Should man rule over womenfor women’s own good?
Scriptures, and other myth’s, say that God determinedthat men should rule over women. This gives form, --- in a demographic sense,---- to our common and society, and says that our demographic pyramid shouldhave a hierarchical shape and or form. This initiates tension and has Goddemonizing woman, as well as any notion of female equality with man.
His motive must be for thegood of women. Somehow!
After all, sanctity of thefamily is one of the main points of morality.
God was arguably right forhis time. Think in the barbaric way. Below the belt. Thank God that time is almost past. Women in our modern worlddo not need man’s dubious ape likehelp. I hope you agree. Be honest now with yourself be you male or female.
Men have dominated women longenough I think. To give them equality would be justice.
What do you think?
What would real men do?
What would real women demand?
Do men and women have what ittakes to be free?
Justice under law should begender and age neutral, with limits, but with a good spirit of assuringequality. We do not administer that justice. We only give it lip service. Men are not walking their talk. Neither arewomen.
In Gods timocracy, a place ofgovernment in which love of honor is the ruling principle. All honors go to theQueen and her children. A king’s first responsibility is to insure theveneration of his queen. Honor demands it. He accepts this burden and pleasurewisely. The Queen, as the Beta archetype is the life of the kingdom. Thearchetypal king’s duty is to raise woman’s position. That means that all menhave the same duty. That of not denying women equality and elevating her.
Men. Be good kings. You aremaking good just men look bad. Step up.
God wills it.
Women. Be good queens anddemand what is yours.
...................................
Regards
DL
Should man rule over womenfor women’s own good?
No.
This initiates tension and has Goddemonizing woman,
That's a leap of logic with out any support.
The gnostic position that the first woman was built out of filth and was a demon does, however, demonize women.
Women in our modern worlddo not need man’s dubious ape likehelp.
Help?
Your argument is about domination, not help.
Your argument is based on emotion and you seem to forget that the words you often use with out much thought become non sequiturs......the logic doesn't follow.
Men have dominated women longenough I think. To give them equality would be justice.
What do you think?
I think you've been living in the woods so long you've missed a lot of history and improvement. Sure, more can be accomplished, but the reality is .....humans operate on emotions that too often override logic ( like yourself ) and progress is slow and a struggle.
Face their responsibilities with honor.
What would real women demand?
Honor and share in those responsibilities.
Do men and women have what ittakes to be free?
Depends on what you mean by 'free'?
Free from responsibility?
Free from sharing?
Free from emotional relationships?
Being strictly free wouldn't include the promise of help that's associated with relationships......a trait you seem to deride.
You obviously aren't/haven't been married.
Justice under law should begender and age neutral, with limits, but with a good spirit of assuringequality. We do not administer that justice. We only give it lip service. Men are not walking their talk. Neither arewomen.
No legal system is perfect because humans are flawed to begin with, but justice in the US seems reasonable with flaws eventually addressed.
I've heard justice in Canada is also quite reasonable, too.
In Gods timocracy, a place ofgovernment in which love of honor is the ruling principle. All honors go to theQueen and her children. A king’s first responsibility is to insure theveneration of his queen.
Where do you get this shit?
In a timocracy the love of honor doesn't transfer to anyone.....it's a personal goal by the ruling aristocracy. To rule with honor. To rule and be honored.
And a timocracy has no democratic element.....it's built on an aristocratic format and equality isn't apparent.
So how the hell can you argue for equality in a system that's based upon a ruling elite?
The shit you get away with
Interesting comment by Kenneth Shouler, Ph.D.:
http://www.netplaces.com/philosophy/plato-dramatist-of-reason/political-doctrine.htm
Less desirable is a timocracy. Plato describes this as a state governed on principles of honor and military glory. Timocracy would result from the first stage of decline from an aristocracy. Timocracy represents a love of honor. The problem is that some ambitious members of a ruling class will be insatiably self-seeking and love their own honor more than the common good. In Platonic terms, the spirited parts of their souls will have usurped (over-powered) the role of reason. Timocracy begins a process whereby the irrational part assumes a progressively larger role. It is a short step from love of honor to the desire for wealth, which means allowing the appetites to rule.
Men. Be good kings. You aremaking good just men look bad. Step up.
God wills it.
Which one of your gnostic gods are you referring to?
