FishEaters Traditional Catholic Forums

Full Version: Bp W column, 7.4.09
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26
(07-05-2009, 03:01 PM)didishroom Wrote: [ -> ]so a woman who is physically strong is not "un-feminine."

We are not talking about natural physical strength or physical strength demanded by a certain type of work, but the physical strength that comes from pumping iron and hitting the gym religiously. A woman who is buff and cut up with bulging muscles like a man is disgusting and unfeminine. Since you mentioned the first lady of the U.S., it is pretty disgusting how buff her arms are. That just looks unfeminine and sick.
(07-05-2009, 03:01 PM)didishroom Wrote: [ -> ]If it was sooo unnatural for women to engage in sports then I doubt they would be very popular. Your opinion, erroneous as it is, that women are not competitive or into sports by nature is just that:your opinion. It is not Catholicism and I am very tired of people trying to pass it off as if it is. 
The fact is that women's sports really are unpopular. They have dismal followings. Where in Catholic culture has there ever been female professional sports? In the centuries of old Christendom and Catholic Europe there was no such thing. It is your opinion that needs a basis in Catholicism and Catholic history. Catholic teaching has always been clear on the inequality of the sexes, their different roles, and complementarity.
Quote:We are not talking about natural physical strength or physical strength demanded by a certain type of work, but the physical strength that comes from pumping iron and hitting the gym religiously. A woman who is buff and cut up with bulging muscles like a man is disgusting and unfeminine. Since you mentioned the first lady of the U.S., it is pretty disgusting how buff her arms are. That just looks unfeminine and sick.
No one was mentioning what you seem to be implying-body builders. And there is nothing sick about Michelle Obama's arms-just the media's attention on them.



Quote:The fact is that women's sports really are unpopular. They have dismal followings. Where in Catholic culture has there ever been female professional sports? In the centuries of old Christendom and Catholic Europe there was no such thing. It is your opinion that needs a basis in Catholicism and Catholic history. Catholic teaching has always been clear on the inequality of the sexes, their different roles, and complementarity.
No, people just don't like to watch women playing sports because they are less strong then men and are not as entertaining. However their entertainment value is irrelevant to a discussion on the intrinsic morality of women playing sports.

When has there been male professional sports?
(07-05-2009, 02:49 PM)flannerywannabe Wrote: [ -> ]I just find the choice of focus funny and strange. I don't think that it's a "de-naturing" if an unmarried female athlete's cycles become irregular or temporarily cease during the season of her life when she is playing.

Yet birthrate always diminishes among populations where athleticism among girls is introduced. Dying-out population segments in the West have high female athleticism. Fecund population segments in the West have low female athleticism. Is there a connection?
(07-05-2009, 02:49 PM)flannerywannabe Wrote: [ -> ]Also, to choose to focus on women's professional sports as though they were a major, irredeemable cause of the problems in Western culture is simply laughable.

Of course there are many causes of Western decline. Female athleticism is probably more of a symptom than a cause.
(07-05-2009, 02:49 PM)flannerywannabe Wrote: [ -> ]Finally, just the tiny percentage of women for whom this issue is a concern in the first place... *shrug* Sure, it's a problem if vast percentages of women in a society are delaying marriage and childbearing until it's nearly too late, as indeed they now are in the West. Let's address that problem.

Yes and let us not be afraid to look at the realities. Man and women are not the same. They are not "equal" in anything besides worth before God. Women are in fact superior any many irreplaceable ways. Let us not continue to deprive society of that superiority.
Certainly, the women body-builders are revolting, but so are the men! Now, merely having defined muscles is not a sign of unfemininity but of health. Pumping iron (insofar as one can) and going to the gym can assist in that. That's why, as I say, you'll find that many trad mothers belong to gyms: the all-around muscle training keeps the whole body strong and prevents over-development of some muscles at the expense of others.
(07-05-2009, 03:32 PM)didishroom Wrote: [ -> ]No one was mentioning what you seem to be implying-body builders. And there is nothing sick about Michelle Obama's arms-just the media's attention on them.
Athletes have impressive muscular physical bodies, which are natural to the male body, but not for the female body. Body builders are extreme and they do it for competition or show, but that is another topic.  What I described fits the description of professional athletes and not just body builders.

There is something wrong and sick about Obama's arms. That is why the media pays such attention to them. They are odd. Women are just not supposed to look like that. The media wouldn't pay attention to her arms if they were like the arms of millions of other women across this country.
(07-05-2009, 03:32 PM)didishroom Wrote: [ -> ]No, people just don't like to watch women playing sports because they are less strong then men and are not as entertaining. However their entertainment value is irrelevant to a discussion on the intrinsic morality of women playing sports.

When has there been male professional sports?
It is just not entertainment that keeps people away from female professional sports. It is a natural gut reaction and a natural distate for it. It can be felt and recognized to be unnatural. There is a recognition that this is not for women. That is why no one wants to see it and it is boring.

As far as modern professional sports, most of our modern sports are recent inventions in human history, not more than one or two centuries old. It has always been dominated by men from the begginning. Professional sports was created by men for men. These sports were also played in Catholic cultures once they were introduced.
Going back in history it can be seen that other sports have always been male. Fishing and hunting for recreation and sport has always been a male thing.
Quote:.

There is something wrong and sick about Obama's arms. That is why the media pays such attention to them. They are odd. Women are just not supposed to look like that. The media wouldn't pay attention to her arms if they were like the arms of millions of other women across this country.
Most women across the country have fat, flabby arms. Mrs. Obama's are very slim and sculpted. They are not like a man's. A man with her arms would be considered slight.


Quote:It is just not entertainment that keeps people away from female professional sports. It is a natural gut reaction and a natural distate for it. It can be felt and recognized to be unnatural. There is a recognition that this is not for women. That is why no one wants to see it and it is boring.
You're taking your opinion and assuming everyone feels the same. You're wrong, or at least unproven. But you're right about it being boring-but again that's irrelevant.

Quote:As far as modern professional sports, most of our modern sports are recent inventions in human history, not more than one or two centuries old. It has always been dominated by men from the begginning. Professional sports was created by men for men. These sports were also played in Catholic cultures once they were introduced.
Going back in history it can be seen that other sports have always been male. Fishing and hunting for recreation and sport has always been a male thing.
Fishing and hunting were necessary activities for survival. Women, as mothers, naturally stayed home with children while men went out and hunted. But once it became more recreational and less necessary women took part in hunting. Women often accompanied men on the hunt in Europe. I think it's the same with fox hunts in Britain and the South. And what is so darn masculine about sitting on the ground waiting for a fish to take a bate? Again you're taking activities common in men for practical reasons and organizing them into the realms of morality.
(07-05-2009, 03:37 PM)columba Wrote: [ -> ]Female athleticism is probably more of a symptom than a cause.

Perhaps, but the good bishop's column seems to hint that it is a cause. Personally, I am not 100% convinced it's either, but if it's anything, it's a symptom. Perhaps in Western culture there is a connection between the attitudes that encourage women's professional sports (not just "female athleticism" or physical fitness, which as Anastasia points out is quite a different animal) and the attitudes that encourage low birthrates, but my question is whether there need be such a connection, intrinsically. I think this is a question quite open for debate, and I do not know the answer.

(07-05-2009, 03:37 PM)columba Wrote: [ -> ]Yes and let us not be afraid to look at the realities. Men and women are not the same. They are not "equal" in anything besides worth before God. Women are in fact superior in many irreplaceable ways. Let us not continue to deprive society of that superiority.

I couldn't agree more, but I hesitate to conclude that women's professional sports -- or any number of other activities -- necessarily "deprive society of that superiority." And -- I'm not saying you are doing this, or anyone else -- but whenever and wherever "that superiority" is treated as just a synonym for "fecundity in childbearing," society is indeed deprived of a great deal of women's full and irreplaceable contribution.
(07-05-2009, 04:04 PM)didishroom Wrote: [ -> ]You're taking your opinion and assuming everyone feels the same. You're wrong, or at least unproven. But you're right about it being boring-but again that's irrelevant.

An opinion? it is reality. I didn't say every single person feels the same, but the vast majority do. You will always have a cult folllowing and those die hard fans who believe in the women and the sport that they are playing. For the overwhelming majority of people I am right. Unproven? Have you seen the attendance figures for female sports? The stats and numbers don't lie. They record reality. TV ratings are really dismal and will never compete with male sports. The prooof is out there.

That the female sports are boring is not irrelevant, but very telling. Why would a sport played by men be exciting, but when played by women be boring? It is the exact same sport. It is because it is unnatural. It doesn't feel the same. One expects it to be right and exciting when men do it because it belongs to the nature of men. We want to see men play these sports because men make it exciting, since it is made for men.

(07-05-2009, 03:21 PM)didishroom Wrote: [ -> ]So exactly what are women allowed to do?

First of all, my congratulations on seamlessly switching topics away from Bp. Williamson's inescapable logic to such an open-ended question of no hard and fast rules. I will answer, but only under protest and in a limited way that redirects back on-topic.

Girls should not develop the athletic hardness that results from mixed sport competion at a young age. Instead girls should take part in physical activities like dancing, tumbling, swimming or even girl-only sport leagues with aim of teaching girls to be lady-like. Obviously there are exceptions, but these are rules of thumb for traditional child-rearing. In the teen years, sex-segregated schooling is much to be preferred.
(07-05-2009, 04:19 PM)flannerywannabe Wrote: [ -> ]
(07-05-2009, 03:37 PM)columba Wrote: [ -> ]Yes and let us not be afraid to look at the realities. Men and women are not the same. They are not "equal" in anything besides worth before God. Women are in fact superior in many irreplaceable ways. Let us not continue to deprive society of that superiority.

I couldn't agree more, but I hesitate to conclude that women's professional sports -- or any number of other activities -- necessarily "deprive society of that superiority." And -- I'm not saying you are doing this, or anyone else -- but whenever and wherever "that superiority" is treated as just a synonym for "fecundity in childbearing," society is indeed deprived of a great deal of women's full and irreplaceable contribution.

Virginity and fecundity are traditionally considered the two most signal qualities of female grace (on second thought, I would say the idea of "superiority" is modern-ist) with virginity the greater of the two. The culture propounded by modern elites would rob us of both.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26