Except in the Bible.

In another topic, someone asked me why the Bible considered women to be property, or something to that effect. I don't remember exactly how I replied, but I have been thinking it deserved more attention. While you are reading this consider that Sir Francis Galton, Darwin's cousin, once conducted a study of what areas of Egland had the most beautiful women. He classified them as attractive, average, and loathsome. Now read about women in the Bible and tell me who treated them as property or second class citizens?

Eve, Genesis, 2-3, If you believe her story, she is arguably the most important woman who ever lived based on her actions. She was not treated as an inferior by Adam. He listened to her though he should not have.

Sarah, Genesis 24: 56And he said unto them, Hinder me not, seeing the LORD hath prospered my way; send me away that I may go to my master. 57And they said, We will call the damsel, and enquire at her mouth. 58And they called Rebekah, and said unto her, Wilt thou go with this man? And she said, I will go.

Some might say that Isaac bought Rebekah making her property. Wrong, read the above, she was asked if she were willing to marry Isaac.

Read the story of Rachel and Leah in Genesis. The family dynamic becomes very complicated due to the multiple marriages, which the Bible reports but never says that God condoned, However, though driven to distraction by the situation, far from treating the women as property, it seems as though the women are manipulating Jacob.

The deaths of Sarah, Rebekah, and Leah and Rachel are marked with respect similar with modern spousal passings showing they were not dismissed as mere property.

Shiphrah, and Puah. In Exodus Chapter 1, these two Hebrew midwives disobey Pharaoh’s orders. Brave women. Whose property were they?

Phaaoh’s daughter, took Moses from the river and raised him as her own son in defiance of her father. Was she property? Was she brave?

Further in Exodus, when Moses is on his way back to Egypt to lead the Jews out, he is stricken with a disease and nearly dies. It turns out that he has not obeyed God’s command, that his own son has not be circumcised. Zipporah performs the procedure in a manner which seems to indicate that she was behind the disobedience. Not property, very influential.

Deuteronomy, Zelophohed’s daughters. Petition Moses for inheritance. Intelligent and assertive women.

In Joshua, Rahab, the harlot. I suppose, if you were a citizen of Jericho you would consider Rahab a traitor, but she protected the Jewis spies, and became a member of the family tree of King David and Jesus.

Book of Judges, Jael invites the Canaanite general Sisera into her tent. He is running from the Jews and is exhausted. He takes her up on her invitation. She gives him some warm milk to drink and he falls asleep. Jael then takes a tent peg and secures Sisera to the ground by driving said peg into the ground through his temples.

Book of Judges, Deborah (means bee in Hebrew) prevails upon Barak to fight opressors but Barak is afraid and only agrees to take them on if Deborah goes with them into battle. She does and they are victorious. Property?

Ruth, read this love story and show me where Boaz treats her as property. He loves her and treats her kindly and with respect. It is true that he claims the right to marry her as a kinsman, but only after he has proposed and she has accepted according to their customs.

Esther, read this book. Talk about saving the world. Esther saves the entire Hebrew race.

Jezebel, possibly the great anti-heroine, She is evil personified, but she is powerful and feared and she rules Ahab.

And that’s just the Old Testament.

Name some secular women heroes.

I don't know, let's start here:


http://www.bellaonline.com/ArticlesP/art56457.asp

#1 Had not heard of her before so thank you for sharing.

#2 That's 1, I cited 15 examples of strong women whose stories are in the Bible. Got more? What about the Huba Huba book Interbane is fabricating?

#3 While I appreciate your sharing Hyaptia's story and expected no less than an attempt to discredit Christians with it, you should be academically honest enough to include full information, to wit:

Murder of Hypatia
"During his conflict with Orestes, Cyril was also involved in the murder of the female Platonist philosopher and head of the library of Alexandria, Hypatia, who was a frequent guest of Orestes and whose fields of study were considered heresy by Cyril. [6][7]

Newer studies show Hypatia's death as the result of a struggle between two Christian factions, the moderate Orestes, supported by Hypatia, and the more rigid Cyril. [8] According to lexicographer William Smith, "She was accused of too much familiarity with Orestes, prefect of Alexandria, and the charge spread among the clergy, who took up the notion that she interrupted the friendship of Orestes with their archbishop, Cyril."[cite this quote]

Others[who?] contend that neither the riots nor the murder of Hypatia can rightly be attributed to Cyril.[citation needed] In the case of the riots, he had intended only to lead a delegation to the Jews, but he lost control of the situation; and in the murder of Hypatia, a group of his followers acted on their own initiative without consulting him. Orthodox Christian scholar John Anthony McGuckin states: "At this time Cyril is revealed as at the head of dangerously volatile forces: at their head, but not always in command of them."[9]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyril_of_Alexandria

Perhaps you should try for a source with some credibility. Bellaonline, Vivian J. Woo, come on, please, that's pathetic.

I'll refrain from my pathetic references and just throw two more names out there for you. Of course at least one of them will spurn your scorn, but I'll remind you that you asked for "secular women heroes" and not "secular women heroes who Stah approves of".

Margaret Sanger and Elizabeth Cady Stanton

Were women ever only seen and not heard... I doubt it. There are already several women cited in this thread that testify to the contrary.

Speaking for myself, I'd love a woman that liked to talk about intelligent things that I'm also interested in - or new things that would spark my interest. Unfortunately, to find a woman that finds the same things I find interesting is rare.

The majority of the female population would probably not share similar interests. For a girl to talk continuously about the things she likes for the sake of my personal knowledge would put me in danger of boredom, and there's nothing worse than boredom with such a short life to live.

A female that's attractive could use her looks to her benefit and not put me at risk of boredom or risk a relationship buster by just refraining from speaking too much. Not very easy for some when silence seems a vacuum and all must be done to fill the infinite void with chit chat.

There's no real advantage to having a female that loves to talk. Chances are likely all the interesting dialogue has been spent and only mindless filler remains to annoy. Even if the conversation still remains good, there might one day be too much of a good thing and all conversation not meeting the standard might make someone wonder why it was ever good in the first place and was it worth it and where is my remote.

Most female initiated conversations that go wrong, I believe, happen at inopportune moments when a women must talk. Some of these situations include: when a man comes home from work, when a man is watching a favorite television show, when a man is thinking heavily on something important to him, and when a man is otherwise in a state where chatter is not welcome. Again, the void must be filled. This leads to males furrowing their brows, cocking their heads in a downward position, closing or squinting their eyelids, and slouching also occurs - In short, the man has a pulse but he is dying on the inside.

The nag is another reason some men wish to bolt a restrictor plate onto their wife's mouth. There is a skill, mastered by none save females, that somehow allows them to think of asking for the same thing at least 10 different ways, numerous different tones of voice and reflection, ear piercing/concentration exploding clarity, and sometimes by throwing their voice as in what might be heard in a surround sound movie theater. This skill makes a man want to melt himself and then light the liquid remains on fire just to escape.

Why isn't non-verbal communication enough? Men use non verbal coordination all the time to get things they need done accomplished. High 5, thumbs up, pat on the back, wink, wave, hold up index finger to say please hold on one second, brush air to say I farted, hold up hand and point to say gimme... there are countless non verbal communication methods men have and some are very, very difficult for females to read. The ones females have a problem with? All of them. They not only want to talk, they want YOU to talk too. WTF!!!!!

So do men prefer a lady that stays quiet most of the time? I doubt most men would give a straight answer. I think we know why.

Stah: "#2 That's 1, I cited 15 examples of strong women whose stories are in the Bible. Got more? What about the Huba Huba book Interbane is fabricating?"

Ahhhh! Heathen! My fabricated book is better than your fabricated book! From my fabricated book I can cite 16 examples of strong women off the top of my head, compared to your 15!

Is that why verses like 1 Timothy 2:11 (Let a woman learn in silence with full submission) have kept women out of the ministry for so long? And why the Catholic church refuses to ordain women priests?



I did not ask you why, I said they are property in the Bible. I am not saying that there are not amazing women in the Bible despite the circumstances. There have always been amazing women. And familial relationships are complicated. But it is obvious that women are not equal in the Bible.

First of all, women are rarely named in genealogies. They did not matter. The important part was the number of sons one had.

Abraham thought it was ok to lie about Sarah being his sister and allow some other man to just marry her. We don’t know what Sarah thought about this. It doesn’t say. That’s pretty silent.

When Sarah can’t have a son she does not think twice about handing Hagar over to Abraham to rape Hagar so that Sarah could have a son. Then Sarah treats Hagar so badly that she runs away. So the oppressed becomes the oppressor. And actually, it was common practice in that time for a woman to hand over a “slave” (property) to her husband if she could not have offspring.

In the story of Sodom and Gomorrah, which is oftentimes used to justify hatred of homosexual people, men from the town went to Lot’s door and demanded that he throw two angels who are in his house out to them. The men wanted to rape the angels. Lot says, don’t take them. Take my daughters. No problem with his daughters being raped. I read somewhere that the reason that he would have done this was because of hospitality. You would protect your guests before your own household. That is not completely satisfying though. He did not say take my sons. He said take my daughters.



Yeah, and women had a lot of choices in Biblical times. A career or a family, what do I do!?



I have read the story of Rachel and Leah. Jacob worked (currency) for seven years to marry Rachel. Then Laban tricks Jacob into marrying Leah instead. So, then Jacob works (more currency) for another seven years to marry Rachel.

Have you read about Jacob and Leah’s daughter? Very short story in Genesis 34:1-31. Dinah was raped and then her father and brothers tell the rapist (Shechem) that they will marry her to him if he and his household are circumcised. But Dinah’s male family was lying to Shechem and his family. As soon as Shechem and his family has been circumcised Dinah’s brothers went and killed Shechem and his family. We don’t know what Dinah thought. It is not in the Bible. Only Shechem’s thoughts and the men in Dinah’s family’s thoughts are in the Bible. More silence.

And this is all in Genesis!



At the time they were Pharaoh’s property. All of the Israelites were. That is what Exodus is about.



It does not say in Exodus that Pharaoh’s daughter took Moses in defiance of her father. This is not in the Bible.


Deuteronomy, Zelophohed’s daughters. Petition Moses for inheritance. Intelligent and assertive women.

Deuteronomy. This is where the official laws are laid out. As Robert said once before, wives are property. It does not say you shall covet your neighbor's spouse. It says wife. You shall not covet anything that “belongs” to your neighbor.

Rape laws are also property laws talked about in Deuteronomy. If a married woman does not cry out in a city then it means that she was not really assaulted and will be put to death along with her rapist. However, if she is a virgin then the rapist will pay (more currency) her father and marry her. It always sent shivers through my body to think of being forced to marry a man who had raped me.



Yeah, Esther. You mean the Esther who became King Ahasuerus’ wife because he had thrown out his first wife? He threw out his first wife because she refused to be a sex object before all of his friends. Then, in order to even talk to the King, Esther had to get all dressed up. It was not even clear that she would live through seeing him. But apparently her great beauty kept him from killing her. Charming.



And has been bad-mouthed for a very long time i.e. evil personified.

Extremely strong women in the Bible...in pretty crappy circumstances.



Unfortunately, too often. And violence has very often kept women silent. Look at the European witch trials or domestic violence in women's households. Did you know that it is actually more dangerous for a woman in her own household than it is for her to be walking alone on the street at night?



I think you are making a pretty broad generalization. There are many, many women on the planet. And they are all different.

SeeSpot, I find it amazing that Stah tries so hard to turn the Bible into something that it is not. My mother had an interesting background on this question. In the 1970s she was in a group called Christian Women Concerned, and edited a magazine called Magdalene. Their premise was that Jesus supported human liberation, and so should be understood as supporting women's liberation. The way mum put it was that she went from seeing the church as a potential site for liberation to understanding that it was the main bastion of patriarchal oppression. Truly, the misogyny of the pope is so lame - 'Jesus only had male disciples so only men can represent God' is their main argument for why women cannot give communion. This denial of the full humanity of women (seen through the bizarre prism of the Virgin Mary) has a ripple effect throughout Christian institutions.

For ease of reference, here are my recent related comments on this topic.
Stah provided the stunning rejoinder that the inclusion of "wives" as men's property in the Ten Commandments did not apply to all women.

The problem of sexism in the Bible presents an interesting case study of cultural evolution, which can be analysed against the framework of Dawkins' methods in The Selfish Gene:


And further, my comment dated 8 October from the Do You Consider yourself an atheist? thread:

Mr. President Camacho vomited:



1)
Women who come home from work do not want to have to talk about the man's day and listen to his gripes and groans. Especially when the dinner needs to be made, the kids homework needs to be completed, and the stinky underwear needs to be washed!

2)
Please, men, please watch football in silence, so women can have a few hours of peace!

3)
When does a man ever do important "thinking" without the need for an audience except when he is asleep with his hand down his pants and his mouth open snoring.

4)
If the man is in a state where chatter is not welcome, good grief, lock the door!

Oh, Pressy baby, get out of the stinky bars! You are either incapable of conversing with a stimulating woman, (doubt that) or you have yet to meet one.

You have to search for women of substance, the same way you have to search to find men of substance.

Not everybody can stimulate the mind. The trick is, don't stay with a woman who cannot stimulate your mind just because she stimulates other parts of you.

Ultimately, after you have been together for years, all the beauty of the skin fades away and you are left with eachother's minds. If you don't enjoy just being with your partner, then you should call it quits before you both waste years of your lives with people you are not compatable with.

I have chased my quota of beautiful women only to be disapointed to find their image a thin facade concealing idiocy. How disappointing. Move on. Find the beautiful AND smart one, like i did.

Failing that, find the smart one. It will be better for you in the long run.
If you do this right, you might just enjoy speaking with your spouse... imagine that!

I am just as picky about my buddies. There are just as many guys who arent worth the breathe of conversation.

Lot's of questions about the Bible.





Ok, I grant you that they are not equal. They are superior to men. After all, who was a biological parent to Jesus, a man (Joseph) or a woman (Mary)? Doesn't get any more important than that does it?



It was not that they did not matter, the claim to the throne passed through the father with the exception of the situation of the DOZ. Also, check out the geneology of Jesus, Rahab (a prostitute) is there and so is Ruth (a Moabitis)



The Bible is full of instances where men behaved shamfully. This is but one example, however, if you read the story you discover that Sarah's relationship to Abraham was discovered before she had sex and she and Abraham were sent away with gifts.[/quote]



Agreed, another example of some pretty sorry behavior by people. However, God promised to make the descendents of Abraham a great nation. Though Hagar was sent away, God did protect her and kept his word.



None of Lot's behavior was condoned by the Bible it is merely reported.




THe limited choices available to women were not unique to Jewish women at that time. I am not convinced that women have it better today. True, they have opportunities to have a career, but women are subjected to more pressue then men in our society because in addition to their careers, if they have one, they usually carry most of the burden of managing the home as well.






True, but Laban was supposed to provide a dowry for his daughters when they married. The dowy was like our social security. If something happened to Jacob, the widow(s) would not be destitute. At the very least, the value of the work (labor is not currency) Jacob did for Laban should have permitted each of the sisters to get a dowry but read the rest of the story to see how Laban treated his daughters and how they treated him (Rachel actually steals from him).



Yes, that is one of those stories that you read and you can't decide who were the bigger jerks.

In some ways I think her silence is better than if we knew what she thought about it. If she was angry about the murders she would be condoning her own rape. If she was happy about the murders she would be allied with deception.

What would you have said?


And this is all in Genesis!



Actually that is not what Exodus is all about. The deliverance from bondage is only a portion of the story of Exodus. The actual theme of Exodus is about redemption.

Also, you misapplied the term property. Yes, they were slaves to Pharaoh, but within that that, they were independent enough to disobey him. I don't know about you, but my propery exists to provide for my deeds and if it doesn't I get rid of it. In this case the midwives disobeyed a direct order from Pharaoh and instead of suffering were blessed.

Quote:
Phaaoh’s daughter, took Moses from the river and raised him as her own son in defiance of her father. Was she property? Was she brave?


Quote:
Phaaoh’s daughter, took Moses from the river and raised him as her own son in defiance of her father. Was she property? Was she brave?




Really, perhaps you are reading Interbane's translation. Mine reads:

Exodus
Chapter 1
22 Then Pharaoh gave this order to all his people: "Every boy that is born [b] you must throw into the Nile, but let every girl live."
Exodus 2
The Birth of Moses
1 Now a man of the house of Levi married a Levite woman, 2 and she became pregnant and gave birth to a son. When she saw that he was a fine child, she hid him for three months. 3 But when she could hide him no longer, she got a papyrus basket for him and coated it with tar and pitch. Then she placed the child in it and put it among the reeds along the bank of the Nile. 4 His sister stood at a distance to see what would happen to him.
5 Then Pharaoh's daughter went down to the Nile to bathe, and her attendants were walking along the river bank. She saw the basket among the reeds and sent her slave girl to get it. 6 She opened it and saw the baby. He was crying, and she felt sorry for him. "This is one of the Hebrew babies," she said.
7 Then his sister asked Pharaoh's daughter, "Shall I go and get one of the Hebrew women to nurse the baby for you?"
8 "Yes, go," she answered. And the girl went and got the baby's mother. 9 Pharaoh's daughter said to her, "Take this baby and nurse him for me, and I will pay you." So the woman took the baby and nursed him. 10 When the child grew older, she took him to Pharaoh's daughter and he became her son. She named him Moses, [a] saying, "I drew him out of the water."

Seems pretty straigt forward to me.



Vashti, the first wife's name was Vashti. I always admired her too, add her to the list of strong women mentioned in the OT. Our discussion isn't dedicated to the morality of the women involved. The point I am making with this discussion is that throughout the Bible, we meet strong women, women who are willing to risk everything, even death. In Esther's case, you sneer at her being saved by her beauty, but you are missing the point. She risked her life to save her people. To me that was a beautiful act whatever she looked like and if I were a woman I would be telling Esther's story to my daughters and sons.

Stah: "Ok, I grant you that they are not equal. They are superior to men."

More brilliant rationalizations come vomiting forth. I stopped reading here. I'm starting to realize why Nick so quickly labeled Stah a douchebag. You can't talk to someone who doesn't use their brain! It takes more energy than it's worth to unravel their rationalizations and show them their errors.

That's because you have no arguments left. God sent His Son through a woman. How much more proof do you need?

Stah: "That's because you have no arguments left. God sent His Son through a woman. How much more proof do you need?"

No, it is because you are immune to reason. You're an idiot. When I asked how you support your belief, you responded in ways which you physically support some organization! It's almost as if you didn't realize I was speaking of evidence and reasoning and even faith when the first two fail. When I showed you how your rationalization requires that you support your belief using faith instead of reason, you recoiled and claimed you "resolved" the particular biblical difficulty we were talking about. The words don't even match! You simply don't comprehend the counter arguments and their implications. I have plenty of arguments left, but why would I waste my time typing them for you when you're unable to comprehend them?

God sent his son through a woman. Good thing he didn't send him through giraffe, that would be awkward. Would it be more believable a fiction story if he 'poofed' into existence? Do you know what parsimony is? Of course not, forget I said anything.

Perhaps it is you who does not understand. I am not going to walk into carelessly set traps which relegate belief to individual faith, then shut and lock the door. There is more it than that and when I choose to use an example of the actions of a group of 'faithful' you can't even draw to parallel to the actions of the early church. That is precisely one of the ways that the early believers behaved. They shared. Those who were able helped the less fortunated. They organized to help widows and orphans who previously often had to fend for themselves. They visited those who were sick and in prison and generally made a nuisance of themselves by taking stands against common social and religious practices of the times. You were the one who tied by hands by dismissing everything in the Bible as irrelevant and fictitious.

Now go read a book and thank a Christian that you even know how to.