Re: Courage, except in the face of women
Jul 03, 1998 06:10 AM
by Pam Giese
> From: "Annette Rivington" <libidium@globalserve.net>
> Date: Wednesday, July 01, 1998 11:10 PM
> Subject: Re: Courage, except in the face of women
>Pam Giese wrote:
>> by pregnancy and chilbirth) was abstinance or celibacy. Even in our
modern
>> culture, birthing and raising children binds a woman economically to a
man
>> (if she accepts the responsibility. There are exceptions of course, but
>> statistically women who "go it alone" pay the price economically).
from Annette: Actually, Pam, I disagree with you here. It would be very
interesting to see the statistics on the economic success of mothers who had
either never been conjoined with a male or who had left a man who was
keeping her and the kids in poverty!
>
I'm speaking here of women with children. Long term studies that follow the
economic status of women with children after divorce (who do not re-marry)
show that less than 10% improve their income even 5-7 years after the
divorce. Not only does income tend to drop, but alcoholism and drug use
tend to rise, especially in the lower income strata. Single mothers have
and continue to be amoung the poorest demographic groups in the US.
>> It's also only been in the last 100 years or so that
>> unless a woman came from a wealthy family, her only hope of learning to
read
>> or be educated was to seek admittance to a religious order.
>From Annette:>Once again, I posit that any woman of any economic situation
in any time could educate herself or find education "in letters". It was
recognition
>and acceptance that was not forthcoming. But what loss? When it was
>obviously necessary to burn women who had knowledge that mere letters
>could never provide, what great gain these letters?
>
It sounds like you come from a different social class than I do. My
grandmother was illiterate, having been raised in a family that saw no
benefit to educate girls. Even when I was growing up in the '60s people
openly talked about it being "wrong" or "unwise" for girls to excell in
school or focus on careers.
>Generally, I
>> think women are more able to channel chthonic energies than men and the
ebb
>> and flow of those energies are hard for men to deal with. One of the
>> reasons many women find Wicca and neo-paganism attractive is that the
>> emphasis on the moon and earth cycles are verified by our own bodies,
thus
>> it's easy to assimilate the "as above so below" rhythm.
>Oh Pam, I wish this was so. Then I could feel a little bit normal and
>feminine :)
>
Annette:IMHO, men have all the same rhythms and capabilities as women. What
>frustrates me is how they chose to shut it off and try to create a world
>in which it is of no significance or import.
>Appreciate your thought provoking comments.
>Annette
>
We just disagree here. I don't believe men have the same rhythms as
women --as vice versa. While I seen emotionally uninhibited Cancer men pour
out themselves in a cathatic release, it is a distinctly different than your
average woman on a PMS tirade. Despite the tone of this email, I don't
believe one is superior to the other, but there are differences. I
appreciate the differences. The soul has no sex, but the body does and that
shapes the ego and the collection of experiences we gather in this
incarnation.
Pam
pgiese@snd.softfarm.com
"Blessed are the cracked, for they shall let in the light..."
[Back to Top]
Theosophy World:
Dedicated to the Theosophical Philosophy and its Practical Application
