FishEaters Traditional Catholic Forums
Bp W Column 3-20: Virile Distress - Printable Version

+- FishEaters Traditional Catholic Forums (https://www.fisheaters.com/forums)
+-- Forum: Church (https://www.fisheaters.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=2)
+--- Forum: Catholicism (https://www.fisheaters.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=10)
+--- Thread: Bp W Column 3-20: Virile Distress (/showthread.php?tid=34957)

Pages: 1 2 3 4


Re: Bp W Column 3-20: Virile Distress - piabee - 03-25-2010

(03-24-2010, 01:04 PM)stvincentferrer Wrote: I predict this thread will go over 10 pages.

Not until Lent is over and Iolanthe is back.

His Excellency's opinion of co-education struck me as illogical. By all means, abolish co-education; it would solve many problems, but I don't see how it would directly change the fact that  "the girls, being more docile and diligent, regularly get better marks than the boys, who are in general disordered and do not apply themselves."


Re: Bp W Column 3-20: Virile Distress - Heinrich - 03-26-2010

(03-24-2010, 01:24 PM)Texican Wrote:
(03-24-2010, 01:22 PM)Heinrich Wrote: How I love this man. +W for pope!

If it were up for a vote.


Is that a Romy AK, Heinrich?

Yepperz. Century Arms.


Re: Bp W Column 3-20: Virile Distress - Gerard - 03-27-2010

(03-25-2010, 03:41 PM)piabee Wrote:
(03-24-2010, 01:04 PM)stvincentferrer Wrote: I predict this thread will go over 10 pages.

Not until Lent is over and Iolanthe is back.

His Excellency's opinion of co-education struck me as illogical. By all means, abolish co-education; it would solve many problems, but I don't see how it would directly change the fact that  "the girls, being more docile and diligent, regularly get better marks than the boys, who are in general disordered and do not apply themselves."

Having gone to both co-ed and all-boys schools for high school, the difference is first that the teachers of the boys must also be men.  The boys will play on women's emotions like crazy.  Male teachers have to be strong and respected.  They can be good humored or not, but if they are strong and fair they are percieved as "cool."    The second factor is that girls are a huge distraction and that leads boys to show off,  goof off and assert themselves as the "alpha male" in the room or they just daydream about the girl tossing her hair or crossing her legs in front of him.  The third factor is competition, a room full of boys and a grading system of rank will bring out the competitive spirit.  Also boys are pigs, so you have to toughen up to get along.  Being shocked by a fart or a curse is not going to get you anything but beaten up. 

I'm make broad statements, there are always exceptional situations but the generalities hold as a good description of the majority. 




Re: Bp W Column 3-20: Virile Distress - dymphna17 - 03-27-2010

(03-27-2010, 12:01 PM)Gerard Wrote:
(03-25-2010, 03:41 PM)piabee Wrote:
(03-24-2010, 01:04 PM)stvincentferrer Wrote: I predict this thread will go over 10 pages.

Not until Lent is over and Iolanthe is back.

His Excellency's opinion of co-education struck me as illogical. By all means, abolish co-education; it would solve many problems, but I don't see how it would directly change the fact that  "the girls, being more docile and diligent, regularly get better marks than the boys, who are in general disordered and do not apply themselves."

Having gone to both co-ed and all-boys schools for high school, the difference is first that the teachers of the boys must also be men.   The boys will play on women's emotions like crazy.  Male teachers have to be strong and respected.  They can be good humored or not, but if they are strong and fair they are percieved as "cool."    The second factor is that girls are a huge distraction and that leads boys to show off,  goof off and assert themselves as the "alpha male" in the room or they just daydream about the girl tossing her hair or crossing her legs in front of him.   The third factor is competition, a room full of boys and a grading system of rank will bring out the competitive spirit.  Also boys are pigs, so you have to toughen up to get along.  Being shocked by a fart or a curse is not going to get you anything but beaten up. 

I'm make broad statements, there are always exceptional situations but the generalities hold as a good description of the majority. 

Wouldn't boys be taught differently than girls?  I think that's what you are saying.  Boys learn differently than girls,  So for the betterment of each gender, they should be separated.


Re: Bp W Column 3-20: Virile Distress - Gerard - 03-27-2010

(03-27-2010, 03:42 PM)dymphna17 Wrote: Wouldn't boys be taught differently than girls?  I think that's what you are saying.  Boys learn differently than girls,  So for the betterment of each gender, they should be separated.

Yes, the material may be the same, but the presentation would be different.  In retrospect I prefer the segregated atmosphere.  We always wanted girls in the classes, but that was because we preferred girls to schoolwork.  So naturally, the schoolwork would sink in when the distraction was significantly lessened. 




Re: Bp W Column 3-20: Virile Distress - Historian - 03-27-2010

I agree with Gerard's take based on my school experience.

I also agree with +W in this sense:

Men, especially the anti-feminist variety,  have this hypocrisy:  they want to be the public leaders, but they don't want to work for it, then they blame women for taking over.  If one thinks men should be the public leaders then stop whining and start working.  God's not going to sit around and wait.  When men stop doing what they're supposed to do, God will send the graces to a woman to take over.  Cf. Saint Catherine of Sienna giving the Pope a kick in the butt as well as many Catholic queens who kept their countries Catholic in spite of the men doing nothing.

This is also true within the family - if the father shirks his responsibility, the mother doesn't have to sit back and take it.  She could - and should - take it upon herself to Catechize the kids, etc., because our responsibility is to God first, then the spouse.

With leadership comes responsibility.  If we don't live up to the responsibility, then we lose the leadership.  Men in the past 30-40 years haven't lived up to much, so it's no surprise that God takes good women and gives them additional graces to do what men are slacking at.

Bottom line: if one doesn't like the current trend, stop whining, start working, and most importantly, behave in an honorable manner towards women.  Being a tyrant (gimme a sammich) is not being a leader in the Catholic sense of the word.


Re: Bp W Column 3-20: Virile Distress - glgas - 03-27-2010

A Hungarian writer Frigyes Karinthy wrote a novel about the same topic 9n 1922: Capillaria.  Conveying the writings of Swift and H. G. Wells, it is a science-fiction novel on Capillária, a land populated exclusively by females; a satiric account on the "sexual contract" between man and woman. Women in that land can't even imagine that men are fro any other reason than to boil and eat them.

This was predicted 40 years before the 21st Ecumenical Council


Re: Bp W Column 3-20: Virile Distress - JacafamalaRedux - 03-27-2010

Okay, I can see the advantages of  boys and girls being educated separately when possible. But what exactly is Bp Williamson saying? Is he saying that women shouldn't take an interest in affairs outside of the home?


Re: Bp W Column 3-20: Virile Distress - dymphna17 - 03-28-2010

(03-27-2010, 08:47 PM)Jacafamala Wrote: Okay, I can see the advantages of  boys and girls being educated separately when possible. But what exactly is Bp Williamson saying? Is he saying that women shouldn't take an interest in affairs outside of the home?

No, He's saying that they shouldn't be in charge of them.


Re: Bp W Column 3-20: Virile Distress - JacafamalaRedux - 03-28-2010

(03-28-2010, 01:42 AM)dymphna17 Wrote:
(03-27-2010, 08:47 PM)Jacafamala Wrote: Okay, I can see the advantages of  boys and girls being educated separately when possible. But what exactly is Bp Williamson saying? Is he saying that women shouldn't take an interest in affairs outside of the home?

No, He's saying that they shouldn't be in charge of them.

What do you think about that? Do you think that's right?

I can see how a woman who's married and has children has a primary obligation to her husband and family, and I'd agree this obligation is ideally met by staying home. Realistically though, that's not always financially possible.

I can't see how it's wrong for a single woman to become involved in activities outside the home. And if she does a good job, well why can't she be put in charge of things? She's earned it.