Divine misogyny

Some people, when speaking of god, will refer to him/her rather than just him. The idea seems to be that god doesn’t have a gender or that god may be a women or perhaps that god is both man and women.

Such wishful thinking will never take place on this blog. If god exists and has a gender he is most definitely a man. And he hates women:

If you claim to be a religious person, you are not a feminist, nor if you believe men and women are inherently equals can you claim to believe in the fundamental beliefs of any religion.
From the Quran:
4:34 Men are in charge of women, because Allah hath made the one of them to excel the other... So good women are the obedient, guarding in secret that which Allah hath guarded. As for those from whom ye fear rebellion, admonish them and banish them to beds apart, and scourge them.
From the Bible:
Leviticus 12:2 If a woman have conceived seed, and born a man child: then she shall be unclean seven days... 12:5 But if she bear a maid child, then she shall be unclean two weeks.
From the Laws of Manu (part of Hindu scripture):
Law 148, Chapter V In childhood a female must be subject to her father, in youth to her husband, when her lord is dead to her sons; A woman must never be independent.
In Buddhism, the Tibetan kind, we are yet to see a female Dalai Lama.

Despite all this, 72% of women in Australia belong to an organsied religion while the same can be said for only 67% of Australian men.

16 comments:

arthurvandelay said...

God, whoever he or she is, is an American!

Vaughan Smith said...

Hi AA, it's probably better to continue this here considering how often Craig updates his blog!

Could you give me the basis upon which you assume the equality of the sexes?

Drew said...

And female gods? Athena, aphrodite etc?

rabee said...

Well its generally accepted that in Islam god is without gender

http://www.masud.co.uk/ISLAM/ahm/gender.htm

Vaughan Smith said...

Still waiting for a response, AA...

Australian Atheist said...

Sorry, didn't know you still cared. You have a good memory.

It’s probably useful to define what we mean by equality.

Obviously men and women are not equal in their number of x chromosomes or in their physical strength.

But when it comes to their intelligence, their ability to hope for a better life, think, suffer, experience pleasure, and their ability to participate in political and economic, life men and women are equal and should be treated as such.

Vaughan Smith said...

But when it comes to their intelligence, their ability to hope for a better life, think, suffer, experience pleasure, and their ability to participate in political and economic, life men and women are equal and should be treated as such.

That is an assertion, yes, but why do these things necessarily mean that men and women are equal?

Australian Atheist said...

Well what do you mean by equal? Define it.

I have already said that men and women are not equal when it comes to their chromosomes or physical strength.

In what way do you believe them to be unequal? Is one gender smarter than another?

Vaughan Smith said...

By "equal" I mean what Allison Kilkenny says when she says that "men and women are inherently equals". I don't think I need to define it, as I'm using the quotation you supplied ;)

You are making statements that presuppose the equality of men and women. You criticise Christianity because you think that Christianity's God doesn't like women.

I ask you, in light of your naturalistic assertions (men and women are inequal in strength, x chromosomes, etc.), how do you make a statement like "men and women are inherently equal"? Is that something you (or Allison Kilkenny) can prove scientifically?

Also, I don't believe that men and women are unequal. I just believe that you can't have any scientific/naturalistic proof to back up your assertions.

Australian Atheist said...

I'm not really sure what you are talking about.

When one says "men and women are inherently equal" it is obvious that the word equal is refering to non-physical abilities.

Of course it can be scientifically tested. As legal and social barriers to female education and employment have been dismantled women are ding just as well as men.

Or we can look at the ability of men and women to suffer and experience pleasure. Here the genders are equal.

What exactly do you base your belief that men and women are equal on if not evidence?

Vaughan Smith said...

When one says "men and women are inherently equal" it is obvious that the word equal is refering to non-physical abilities.

Of course it can be scientifically tested.


So, science is able to test non-physical hypotheses?

Australian Atheist said...

Now you're misinterpreting the term 'non-physical'.

I was using the word physical to refer to the body not too the physical universe.

The term 'non-physical' was used to refer the mental capabilities - the mind.

Of course the mind is completely physical and so can be scientifically studied.

Vaughan Smith said...

The term 'non-physical' was used to refer the mental capabilities - the mind.

Of course the mind is completely physical and so can be scientifically studied.

I don't understand what you are saying here... so is the mind non-physical or physical?

Australian Atheist said...

The word physical has two common usages:

phys·i·cal
–adjective
1. of or pertaining to the body: physical exercise.
2. of or pertaining to that which is material: the physical universe; the physical sciences.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/physical

When I said 'non-physical' I was using it in the first way. Another example Physical Education at school.

But of course the body and the mind are physical in the second sense of the word. i.e. they are both material.

Labia Majora said...

BRAVO!

I'm always baffled by the farce of feminist ministers and gay republicans. God doesn't exist- female social-political-economical-linguistic subordination, and my month long cold streak proves it so.

Jonathan Baker said...

I would like to propose that we could say that men and women have equal dignity.

That said, we can also affirm that they are unequal (which simply means different if we accept my proposition) in so many other ways such as genetic makeup, ability to bear children, sexual characteristics etc...

God, of course, being non material, has no sexuality. However, the Christian God is Trinity, which implies relationship, and sheds some light on the need for the male/female duality to find fulfilment in each other to be complete. This completion is possible precisely because of the 'inequalities' in which each one seeks out some good found in the other.

It is no surprise that women tend to be more religious than men, given that relationship tends to be valued more by women. Despite the Jewish purity laws, which you mock (and don't understand) Christianity, in particular, has been particularly supportive of women (and the family) from the beginning, and conversions in the earliest centuries were often driven by the wives.