisions. The implicit assumption is that your husband will naturally make the best decisions. There was no room in that narrative for what happens if you happen to disagree with your husband about what the best decision is, or he turns out to be an abusive asshole. They also never really squared the circle about how you were supposed to keep men sexually pure if you also were supposed to submit to them. (We were also taught that wives owed their husbands sexual gratification pretty much whenever they pleased.) What definitely wasn’t discussed was the meaning of consent or why the things you wanted were less important than what your husband wanted. Just another way women have been told to suck it up and take responsibility for men’s actions since time immemorial.
It’s indoctrination, plain and simple.
Agreed. Many Fundamentalist Protestant sects (and Hyles-Anderson is administered by an independent Fundamentalist Baptist church) believe that Catholics are not actually Christians; they refer to Catholics as “papists,” who put the word of the Pope ahead of the word of God (and also worship Mary).
I’m pretty sure that even a conservative Catholic would not be welcome at Hyles-Anderson.
Yes, for a while I was Pentecostal (later Baptist) and I was taught that Catholics are not Christian.