Christian Submissives: Brainwashed?

[FurryFury]

I totally dissagree. I think it's a pretty horrible practice akin to throwing a child who hasn't been taught how to swim into the ocean from a fishing boat. Those kids are going to be terrified when all they've known is how to live plain.

That MAKES most come back out of fear, guilt, and loss of everyone they know and love much of the time, but it's not a real being free thing because the kids are in no way ready or able to understand that freedom or the world at large.

I'd love to see some verifiable statistics on how many return, how many don't, how many end up in rehab, or jail or dead.

The Amish are wise in "Rumspringa" - they suspend Ordnung, which is their laws, for the young. At a certain age they're required to leave the community to see the world, and then choose.

Amish children CHOOSE being Amish adults.

 

[JMohegan]

I really wouldn't think so. I feminism is not really anti Christian, anti Muslim, or anti Zoroastrian even. It's not about the religion, religions don't brainwash people, it's individuals.

I mean, I know a ton of decent Catholics, friendly Jews, and female rights supporting Muslims. The issue is the individuals or group of individuals that form a religious group. For example, a dear friend of mine is both catholic and lesbian... not sure why but she is. Now she by no means fits the catholic stereotype, though I'm pretty sure her partner and her don't use condoms. On the other side, my uncle, who is also catholic, pressured his son into joining the priesthood after he got a DUI. He also made it clear to my cousins that they are by no means to talk with me or interact with me lest I corrupt them with my ideals.

So I think it wholly inaccurate to say Christians brainwash people, Christianity encompasses a wide range of sub religions like Quakers (who will freely marry Gay and Lesbian couples). I think it's the mothers, fathers, family members, religious leaders, and figures of authority who are responsible for any conditioning. It's important to draw a distinction between religions and people who do things in the name of their religion.

There is no such thing as a "religion" involving more than one believer, without people indoctrinating others in that religion's ideas.

Nobody is born believing in the Virgin birth, the Trinity, and whatnot. Those ideas are taught.

Similarly, nobody is born believing that homosexual urges are "disordered" and that people with those urges are "called to chastity" because homosexual acts are "sinful." Those ideas are taught, too.

Lots of people refer to themselves as Catholic, and pick and choose among the teachings of that religion. That's fine, of course, but the "Catholic stereotype" of intolerance exists for a reason. It exists because of the actual teachings of the Catholic Church.

I have a problem with use of the term "brainwashing," in the context of a discussion of church teachings, such as the Baptist admonition that "a wife is to submit graciously to the servant leadership of her husband." Either *all* of a church's teachings are "brainwashing," or none of them are.

A separate question is whether or not specific church teachings promote abuse.

 

[Recidiva]

I totally dissagree. I think it's a pretty horrible practice akin to throwing a child who hasn't been taught how to swim into the ocean from a fishing boat. Those kids are going to be terrified when all they've known is how to live plain.

That MAKES most come back out of fear, guilt, and loss of everyone they know and love much of the time, but it's not a real being free thing because the kids are in no way ready or able to understand that freedom or the world at large.

I'd love to see some verifiable statistics on how many return, how many don't, how many end up in rehab, or jail or dead.

I spent a lot of summers in Amish country.

A lot of Amish people have enough exposure to "English" culture to be vaguely amused by it and think it's all just sort of silly. Wasteful. Meaningless. Not like a good well-grown carrot. Hardly pining to leave.

There are a lot of healthy people in there who just like good shoofly pie and gardening and can't imagine not getting back home to it, and their extended family who is always there for them.

There's the word verifiable. If you don't trust an Amish person's opinion on it, who you gonna trust?

This is the essence of the question of the thread. If you're opposed to religion or religious practices, can you ever make a consensual choice regarding them? Or are you going to lack education and choices because you oppose the thing entirely? Is being OVERLY educated in the wrong ways qualified? Is that brainwashed also?

If you're opposed to a certain practice or religion, can you ever admit any part of it, much less a majority part of it, can be a good choice for anyone?

Or given the choice, would you eliminate the religions entirely?*

I think in the case of this thread, I would postulate that the feminist tenet expressed here despises Christianity and wants to eliminate it entirely as completely destructive in all ways and not allowing that anything, ever, good, has come from it.

* Imply disclaimer. Not accusing you of these thoughts. I'm thinking them myself and writing them down.

 

[HarlotMinx]

There is no such thing as a "religion" involving more than one believer, without people indoctrinating others in that religion's ideas.

Ahhhh but theirs a flip side to that statement. All churches must indoctrinate others into their beliefs, not all people in a church are necessarily indoctrinated however.

Lots of people refer to themselves as Catholic, and pick and choose among the teachings of that religion. That's fine, of course, but the "Catholic stereotype" of intolerance exists for a reason. It exists because of the actual teachings of the Catholic Church.

Hmmm I think this is still an argument of individuals. I think in the case of the catholic church, their are priests who are quite tolerant and kind but the way it's set up they are likely to not move up within the church. So the people who end up in the church leadership all have a shared set of values. It's like... a government has a corrupt leader, does that make the entire government corrupt? Should the everyone in the government be kicked out? When I came out as bisexua and a few other thingsl I received therapy from a catholic priest (I went to him of my own choice and I went for advice on how to break it to my family), he was extremely kind and encouraging.

I have a problem with use of the term "brainwashing," in the context of a discussion of church teachings, such as the Baptist admonition that "a wife is to submit graciously to the servant leadership of her husband." Either *all* of a church's teachings are "brainwashing," or none of them are.

I think brainwashing itself is a bad term, a more appropriate one would be conditioning and frankly YES all churches condition members. YES all governments, organizations, and families condition us. If you have more than one person in a single place, one of them is trying to condition the other. Now, that said... not all conditioning is bad. Churches do not necessarily condition is members to be intolerant, sexist, bigots. They have some bad teachings and some good teachings.

I think the big point of this conversation is about churches conditioning women to be subservient to men... really though is it just the church? I think culture at large tries to condition that into women, the church being just an extension. Now I'll admit that their are plenty of sub cultures that promote female rights but really, almost every society and culture in the world has a tendency of placing women in a different social standing than men and often it's bellow that of men. I think we just take more notice of it in some religious organizations than we do in society at large because it stands out to us more. When it comes to general society, it happens so often that we think it normal. It's when we see it in someone else's religion that it becomes a problem.

I find it funny that people always feel women in some other religion need to be educated and saved from the religious practices of that religion but those very people we want to save feel the same about us. Religion isn't the problem, we're the problem. Religions are just like any other society, it's formed by a group or sub group of people who share common beliefs or values.

 

[FurryFury]

I have no problems with the Amish, or any other religion, if adults that know real choices, choices that are not demonized for them wish to participate consensually.

However, in general I think religions are pretty horrible and meant mainly to control people (particularly women and children) and/ or cow them into accepting whatever shit is in their lives. For those that have a lot of things it is also often meant to pry some portion of those things away and make the organization of the religion more wealthy.

I personally think we'd be better off without religion. Watching religion be brought up as part of political campaigns and ceremonies is quite sickening to me. Separation of church and state is clearly not really in place. Religion has been the cause of a great deal of horrors IMO.

Seeing endless people, from movie stars, to sports figures, to the indigent praise their God is just mind boggling as well. I don't really understand why people need something else besides, what they know to exist in order to, make life make sense for them.

But, there are quite a few people I know, who have told me going to church keeps them from killing their families and other horrors. To those people I say, keep going to church then! Please!

I also think churches provide a great deal of charity and socialization which can be helpful to many. I know I have appreciated free rooms for Girl Scout events and such.

Yes, I am a feminist too but I'm not certain those things (wanting to wipe out religion and being a feminist) fit hand in glove. I'd guess there are quite a few religious feminist though some statistics on that would be interesting.

Right now I'm reading Parable of the Talents by Octavia Butler. I like her fictional belief system in the book pretty well. There are things I believe in.
They just don't include some omnipotent yet, often seemingly, uncaring, "God."

If I were to worship a "God" that "God" would have to be more logical and tolerant, than most religions seem to expose. Other wise I really don't care if a God or many exist, if they are intolerant, and cruel, I want no part of them.

 

[Recidiva]

Ahhhh but theirs a flip side to that statement. All churches must indoctrinate others into their beliefs, not all people in a church are necessarily indoctrinated however.

Hmmm I think this is still an argument of individuals. I think in the case of the catholic church, their are priests who are quite tolerant and kind but the way it's set up they are likely to not move up within the church. So the people who end up in the church leadership all have a shared set of values. It's like... a government has a corrupt leader, does that make the entire government corrupt? Should the everyone in the government be kicked out? When I came out as bisexua and a few other thingsl I received therapy from a catholic priest (I went to him of my own choice and I went for advice on how to break it to my family), he was extremely kind and encouraging.

I think brainwashing itself is a bad term, a more appropriate one would be conditioning and frankly YES all churches condition members. YES all governments, organizations, and families condition us. If you have more than one person in a single place, one of them is trying to condition the other. Now, that said... not all conditioning is bad. Churches do not necessarily condition is members to be intolerant, sexist, bigots. They have some bad teachings and some good teachings.

I think the big point of this conversation is about churches conditioning women to be subservient to men... really though is it just the church? I think culture at large tries to condition that into women, the church being just an extension. Now I'll admit that their are plenty of sub cultures that promote female rights but really, almost every society and culture in the world has a tendency of placing women in a different social standing than men and often it's bellow that of men. I think we just take more notice of it in some religious organizations than we do in society at large because it stands out to us more. When it comes to general society, it happens so often that we think it normal. It's when we see it in someone else's religion that it becomes a problem.

I find it funny that people always feel women in some other religion need to be educated and saved from the religious practices of that religion but those very people we want to save feel the same about us. Religion isn't the problem, we're the problem. Religions are just like any other society, it's formed by a group or sub group of people who share common beliefs or values.

I love this post.

I agree, and the funny thing is people outside churches don't necessarily get the whole individuality thing of human participation. How Joe over there doesn't follow this particular tenet and we all get that, and don't ask him unless you want to see the scars or get some of your own. Churchgoing adherence to literal tenets 100% is about the same as autism rates.

The diversity of churchgoers and their ability to adapt, lie, change things to suit themselves and just basically manage to be an unruly rabble in private if not in public...well, it's enough to think people need a leader, frankly.

I think men condition men and women and women condition men and women. The folks who are good at conditioning do it.

The folks that resist conditioning get approving glances for being a rebel or dirty stares and ignored, and you don't ask them about unless you want to see or get the scars.

I've never felt as if I have an actual, inherent differential in social standing. I've always found the concept to be entirely foreign. I've had men and women try to convince me I do, though. I deal with them in the same way I deal with those attempting to condition me on the subject. "That's your opinion."

Throw history at me and I'll throw lots of kick-ass women who didn't listen either, right back at them. Those women existed all through time. Therefore there's no reason why I can't do exactly the same.

 

[Recidiva]

I have no problems with the Amish, or any other religion, if adults that know real choices, choices that are not demonized for them wish to participate consensually.

However, in general I think religions are pretty horrible and meant mainly to control people (particularly women and children) and/ or cow them into accepting whatever shit is in their lives. For those that have a lot of things it is also often meant to pry some portion of those things away and make the organization of the religion more wealthy.

I personally think we'd be better off without religion. Watching religion be brought up as part of political campaigns and ceremonies is quite sickening to me. Separation of church and state is clearly not really in place. Religion has been the cause of a great deal of horrors IMO.

Seeing endless people, from movie stars, to sports figures, to the indigent praise their God is just mind boggling as well. I don't really understand why people need something else besides, what they know to exist in order to, make life make sense for them.

But, there are quite a few people I know, who have told me going to church keeps them from killing their families and other horrors. To those people I say, keep going to church then! Please!

I also think churches provide a great deal of charity and socialization which can be helpful to many. I know I have appreciated free rooms for Girl Scout events and such.

Yes, I am a feminist too but I'm not certain those things (wanting to wipe out religion and being a feminist) fit hand in glove. I'd guess there are quite a few religious feminist though some statistics on that would be interesting.

Right now I'm reading Parable of the Talents by Octavia Butler. I like her fictional belief system in the book pretty well. There are things I believe in.
They just don't include some omnipotent yet, often seemingly, uncaring, "God."

If I were to worship a "God" that "God" would have to be more logical and tolerant, than most religions seem to expose. Other wise I really don't care if a God or many exist, if they are intolerant, and cruel, I want no part of them.

You're awesome and I agree with this.

I'm not at all saying "All Feminists" - just the feminist that wrote the article that started the thread. I appreciate your perspective and honesty.

I really do believe in diversity. So much so that groups that tend to be monolithic eventually have to accomodate it or live in denial. Just like regular societies trying to live up to any standard.

 

[JMohegan]

Ahhhh but theirs a flip side to that statement. All churches must indoctrinate others into their beliefs, not all people in a church are necessarily indoctrinated however.

I'm not sure I understand what you're saying here.

Are you saying that some church attendees or members believe *none* of the teachings of that church?

Hmmm I think this is still an argument of individuals. I think in the case of the catholic church, their are priests who are quite tolerant and kind but the way it's set up they are likely to not move up within the church. So the people who end up in the church leadership all have a shared set of values. It's like... a government has a corrupt leader, does that make the entire government corrupt? Should the everyone in the government be kicked out? When I came out as bisexua and a few other thingsl I received therapy from a catholic priest (I went to him of my own choice and I went for advice on how to break it to my family), he was extremely kind and encouraging.

As I said, I agree that some people who ID as Catholic pick and choose among the teachings of that church. This could certainly apply to priests as well.

I'm not suggesting that anyone be kicked out. That's none of my business.

I think brainwashing itself is a bad term, a more appropriate one would be conditioning and frankly YES all churches condition members. YES all governments, organizations, and families condition us. If you have more than one person in a single place, one of them is trying to condition the other. Now, that said... not all conditioning is bad. Churches do not necessarily condition is members to be intolerant, sexist, bigots. They have some bad teachings and some good teachings.

I think the big point of this conversation is about churches conditioning women to be subservient to men... really though is it just the church? I think culture at large tries to condition that into women, the church being just an extension. Now I'll admit that their are plenty of sub cultures that promote female rights but really, almost every society and culture in the world has a tendency of placing women in a different social standing than men and often it's bellow that of men. I think we just take more notice of it in some religious organizations than we do in society at large because it stands out to us more. When it comes to general society, it happens so often that we think it normal. It's when we see it in someone else's religion that it becomes a problem.

I find it funny that people always feel women in some other religion need to be educated and saved from the religious practices of that religion but those very people we want to save feel the same about us. Religion isn't the problem, we're the problem. Religions are just like any other society, it's formed by a group or sub group of people who share common beliefs or values.

I was raised without religion of any kind, but indoctrinated/conditioned/inculcated with a host of values and ideas - most of which I strive to adhere to, and feel strongly about, to this day.

I agree with what you say about the bottom line for this conversation, though I do see a distinction between an overt instruction to obedience and the more subtle messages conveyed by society at large.

 

[Recidiva]

Are you saying that some church attendees or members believe *none* of the teachings of that church?

This is absolutely true. Many people go to church to please their parents, spouse or community.

I even had a man try to talk me into converting me so that when we were married he could use it for business networking.

"Look, just take the deal, okay? You don't have to believe, just go. Just look like you give a damn, all right? The worst thing that happens is we get into Heaven together and that wouldn't suck, right?"

I didn't marry him. I don't like Church or golf for networking purposes.

 

[FurryFury]

Wow! Thanks! I'm glad we agree.

I was raised in a very restrictive religion. I remember how it felt to be in it and have nearly total faith.

I remember how it felt when others around me said or preached one thing but did another.

I remember how it felt when I was in fifth grade and my parents relationship and lives fell apart leading to freedom. I've been very happy to have that freedom. This is where a lot of my feelings about religion comes from.

You're awesome and I agree with this.

I'm not at all saying "All Feminists" - just the feminist that wrote the article that started the thread. I appreciate your perspective and honesty.

I really do believe in diversity. So much so that groups that tend to be monolithic eventually have to accomodate it or live in denial. Just like regular societies trying to live up to any standard.

 

[HarlotMinx]

The reaaaaaaaaaaaaaally big problem with saying feminist do something or act some way is that feminism is seperated into 5 waves of feminism and each of them has ENTIRELY different ideas. I know 3rd wave feminists who get in a fit when talking about women rights with 4th wavers. So the key thing to do when reading a feminist argument is to understand where a feminist is coming from. It's like talking to a Hasidic Jew and a Reform Jew about gay rights. Both may quote the Torah but they are NOT going to give the same opinion.

 

[JMohegan]

This is absolutely true. Many people go to church to please their parents, spouse or community.

I even had a man try to talk me into converting me so that when we were married he could use it for business networking.

"Look, just take the deal, okay? You don't have to believe, just go. Just look like you give a damn, all right? The worst thing that happens is we get into Heaven together and that wouldn't suck, right?"

I didn't marry him. I don't like Church or golf for networking purposes.

You'd think, once they became adults, that nonbelievers would have the balls to stop going.

 

[Recidiva]

The reaaaaaaaaaaaaaally big problem with saying feminist do something or act some way is that feminism is seperated into 5 waves of feminism and each of them has ENTIRELY different ideas. I know 3rd wave feminists who get in a fit when talking about women rights with 4th wavers. So the key thing to do when reading a feminist argument is to understand where a feminist is coming from. It's like talking to a Hasidic Jew and a Reform Jew about gay rights. Both may quote the Torah but they are NOT going to give the same opinion.

Right, monolithic mindsets don't last long without reform splinter groups

 

[Recidiva]

You'd think, once they became adults, that nonbelievers would have the balls to stop going.

It's not about balls. It's really about not caring. It's less trouble to go and to have your mom cook Sunday dinner and your wife sleep with you, than take a stand and go hungry and sexless tonight.

Some people go BECAUSE they don't care enough to fight it and they just don't listen anyway. It's just another social obligation.

 

[rosco rathbone]

The analogy had nothing to do with brains, and everything to do with genetics. We humans have been practicing selective breeding for basically the history of our existence. Say you find blondes attractive, and tend to go for them as sexual partners. That's selective breeding.

In this case, they are not allowed to socialise with those outside their faith. This means limiting the pool of possible breeders. Livestock and pet breeders do this all the time to help ensure the purity of a breed line. Bad seeds are culled from the society, such as VelvetDarkness' case in which she was shunned for getting an actual education. Again, breeders do the same when they discover an animal that does not possess the proper traits such as coat colour, temperment, size, etc.

Limiting the breed pool to prevent certain traits and emphasise others is common across all sorts of closed societies.

Of course, you could explain the uniform behavior traits in a small closed society just as easily-much more easily, actually-by nurture and culture. There's definitely a genetic component to behaviour, but humans, being much more complex and self-aware, can't be compared to livestock bred for temperament.

 

[HarlotMinx]

Of course, you could explain the uniform behavior traits in a small closed society just as easily-much more easily, actually-by nurture and culture. There's definitely a genetic component to behaviour, but humans, being much more complex and self-aware, can't be compared to livestock bred for temperament.

I'd like to think so but I often question the reality of that...

 

[rosco rathbone]

Anyway, I won't imply, but will state that it is my opinion that selective breeding in limited populations isn't selective, which implies lots of choices. It just doesn't have many options. It's default inbreeding.

Great point. Didn't even occur to me.

 

[JMohegan]

It's not about balls. It's really about not caring. It's less trouble to go and to have your mom cook Sunday dinner and your wife sleep with you, than take a stand and go hungry and sexless tonight.

Some people go BECAUSE they don't care enough to fight it and they just don't listen anyway. It's just another social obligation.

For me personally, this would be an issue of integrity, i.e. adherence to moral and ethical principles. Which frequently, if not always, takes balls.

Metaphorically speaking, of course.

And I don't want to fuck someone who doesn't respect my ethical principles anyway. She can go fuck an actual believer, or herself.

 

[Recidiva]

Of course, you could explain the uniform behavior traits in a small closed society just as easily-much more easily, actually-by nurture and culture. There's definitely a genetic component to behaviour, but humans, being much more complex and self-aware, can't be compared to livestock bred for temperament.

I think humans also have longer life spans and build up resentment to things cumulatively and don't necessarily flush it out of their systems. Sort of an exposure allergy. Might not show up until the fiftieth time or the four thousandth time they encounter something they resent.

One day they tend to break one way or the other, either their willingness to fight or "I AM NOT FUCKING SPENDING ONE MORE DAY IN THE CUBICLE" riot.

 

[rosco rathbone]

I'd like to think so but I often question the reality of that...

I love the idea of a submissive breeding farm, with those pens to hold the cows tightly so they can't move around when I come around and sew my seed. I mean, the girls. Actually, that would be a dom breeding farm. Hm. *scratches head*

 

[Recidiva]

For me personally, this would be an issue of integrity, i.e. adherence to moral and ethical principles. Which frequently, if not always, takes balls.

Metaphorically speaking, of course.

And I don't want to fuck someone who doesn't respect my ethical principles anyway. She can go fuck an actual believer, or herself.

Yeah, you and I are similar in that manner.

So therefore I insist on honesty and straightforwardness and there are probably four people on the planet that can stand being in close quarters with me for any length of time before begging to shun me.

Unfortunately for my children, they're not two of them. They try, but the poor things.

"Mom! I do NOT want to learn about sex! Do NOT give me a book. EW! Too much information!"
"But you need to know these things."
"No I don't! No I don't! I like being ignorant, okay?"

I swear, she resented me for telling her that the shots at the doctor were going to hurt. "Couldn't you just lie to me? ONCE? Don't you love me?"

 

[rosco rathbone]

I think humans also have longer life spans and build up resentment to things cumulatively and don't necessarily flush it out of their systems. Sort of an exposure allergy. Might not show up until the fiftieth time or the four thousandth time they encounter something they resent.

One day they tend to break one way or the other, either their willingness to fight or "I AM NOT FUCKING SPENDING ONE MORE DAY IN THE CUBICLE" riot.

I'm just resisting any flat simplifications. Homburg didn't hedge his claims at all, he just said "if you like blondes, it's cause you were bred for it" and that's highly controversial at best.

 

[HarlotMinx]

I love the idea of a submissive breeding farm, with those pens to hold the cows tightly so they can't move around when I come around and sew my seed. I mean, the girls. Actually, that would be a dom breeding farm. Hm. *scratches head*

What, you don't think they already exist? I'll have you know I come from a long line of slaves. I've been bred for the perfect look, demeanor, and milk production (don't ask). Why my mother was sold for a record price on the slave livestock market!

 

[Evil_Geoff]

St. Paul assumed a LOT of love for the Church or really didn't care much for women.

Paul had a LOT of issues. And thoroughly believed that the Second Coming would occur during HIS lifetime... That's why there's all the stuff about being celibate, and not wasting time and energy with sex and relationships and children. "Why get married and have a family when Christ is coming back tomorrow and the End Times will be upon us? Get out there and SPREAD THE WORD!"

It's great motivation to evangelize, but not so much for the how to build real relationships.

 

[rosco rathbone]

What, you don't think they already exist? I'll have you know I come from a long line of slaves. I've been bred for the perfect look, demeanor, and milk production (don't ask). Why my mother was sold for a record price on the slave livestock market!

I don't go to enough munches. No one ever told me about the breeding farms.

I guess doms would run the farm, but the studs would be submissive males. Or maybe submission is a trait transmitted on the mother's chromozones only.