bishop williamson
#11
Of course he is addressing what the wife can do -- the wife is the one who wrote in about the problem, so SHE is the one he is advising.  I imagine that, if a man wrote in about difficulties with his wife, or her being stressed or something, the good bishop would council him about loving and cherishing his wife.
Reply
#12
(09-10-2011, 05:31 PM)Someone1776 Wrote:
(09-10-2011, 05:13 PM)Mithrandylan Wrote: I actually agree with most of this.  Although he doesn't seem to be coming across this way exclusively, I want my wife to respect and love me equally.  Respect without love is either contempt or fear.  No family can run on that.

Where Bishop Williamson errs is in saying women's education is not important.  Let's pretend that no woman's husband will ever die before her, get ill, or abandon her and force her to go out and support her family, or that intelligence is a desirable trait in a mate, or useful in just getting by in everyday life. Even if a woman could always depend on some amazing man to always take care of her and the family it's still important for a woman to be educated.  Mothers are the first teachers children have.  I don't understand how many of the same people who decry the public and Catholic school systems and advocate home schooling at the same time oppose education for women.  Who the heck is going to teach the kids? The father after a long day of work?

But, even when not being home schooled mothers should still play important roles in education. We decry how parents are so detached from a child's education, but how can a mother really participate if she is uneducated herself?

Feminist Heretic.  :fish:

The great Bishop Williamson speaks with the Authority of God.  He is beyond criticism.  He would never say anything imprudent.

(I actually agree with most of what he said.  Rather, I would suggest that men need respect because women are not respect driven creatures and usually don't think about it.  The same goes for men not being love oriented; they often just don't think about how much affection they give their wives.)
Reply
#13
(09-10-2011, 05:10 PM)Petertherock Wrote:
(09-10-2011, 05:09 PM)Iolanthe Wrote: More one-sided bilge from B. It's "easier" for women to adapt....how convenient for men.  :laughing: And what is his real goal in wanting all women to be uneducated, anyway?

It seems to me you are married to the world and could care less what the traditional roles of the husband and wife are. AKA...you're a feminist.

What he's calling "traditional roles" are this: women should lie and pretend everything is okay instead of finding an actual solution.

I'm tired of the knee-jerk "you're a feminist" response. Someone else try to do better, please.

What actual solution did he give to this woman? Can anyone tell me what advice he gave her?
Reply
#14
(09-10-2011, 05:43 PM)OCLittleFlower Wrote: Of course he is addressing what the wife can do -- the wife is the one who wrote in about the problem, so SHE is the one he is advising.  I imagine that, if a man wrote in about difficulties with his wife, or her being stressed or something, the good bishop would council him about loving and cherishing his wife.

Do you think what he told her will solve the problem? Didn't he just say, "Stroke his ego and pretend he's doing the stuff he should be doing, even if he's not"? What did I miss?
Reply
#15
Please, can anyone address these questions?

A. Why did he tell her that women should adapt more than men? How does this fit in with the traditional male role of a husband sacrificing everything for the care of his family?

B. This woman said, "We don't have money to educate the kids." He responded, "Teach the girls to cook instead." What is this woman supposed to do now? Go home and not educate either her boys or her girls? Does this really seem like a good solution?

C. How does respecting a person equate with lying to them?
Reply
#16
(09-10-2011, 05:31 PM)Someone1776 Wrote:
(09-10-2011, 05:13 PM)Mithrandylan Wrote: I actually agree with most of this.  Although he doesn't seem to be coming across this way exclusively, I want my wife to respect and love me equally.  Respect without love is either contempt or fear.  No family can run on that.

Where Bishop Williamson errs is in saying women's education is not important.  Let's pretend that no woman's husband will ever die before her, get ill, or abandon her and force her to go out and support her family, or that intelligence is a desirable trait in a mate, or useful in just getting by in everyday life. Even if a woman could always depend on some amazing man to always take care of her and the family it's still important for a woman to be educated.  Mothers are the first teachers children have.  I don't understand how many of the same people who decry the public and Catholic school systems and advocate home schooling at the same time oppose education for women.  Who the heck is going to teach the kids? The father after a long day of work?

But, even when not being home schooled mothers should still play important roles in education. We decry how parents are so detached from a child's education, but how can a mother really participate if she is uneducated herself?

Do not confuse a lack of college education with a lack of education in totality.  Up until a few generations ago, nearly everyone accepted a high school education as a decent foundation, and would not have called anyone with such "uneducated."  If the quality of the high school education is good, it should be enough education to be able to homeschool one's children, especially if one uses a program to do so (ex Kolbe, Our Lady of Grace, etc).
Reply
#17
(09-10-2011, 06:06 PM)OCLittleFlower Wrote: Do not confuse a lack of college education with a lack of education in totality.  Up until a few generations ago, nearly everyone accepted a high school education as a decent foundation, and would not have called anyone with such "uneducated."  If the quality of the high school education is good, it should be enough education to be able to homeschool one's children, especially if one uses a program to do so (ex Kolbe, Our Lady of Grace, etc).

But that's not the advice he gave. You may think that, but he didn't say a word about homeschooling. All he said was, "get the girls in the kitchen." Do you think he gave her good advice about educating the children?

Also, it sounds like this woman is working full time, so even if he had suggested homeschooling, which he didn't, I don't quite see how it would be possible if she's gone all day. It sounded to me like he wants her to come home after a long day at work and pretend she's not tired so the husband doesn't get his ego wounded. Does it seem to you like he provided a good, practical solution?
Reply
#18
(09-10-2011, 05:57 PM)Iolanthe Wrote: Please, can anyone address these questions?

A. Why did he tell her that women should adapt more than men? How does this fit in with the traditional male role of a husband sacrificing everything for the care of his family?

B. This woman said, "We don't have money to educate the kids." He responded, "Teach the girls to cook instead." What is this woman supposed to do now? Go home and not educate either her boys or her girls? Does this really seem like a good solution?

C. How does respecting a person equate with lying to them?

A) Men do sacrifice everything (or are supposed to) -- up to and including their lives.  I think the bishop is referring to more day to day things -- such as the family arranging its schedule around the father's work and adjusting home life to the father's wishes.

B) This may have been a reference to college education.  Homeschooling costs very little.

C) He could be referring to public opinion and gossip -- ie don't bad mouth your husband and don't lord things over him.  Of course, he sees the tax statements, he knows how much money comes in.  However, it's one thing to, say, own property from prior to marriage that brings in a good income due to rent, and quite another to shout from the roof tops that your inheritance paid for that new car of your husband's.  :)
Reply
#19
(09-10-2011, 06:11 PM)OCLittleFlower Wrote: A) Men do sacrifice everything (or are supposed to) -- up to and including their lives.  I think the bishop is referring to more day to day things -- such as the family arranging its schedule around the father's work and adjusting home life to the father's wishes.

B) This may have been a reference to college education.  Homeschooling costs very little.

C) He could be referring to public opinion and gossip -- ie don't bad mouth your husband and don't lord things over him.  Of course, he sees the tax statements, he knows how much money comes in.  However, it's one thing to, say, own property from prior to marriage that brings in a good income due to rent, and quite another to shout from the roof tops that your inheritance paid for that new car of your husband's.  :)

None of that is in the article. You've assumed all of that.
Reply
#20
(09-10-2011, 05:57 PM)Iolanthe Wrote: B. This woman said, "We don't have money to educate the kids." He responded, "Teach the girls to cook instead." What is this woman supposed to do now? Go home and not educate either her boys or her girls? Does this really seem like a good solution?

I think she was talking about higher education. Everyone gets basic education. That is not the question. Basic education is free up to high school for boys and girls. I think Bishop Williamson has no problem with basic education that is essential to everybody including girls.

Higher education beyond K-12 should not be for everyone. The majority of women won't need it since the role for the majority of women is to be a wife and mother. Higher education and universities shouldn't even be for the majority of men. A society where everyone has a college education will be dysfunctional since it leads to a classless society where the quality of higher education itself and the quality of jobs all come down.

What we need is a good society and economy where one doesn't need a college education for a good job, a man can have a living wage so the normal order of a one income household returns. That would require the country to return to producing and manufacturing instead of the service oriented economy and exporting of jobs for globalism.
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)