To enjoy the drunken debauchery every hypocrite enjoys when they convention in the city that care forgot.

I stand by my decision to walk away from the foaming baptists in my family, taken years ago.

I vaguely recall that his sister was a Baptist minister, hope she found another denomination, one that treats women as Jesus intended - equals.

As the old guard age and dies out their ranks are shrinking. Today's milenials won't follow this sort of ideology. They're dooming themselves.

Their reaction is to double down on the cruel insanity of RW ideology.

Sad when women feed the narrative of their inferiority. Too many men want to keep women down and then there are the women who assist them.

You have an avatar of JFK, who was Catholic. Pretty sure their ban on female priests still holds now

You see, we all have to think of things differently when religion is involved, it is its own little box of customs related to magical sky-daddy shit. It's very special.

Naturally we must all defer to 'followers' Bronze Age 'beliefs' and 'faith' because ... reasons!

Horrible to see.

And reinforces it.

Anti female sentiment is much more deeply ingrained and widespread than religion.

So when you said what have we done to deserve this ... I assumed you referred to the two women in the particular religion who've lost their jobs.

I was replying based on that assumption.

And I don't think it necessarily reflects 'prevailing belief systems' currently.

Rather, it reflects ANCIENT belief systems, which we continue to give a ridiculous level of imprimatur.

Outside of a religious context, these firings are totally freaking illegal.

What have women on this planet done that is so evil it merits eternal subjugation?

And females are subservient/subjugated in our closest cousin's 'Tournament' species?

In our other closest cousins the Bonobo's, which are not a tournament species, females have a lot more power and agency. In essence, they're so promiscuous that no male knows that any issue ... is actually their own. Which tames the males aggressive behaviors.

Which explains the situation with humans pretty well, or I'd posit it's as logical an explanation for humanities ongoing battle of the sexes as any

Male primates who do not know the paternity of any of the offspring are less aggressive?
Because they may be related to any given male?

If the females just basically refuse to 'go along' with a 'tournament' (aka a type of 'alpha male harem') arrangement, and instead just mate with whoever they want, whenever they want, it takes away a main motivation for the males to exert control. They tend to adopt an 'it takes a village' attitude, because any of the kids could be theirs for all they know.

Knowing this ... it kinda pulls a lot of things together for me when it comes to human behavior. And helps me not be quite so mad about this shit ... it's probably all quite biological in nature, going way back before humans existed.

Might read the Bonobo wiki sometime if you never have, it's pretty fascinating

For example, a young males 'status' is based on his mother's status in the troop, not his fathers ... cause nobody knows who that was

Very interesting, thanks for the info.

.

Then, they got slick and started to hold two services, one bestowing the virtues of slaveholders to the White communities, which before 1820 shunned slaveholders. The ministers offered slaves exposure to Christianity. By the 1850s, slaveholders became viewed as respected citizens in town. Mind you not all Whites bought into this. The elders resisted, the middle-aged were swayed and the younger grew up on this new philosophy. It took a generation to change the attitude.

The ministers found another way to make money by holding separate services for the slaves, telling them that while life on earth was hard, they would be promised goodness in the afterlife. They should work for their slaveholder and be productive and supportive of them.


So it doesn't surprise me that they took this position.

.